securelyinsecure
blvcknvy:

They made ​​fun of your name and you have changed your name.
They made ​​fun of your clothes and you changed clothes.
They made ​​fun of your hair and you have straighten your hair.
They made ​​fun of your skin and you bought skinn brighteners. 
They made ​​fun of your languages ​​and you have adopted their own.
They made ​​fun of your religion and you have embraced theirs.
Who taught you to hate the texture of your hair?
Who taught you to hate the color of your skin? to the extent that you bleach to be like the white man.
Who taught you to hate the shape of your nose and the shape of your lips?
Who taught you to hate the top of your head to the soles of your feet?
Who taught you to hate your being? to hate the land of your ancestors, to hate the race you belong to, such a point that you do not want to be next to each other.
When will we realize? When will be a humanity?

blvcknvy:

They made ​​fun of your name and you have changed your name.

They made ​​fun of your clothes and you changed clothes.

They made ​​fun of your hair and you have straighten your hair.

They made ​​fun of your skin and you bought skinn brighteners. 

They made ​​fun of your languages ​​and you have adopted their own.

They made ​​fun of your religion and you have embraced theirs.

Who taught you to hate the texture of your hair?

Who taught you to hate the color of your skin? to the extent that you bleach to be like the white man.

Who taught you to hate the shape of your nose and the shape of your lips?

Who taught you to hate the top of your head to the soles of your feet?

Who taught you to hate your being? to hate the land of your ancestors, to hate the race you belong to, such a point that you do not want to be next to each other.

When will we realize? When will be a humanity?

thisguyknowswhatimtalkingabout
coelasquid:

paperwaspnest:

sealprinceling:

bregma:

kevinrfree:

charlienight:

commanderbishoujo:

bogleech:

prokopetz:

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

truthandglory:

assbanditkirk:

whoa canada
someone needs to turn down that sass level

Two things to know about Canada!
We are smart enough to know hot things should be hot.
We are sorry if you don’t

fun story about the reason they do that (at least in America)
once this lady spilled her McDonald’s coffee on herself and ended up getting like 3rd degree burns and since there was no warning on the cup she was able to claim she didn’t know it would be hot (or at least that hot) and won a lawsuit against McDonald’s for $1 million

That’s what the media smear campaign against her would have you believe, anyway. The truth of the matter is that the McDonald’s in question had previously been cited - on at least two separate occasions - for keeping their coffee so hot that it violated local occupational health and safety regulations. The lady didn’t win her lawsuit because American courts are stupid; she won it because the McDonald’s she bought that coffee from was actively and knowingly breaking the law with respect to the temperature of its coffee at the time of the incident.
(I mean, do you have any idea what a third-degree burn actually is? Third-degree burns involve “full thickness” tissue damage; we’re talking bone-deep, with possible destruction of tissue. Can you even imagine how hot that cup of coffee would have to have been to inflict that kind of damage in the few seconds it was in contact with her skin?)

Yeah I’m tired of people joking about either the “stupid” woman who didn’t know coffee was hot or the “greedy” woman making up bullshit to get money.
She was hideously injured by hideous irresponsibility, it was an absolutely legitimate lawsuit and the warning on the cups basically allows McDonalds to claim no responsibility even if it happens again. Every other company followed suit to cover their asses.
So they can still legally serve you something that could sear off the end of your tongue or permanently demolish the front of your gums and just give you a big fat middle finger in court. “The label SAID it would be HOT, STUPID.”

obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case
obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist teh facts on this case and get public opinion against the victim was deliberate and fueled by the right wing tort reform movement
it was seized upon to limit the rights of consumers to hold giant corporations accountable for wrongdoing
watch the documentary Hot Coffee, it lays out all of the facts and examines the response to this case and explains why everything you think you know about this case is bullshit, and explains why tort reform is bullshit in an entertaining and informative manner

