INT. Titan Defense Systems Office. SUSAN in HR sits behind a desk. Senior Engineer MARK sits in front of her.
MARK: I gotta say, this is feeling kind of ominous.
SUSAN: (tight smile) I don't want you to feel that way. We're just here to talk about language and how it's being used in the workplace.
MARK: This is about yesterday?
SUSAN: This is about a few things, but why don't you tell me about yesterday.
MARK: Well ... I said something that a few people seemed like they took offense at. (pause) Do you, uh, are you briefed on what our project is?
SUSAN: I'm not a technical person, but my understanding is that your project is attempting to leverage the full spectrum of emotion in mech pilots, particularly the positive ends, which have been underutilized.
MARK: Right. I came here from a different area, more focused on combat scenarios. (pause) Well, we'd just finished one of the tests, and I had said something to the effect of "those pilots sure can take a pounding".
SUSAN: If you'll forgive me, I have the transcripts right here.
MARK: (alarmed) Transcripts?
SUSAN: As part of the mech testing, all audio from inside the cockpits and outside the machines is recorded.
MARK: Alright, fine, what was the wording.
SUSAN: You said, "those pussies sure can take a pounding".
MARK: Ah. But, context is important here.
SUSAN: Help explain the context to me.
MARK: The context is ... I mean, the project is, it's sexual pleasure, okay? I mean, people keep saying this "positive end of the emotional spectrum" line, and what it really is, is (carefully) getting pilots aroused, sexually stimulating them, and then bringing them to orgasm when they kill the enemy. Ostensibly as a method of positive reinforcement and PTSD avoidance.
MARK: And, to be clear, HR is aware of this? Because I probably should have asked that when I was brought on, but — I mean, it's a lot of sex.
SUSAN: Sexual stimulation.
MARK: I ... yeah. And the context of that comment was, there was a test going on in our mock cockpit — not actually a mech — where one of the pilots was strapped in place and being penetrated with ah, an implement.
SUSAN: Vaginally penetrated.
SUSAN: But you see that I used the preferred nomenclature there?
MARK: ... right. I'm not saying that what I said was appropriate to the workplace, I just ... it's difficult to know where the line is.
SUSAN: Am I correct that you don't hear your co-workers and supervisors referring to vaginas as "pussies"?
MARK: (sigh) I know you have the logs, and you would probably tell me that no, they're always very clinical about it, even though ...
MARK: I mean, look, some of the stuff that's been going on, it's, you know, I've filed reports on some of what I see as the more questionable elements of the project. Some of the things that the test pilots are being hooked up to.
MARK: No, with management. Not because they're questionable from an HR standpoint, though they definitely are, but because I just think we're wasting a lot of time and money on things that are, you know. Not being built with actual combat in mind.
MARK: I mean, the "implements" themselves, they're too complicated, there's too much variety, it feels like every single day we're hooking one of the test pilots up to a new one and having her be, uh, vaginally penetrated for what feels like hours. And we've already proven that we can get a pilot to come, so what are we even doing here?
SUSAN: The language "get a pilot to come" is dispreferred.
MARK: Fine, whatever, "achieve orgasm"?
SUSAN: I believe just "orgasm" would be fine.
MARK: (snorts) Not an achievement, got it.
SUSAN: What I'm hearing is that you're critical of the project, and this might be the source of some of this language?
MARK: Sorry, I thought this was just about yesterday.
SUSAN: There have been a few other incidents that were brought to my attention.
MARK: (unintelligible muttering)
MARK: Nothing, lay it on me.
SUSAN: It seems that two months ago, you said one of the pilots was "all splayed out". That's a direct quote.
MARK: I mean, okay, so we have this posture control system, it has basically no reason to exist. It means that we have servos and hydraulics in place that will manipulate the pilot. And Mary, that's the project lead, she had the pilot in this thing, and had used it to spread the pilot's legs almost to the point of pain, then used the actuators to, uh, vaginally penetrate the pilot with one of the implements.
SUSAN: (shifts in seat) That sounds like a routine systems interoperability test.
SUSAN: Understanding how these two systems work together seems sensible to me, yes, and I would defer to the expertise of the project lead.
MARK: (shaking head) Man, I just don't know.
SUSAN: Mark, the purpose of this meeting is to make sure that you understand that some of the language you've been using is making people in your workplace uncomfortable.
MARK: Yeah, no, I get what you're saying, it's just ... Mary had one of the pilots in from a training exercise, and she's manually pulling the, uh, implement from out of the pilot, which there's not any reason to do, I designed the automated systems for that. And the pilot is flushed and trembling, because in the half hour she's been out in the test field she's (pauses) orgasmed nineteen times. And Mary looks dead in the pilot's eyes and says, "How did that feel?" and the pilot is like half dazed and says "I think the implement might be too big" and Mary says "oh, I think you could handle larger", and I'm standing there like, (throws up hands)
SUSAN: You interpreted it as sexually charged.
MARK: Yeah! Of course I did! And I don't understand why we're having these "implements" ejaculate!
SUSAN: I'm understanding your frustration here, but if the issue is that you can't separate your emotional reaction from strictly professional work —
MARK: I actually do not buy at all that it's strictly professional.
MARK: And you know, I was cool with it, for a bit, but Mary had one of the pilots wear a gag, and I'm thinking "alright, no way, no way does that make any sense, the pilots need to be able to talk over radio, we can't be gagging them", and what, I'm supposed to just stand there with a clipboard and say "hrm, the mouth implement" like some kind of moron?
SUSAN: I'd like you to calm down and take a breath.
MARK: (takes a breath, but in a sarcastic way) I will try to modulate my language if that's what's being asked of me. I will keep it clinical, with preferred nomenclature.
SUSAN: That's really all that we're trying to do here.
MARK: I'm going to return to the lab now, where at any given time there are multiple pilots being vaginally penetrated by implements under the testing regimes of engineers and prospective handlers.
SUSAN: Mark, I would really like to not see you back here, but I'm worried that I will.
MARK: Yeah, well ... I've got no idea what the hell is going on, so probably. Cheers. (gets up)
SUSAN: Mark? There’s just one more thing.
SUSAN: We don’t use the term “hell” in the workplace, it’s insensitive to our Christian employees.
