hello.
it's so very nice to meet you

© everlark

missmirandaaraee:

WHAT


i really want the thing, except i also want that other thing, and that other! having to choose makes me overwhelmed and i end up doing nothing. halp.

▲ Anonymous

lettersfromtitan:

YOU DO NOT HAVE TO CHOOSE.  CHOOSING IS A LIE.

You have to prioritize and strategize and balance and consider return on investment (emotional, financial, what you view as win, etc), BUT YOU DON”T HAVE CHOOSE.

We often mistake the idea of rigor and dedication as something that requires the exclusion of other activities and goals.  Everything has a price, but the price never has to be everything.


laughingsquid:

SciShow Explains Why Humans Yawn


My skin has turned to porcelain, to ivory, to steel.


turkey-imported-from-maine:

firelorcl:

meladoodle:

i wanna be a reverse tooth fairy where i rob people and then scatter human teeth on their bed

a dentist

i dont know what your dentist is doing to you but i think you need to go to the police

#oh tumblr #this is golden


assbanditkirk:

whoa canada
someone needs to turn down that sass level

truthandglory: 

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

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

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

prokopetz:

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?)

bogleech:

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.”

commanderbishoujo:

obligatory reblog for the great debunking of the usual ignorance spouted about this case
obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist the 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

charlienight:

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 an throwaway punchline.

thebicker:

I love a good debunking. This was not a case of “Americans are all stupid and greedy;” it was a case of “our corporations don’t think they have to be held liable for anything ever because FREEDOM!” The label on that cup in the photo should say, “If this beverage is too hot, taxes paid by your fellow citizens and companies will cover the healthcare needed to heal your injuries, and the company that gave you this coffee will probably apologize (ok it’s Canada they will DEFINITELY apologize) and maybe not make their coffee so hot in the future. Good thing this is Canada!”

assbanditkirk:

whoa canada

someone needs to turn down that sass level

truthandglory

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

johnlockinthetardiswithdestiel:

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

prokopetz:

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?)

bogleech:

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.”

commanderbishoujo:

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

obligatory mention that the media smear campaign to twist the 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

charlienight:

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 an throwaway punchline.

thebicker:

I love a good debunking. This was not a case of “Americans are all stupid and greedy;” it was a case of “our corporations don’t think they have to be held liable for anything ever because FREEDOM!” The label on that cup in the photo should say, “If this beverage is too hot, taxes paid by your fellow citizens and companies will cover the healthcare needed to heal your injuries, and the company that gave you this coffee will probably apologize (ok it’s Canada they will DEFINITELY apologize) and maybe not make their coffee so hot in the future. Good thing this is Canada!”

#tumblr detectives

barahirs:

benedict being a dexterous bastard.

I’m a sucker for picking things up and twiddling them…It’s not in the books, it’s not in the script. It’s just me having fun with the props.
#benedict cumberbatch #sherlock

Do you think Kurt cannot handle this relationship ? to me it seems like Kurt was not ready for this level of commitment and though he still loves and cares for blaine he seems unsuitable for the relationship

▲ Anonymous

lettersfromtitan:

Okay, there are only so many ways I can answer the relationship question.  I did like four last night, and I think unless someone comes up with something really specific this is going to be the last one.

No one is ready for a relationship ever.  No one is good at relationships all the time.  No one comes into a relationship with all the skills they need.

Relationships work when people identify fault lines and try to address them.  Sometimes that is enough.  Sometimes it isn’t.

What is an absolute deal-breaker in one relationship is “Oh my god you forgot to take out the trash again” in another.

I don’t know if Kurt can handle this relationship.  I don’t know if Blaine can.  I don’t know that either of them can’t.

Certainly this is far from a place of no return, and they are both trying to communicate and improve their habits and look for solutions, which may or may not work.

Relationships are hard, and all relationships can go through periods that are kind of awful or boring or weird.  Especially when you don’t yet have a lot of skills and do have a lot of baggage you hadn’t even known yet to name.

This is not a Kurt problem or a Blaine problem.  People aren’t problems for how they cope or for not knowing how they cope.

It’s all about what happens next.

Also, score-keeping is really unhealthy in relationships.  Which means I think score-keeping is also a terrible tool to analyze other people’s relationships, even fictional ones.


fennecwolfox:


oeste:

misterhippity:

I tried a 2-D printer once, and the paper jammed.
So now I just painstakingly re-create my paper copies by hand, like a medieval monk.

i tried using paper, but the edges crumpled
so now i just chisel my commandments into stone, like old testament god

I tried using stone, but it cracked and broke.
Now I just scream everything at passersby, hoping they’ll remember what I said so I can ask them about it when I need it.

fennecwolfox:

oeste:

misterhippity:

I tried a 2-D printer once, and the paper jammed.

So now I just painstakingly re-create my paper copies by hand, like a medieval monk.

i tried using paper, but the edges crumpled

so now i just chisel my commandments into stone, like old testament god

I tried using stone, but it cracked and broke.

Now I just scream everything at passersby, hoping they’ll remember what I said so I can ask them about it when I need it.


Mercedes sees a million romantic candles all over every surface of the apartment, and immediately thinks GOD DAMNIT BLAINE NOT AGAIN. [x]

#glee #sniggers

cutiegeek:

No

image

But

image

Why

image

Do 

image

We 

image

Not 

image

Talk 

image

About 

image

Series Of Unfortunate Events?

image


#glee #they're handling this really well