The woman injured in Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants was 79 years old at the time of her injuries, and suffered third-degree burns to the pelvic region (including her thighs, buttocks, and groin), which in combination with lesser burns in the surrounding regions caused damage to an area totaling a whopping 22% of her body’s surface. These injuries that required two years of intensive medical care, including multiple skin grafts; during her hospitalization, Stella Liebeck lost around 20% of her starting body weight.
She was uninsured and sued McDonald’s Restaurants for the cost of her past and projected future medical care, an estimated $20,000. The corporation offered a settlement of $800, a number so obviously ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with any further explanation.
The settlement number most often quoted is not the amount that the corporation actually paid; the jury in the first trial suggested a payment equal to a day or two of coffee revenues for McDonald’s, which at the time totaled more than $1 million per diem. The judge reduced the required payout to around $640,000 in both compensatory and punitive damages, and the case was later settled out of court for less than $600,000.
Keep in mind that at the time, McDonald’s already had over 700 cases of complaints about coffee-related burns on file, but continued to sell coffee heated to nearly 200 degrees Fahrenheit (around 90 degrees Celsius) as a means of boosting sales (their selling point was that one could buy the coffee, drive to a second location such as work or home, and still have a piping hot beverage). This in spite of the fact that most restaurants serve coffee between 140 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit (60 to 71 degrees Celsius), and many coffee experts agree that such high temperatures are desirable only during the brewing process itself.
The Liebeck case was absolutely not an example of litigation-happy Americans expecting corporations to cover their asses for their own stupidity, but we seem determined to remember it that way. It’s an issue of liability, and the allowable lengths of capitalism, and even of the way in which our society is incredibly dangerous for and punitive towards the uninsured, but it was not and is not a frivolous suit. Please check your assumptions and do your research before you turn a burn victim’s suffering into a throwaway punchline.

#don’t fricking get me started on Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants the level of misinformation floating around is staggering#I know that it’s an older case but it still makes me really mad that people treat it as this big dumb thing?#the fact that the media took a serious case and turned it into what it is to us today should piss people off#the level of distortion of facts is astonishing and upsetting and nobody seems to hear about it?#sorry I’m done I just#it upsets me when a legal travesty like this is just dragged out for some#’haha americans are sOOOOOOOo dumb!!1!’ humor#I MEAN GODDAMN IF YOU’RE GOING TO MAKE FUN OF AMERICANS AT LEAST MAKE FUN OF US WITH FACTS OKAY

jesus, i actually didn’t know about any of this, thanks for clearing that up


I just learned a lot of stuff 8l wow

Watch the documentary, it’s on Netflix. Or look up the photos of her burn areas - it’s not so funny anymore. Happy to see this get debunked!

Yeah, whenever people joke about this I have to assume they haven’t seen the photos of the woman in question. (They’re at the bottom of that page, warning, very graphic and not safe for work) if you watch the documentary they discuss how unlikely medical professionals even banked on her chances of surviving the incident to be. Companies launch smear campaigns like this when people sue them for egregious damages, because it nets them a higher rate of success when they lobby to have caps put on damage payouts. This leads to real life cases of people being harmed in ways that caused them permanent physical injury and ongoing medical bills being out in the cold when they seek compensation from the organization that harmed them.

coelasquid:

paperwaspnest:

sealprinceling:

bregma:

kevinrfree:

charlienight:

commanderbishoujo:

bogleech:

prokopetz:

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

truthandglory:

assbanditkirk:

whoa canada

someone needs to turn down that sass level

Two things to know about Canada!

  1. We are smart enough to know hot things should be hot.
  2. We are sorry if you don’t

fun story about the reason they do that (at least in America)

once this lady spilled her McDonald’s coffee on herself and ended up getting like 3rd degree burns and since there was no warning on the cup she was able to claim she didn’t know it would be hot (or at least that hot) and won a lawsuit against McDonald’s for $1 million

That’s what the media smear campaign against her would have you believe, anyway. The truth of the matter is that the McDonald’s in question had previously been cited - on at least two separate occasions - for keeping their coffee so hot that it violated local occupational health and safety regulations. The lady didn’t win her lawsuit because American courts are stupid; she won it because the McDonald’s she bought that coffee from was actively and knowingly breaking the law with respect to the temperature of its coffee at the time of the incident.

(I mean, do you have any idea what a third-degree burn actually is? Third-degree burns involve “full thickness” tissue damage; we’re talking bone-deep, with possible destruction of tissue. Can you even imagine how hot that cup of coffee would have to have been to inflict that kind of damage in the few seconds it was in contact with her skin?)

Yeah I’m tired of people joking about either the “stupid” woman who didn’t know coffee was hot or the “greedy” woman making up bullshit to get money.

She was hideously injured by hideous irresponsibility, it was an absolutely legitimate lawsuit and the warning on the cups basically allows McDonalds to claim no responsibility even if it happens again. Every other company followed suit to cover their asses.

