The wonderful thing about ti duble ga rrr

[lovethefuzzies]

I, for one, can attest to the conditions inside of a costume. Trust me, the last thing you're thinking about when you're in there is sex. It's so hot all you can think about is getting off set. You're thinking "Wow, I could really go for some water or even some air" not "Hey, that guy has a nice ass. I'm gonna grab it."

[UnluckySven]

I just wanted to add that seeing in those costumes can be a pain in the rear. As others have mentioned I have had to dress up in a character costume, though not disney's, and they are a pain to see in.

Also I am not to sure how many of you who live in CFL, actively following the case on the news, but the jurors were allowed to try on the costume, so they can see how hard it was to see, and the man's lawyer, who from what the news said owns his own firm, works as a costumed character, how cool is that? A lawyer working at Disney in probably one of the most underappreciated jobs in the park, because he loves doing it.

Though the case wasn't funny, I thought when Disney tried to get the costume dyed black so it "would't ruin the magic" was a hoot.

[leftcoaster]

It was Michael Cortland on trial, NOT Disney. Disney had NO REASON to offer these sorry excuses for people any money. And I hope they never do. In fact, one of the defense witnesses was a civil lawyer. He told the court that he didn't take the case, because he didn't see much money in the outcome. :shock: So, in 200 + years of this country, we have come from "I have one life to live for my country" to "I don't see much MONEY in the outcome of this case, so I am not taking the case." Wonderful.

Yes, the jurors had an opportunity to try on the costume. However, they did not. They said they didn't need to, since they said the prosecutor could not prove it was Michael IN the costume at the time of the alleged incident.

[screnwriter]

I'm curious as to what the group feels about the aquital of Tigger on those 'improper touching' charges.

I haven't worked for Disney yet, but I've worked for a few other parks in my teenage years, and during the time only had to be in costume a handful of times. During those times I've personally witnessed that it's very very difficult to see, and since you esentially have a 'shell' on over your body, you don't always know where 'you' end.

I'm glad he was acquitted. Where the hell did the family come off making such an claim? For one thing, even if Tigger HAD done it, it would have been like being fondled by oven mitts, so how would it even FEEL wrong to the guest?

Having played Tigger before at Disneyland, as well as other characters, I can tell ya that with the black screen or cloth that characters have to look out thru you can't tell a hottie from a nottie. Plus you have NO IDEA who is watching you from what angle. It would be like walking up to some cute girl in high school in the middle of a crowded lunch room and reaching down her blouse into her bra. Way too many angles to be caught from. And with them mitts on, you wouldn't enjoy it anyway.

'sides, we had a saying in Characters at Disneyland - perhaps the same holds true elsewhere, "You can't be a Character and NOT sleep with someone else in the department."

:twisted: