HR Christmas Spirit Tested by Kris Kringle Gift from Sex Shop Nobody Can Explain

17 December 2025

SYDNEY — The People & Culture team at Harrington, Lowe & Myers has confirmed it is unable to determine whether a Kris Kringle gift purchased from a sex shop breaches firm policy, pending clarification of what the item is actually designed to do.

The gift, presented anonymously under the firm’s standard mystery-giver system, was unwrapped during a pre-lunch Christmas gathering and initially greeted with confused laughter. That reaction quickly faded once it became clear that no one present could confidently explain the object’s purpose. “It might be a dog toy,” said one associate. “Or some kind of piercing device. Or something you attach to something else. We honestly don’t know.”

HR intervened shortly afterwards, removing the item from the table and advising staff that an assessment would be undertaken once its function could be established. “At this stage, we cannot say whether it breaches policy because we cannot say what it is,” an HR spokesperson explained. “The Code of Conduct is very clear on inappropriate behaviour. It is less clear on ambiguous objects with multiple possible uses.”

Initial inspection reportedly raised further questions, including whether the item vibrates, whether it requires batteries, and whether it is intended for use by a person, an animal, or in conjunction with other equipment. One partner asked whether it was “medical,” before being advised by HR that further speculation was unhelpful.

HR has since reminded staff that internet activity on firm systems is monitored, following a noticeable increase in searches that may or may not have included phrases such as “what is this used for,” “how does this work,” and “is this safe.” “We are not discouraging curiosity,” HR clarified. “We are simply encouraging staff not to satisfy that curiosity using firm devices.”

Until the item’s purpose can be conclusively determined, HR has confirmed it will remain in secure storage while policies are reviewed on a hypothetical basis. The anonymous purchaser has not come forward, though HR remains confident that once the object’s function is understood, it will be possible to decide whether the gift was merely ill-advised or formally inappropriate.

At press time, HR confirmed that next year’s Kris Kringle guidelines would include an explicit prohibition on gifts that require explanation, research, or a private meeting to determine whether they are acceptable.

While this article is based on a true story, it is written as satire.