So they can still legally serve you something that could sear off the end of your tongue or permanently demolish the front of your gums and just give you a big fat middle finger in court. “The label SAID it would be HOT, STUPID.”

obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case

obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist teh facts on this case and get public opinion against the victim was deliberate and fueled by the right wing tort reform movement

it was seized upon to limit the rights of consumers to hold giant corporations accountable for wrongdoing

watch the documentary Hot Coffee, it lays out all of the facts and examines the response to this case and explains why everything you think you know about this case is bullshit, and explains why tort reform is bullshit in an entertaining and informative manner

The woman injured in Liebeck v. McDonald’s Restaurants was 79 years old at the time of her injuries, and suffered third-degree burns to the pelvic region (including her thighs, buttocks, and groin), which in combination with lesser burns in the surrounding regions caused damage to an area totaling a whopping 22% of her body’s surface. These injuries that required two years of intensive medical care, including multiple skin grafts; during her hospitalization, Stella Liebeck lost around 20% of her starting body weight.

She was uninsured and sued McDonald’s Restaurants for the cost of her past and projected future medical care, an estimated $20,000. The corporation offered a settlement of $800, a number so obviously ridiculous that I’m not even going to dignify it with any further explanation.

The settlement number most often quoted is not the amount that the corporation actually paid; the jury in the first trial suggested a payment equal to a day or two of coffee revenues for McDonald’s, which at the time totaled more than $1 million per diem. The judge reduced the required payout to around $640,000 in both compensatory and punitive damages, and the case was later settled out of court for less than $600,000.

Keep in mind that at the time, McDonald’s already had over 700 cases of complaints about coffee-related burns on file, but continued to sell coffee heated to nearly 200 degrees Fahrenheit (around 90 degrees Celsius) as a means of boosting sales (their selling point was that one could buy the coffee, drive to a second location such as work or home, and still have a piping hot beverage). This in spite of the fact that most restaurants serve coffee between 140 and 160 degrees Fahrenheit (60 to 71 degrees Celsius), and many coffee experts agree that such high temperatures are desirable only during the brewing process itself.

The Liebeck case was absolutely not an example of litigation-happy Americans expecting corporations to cover their asses for their own stupidity, but we seem determined to remember it that way. It’s an issue of liability, and the allowable lengths of capitalism, and even of the way in which our society is incredibly dangerous for and punitive towards the uninsured, but it was not and is not a frivolous suit. Please check your assumptions and do your research before you turn a burn victim’s suffering into a throwaway punchline.

jesus, i actually didn’t know about any of this, thanks for clearing that up

I just learned a lot of stuff 8l wow

Watch the documentary, it’s on Netflix. Or look up the photos of her burn areas - it’s not so funny anymore. Happy to see this get debunked!

Yeah, whenever people joke about this I have to assume they haven’t seen the
photos of the woman in question
. (They’re at the bottom of that page, warning, very graphic and not safe for work) if you watch the documentary they discuss how unlikely medical professionals even banked on her chances of surviving the incident to be. Companies launch smear campaigns like this when people sue them for egregious damages, because it nets them a higher rate of success when they lobby to have caps put on damage payouts. This leads to real life cases of people being harmed in ways that caused them permanent physical injury and ongoing medical bills being out in the cold when they seek compensation from the organization that harmed them.
spinachsmoothies

thepeoplesrecord:

7 black women to follow for updates in #Ferguson
August 18, 2014

Like much of the world, I haven’t been able to take my eyes off of the unrest that’s happening in Ferguson, Missouri. Social media has, once again, proven it’s effectiveness in quickly disseminating information and fact-checking mainstream sources for an event that the history books will not forgot. While you’re trying to keep up with what’s going on, be sure to follow these women who are doing extraordinary work telling stories and keeping those of us who cannot make it to Ferguson abreast of what’s happening on the ground.

1)      Brittany Noble | Reporter for KMOV in St. Louis | Twitter/Instagram

2)      Yamiche Alcindor | Contributor for MSNBC and USA Today | Twitter/Vine/Website

3)      Maria Chappelle-Nadal | Missouri State Senator | Twitter

4)      Patricia Bynes | Democratic committeewoman of Ferguson Township | Twitter

5)      Tasha B. | Resident & activist | Twitter/Instagram

6)      @Awkward_Duck | Resident & activist | Twitter

7)      Johnetta E. | Resident & activist | Twitter

Source