Gherkin Street

By Milton Montgomery:

I am the legal counsel representing a group of people who have a serious claim against your product, namely the “toilet”.

My clients have asked to remain anonymous so, between us, lets just say their names rhyme with Sonny Bill Williams, Ralph Fiennes, Lisa Robertson and Candice Falzon. You may well guess that they were caught having, ahem, “trysts” in cubicles next to your product.

It is very clear to anyone who cares to think about said matters that the reason they were unable to control their lustful urges was due to the failure of your product.

To be clear, this is not about damages for while my clients’ reputations suffered terrible damage (albeit in some cases that was arguably not possible), that was more than compensated by the fact they may or may not have sold their stories to the media.

The purpose of this letter is thus to ensure that your product does not force people to have sex ever again.

In this case, I feel strongly that a simple warning label is not sufficient. By the time anyone has finished reading “Warning: Use of this Product May Result in You Having Illicit Sex” then its probably too late, especially for Ralph Fiennes if we are to believe Lisa’s story.

It would appear that in the case of the toilet there are serious design faults that need remedy. For a start, when men use the product they are forced (by its design) to touch their own private parts. This clearly has sexual overtones. In fact, for many men this is the closest thing to foreplay they will ever know. Surely in this day and age you could devise some sort of attachment that holds men’s “bits” while they urinate? Provided you do not make the “shake” motion afterward too vigorous (or dangerous) then I see no problem at all.

As for my female clients, your product forces them to sit down to use it. For most women, this is the only time in their ridiculously busy days that they get a moment’s rest and/or peace. Again, for most women this is the closest thing to foreplay they will ever know. Surely you could make the seat more uncomfortable or invasive, like most products designed by men for women?

Then there is the lid dilemma, the correct use of which has been a source of angst for the sexes since your product’s invention. Men and women have often associated such gender related battles as a precursor to a happy, loving relationship. Hollywood may be to blame for such attitudes (fuelled by the feminist movement) but its up to you to do something about it.

Your product does nothing but inflame sexual urges if you really stop to think about it. The pushing of buttons that look like nipples or pulling of levers that look like the male organ. Then there is the sensual sound of water flushing. What about the sleek, inviting appearance or the smooth touch of the porcelain?

I ask you, who can look at a toilet and not think of sex?

If toilets were terracotta coloured, made of sandpaper, had no buttons or levers, no water to flush or lids to prop against then who would have sex on/near them?

Mr Crapper, your product is solely to blame for my clients’ indiscretions, its just a shame they didn’t have the courage to stand up before the paying media to shout, “The toilet made me do it!” No-one would have judged them then. For who among us hasn’t felt the same way? Let him among us who is without sin pass the first stone.

Moreover, your product is also the cause of a great deal many people excessively drinking to the point where they use your product to place their stomach contents.

But that is another matter. I trust you will first do something about the sexual innuendo of your product before we have another scandal on our hands and in our papers.

Yours in law,
Milton

P.S. Should you ever consider seeking recompense for your name, I have some interesting thoughts about suing you parents should you care to discuss them. I cannot believe they called you “Winnie”.