Dani Mathers is one of those women you see all the time...pneumatic, callipygian, artificially bosomy and pouty and blond.
But that's ok. It's her life, and I can't comment too much on someone else's appearance, the mess that I am.
What sets her apart from the thousands of other "hot Playboy Playmates" is that she's the one going to trial next month for an offense both stupid and hurtful.
She did not know that it's a crime to invade the privacy of another person by doing what she did, which was to go to her gym's locker room and see a naked 70-year-old woman there, take the woman's picture in that state of deshabille, and then post that picture on social media, with the clever tag "If you can’t un-see this, I can’t either."
That nasty prank took place last summer, and at first, all Ms Mathers faced was a tide of public criticism.
Now, it's in the courts. The Los Angeles City Attorney’s Office looked into the legality of her sending this picture around without permission, and decided to charge her with one count of invasion of privacy.
"Body-shaming is humiliating, with often painful, long-term consequences," City Attorney Mike Feuer said in a statement published in PEOPLE magazine. "It mocks and stigmatizes its victims, tearing down self-respect and perpetuating the harmful idea that our unique physical appearances should be compared to air-brushed notions of 'perfect.' "
"Air-brushed notions of perfect!" I know that hit home with Ms Mathers, who seems to be as substantial as a whipped-cream sandwich.
Of course, Mathers has an attorney, that guy with long white hair who defended Michael Jackson against child molestation charges. He would want me to mention his name here.
The lawyer said to People magazine, "I am very disappointed that Dani Mathers was charged with any violation. She never tried to invade anyone’s privacy and never tried to break any law."
As I often mention, I am not an attorney, but it seems to me that the very definition of "invasion of privacy" would contain the act of taking a picture of someone, especially someone naked in a gym locker room, and publishing that picture online. How else would one describe such a trespass against the dignity of another person?
And the mouthpiece's assertion that she "never tried to break any law," if accepted by the court, will surely go down in American jurisprudence as a groundbreaking defense. Does one really need to be found to have tried to break a law? Isn't breaking the law the concern here?
"Your honor, I freely admit to robbing the bank, stealing a getaway car, assaulting a police officer, and speeding away from the scene, but I wasn't trying, so, I'm innocent, huh?"
Circle the date November 28 on your calendar. On that day, Mathers will sashay into court and enter her plea. Someday, she will be 70 and know how it feels to be 70. For now, she is 29, and needs to know to how it feels to be punished.