🔥 | Latest

Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒 the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs. Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language. “For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip. For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert. But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)” ^^^!!!
Dogs, Drugs, and Facts: DAPASTOR YOO
uncleromeo:

feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes:


emotionsclashagainstemotions:


thatpettyblackgirl:

Because we know they value the lives of dogs over blac… nevermind 😒

the ironic part is, racism is probably why the cop was so convinced the drugs were there. the dog was doing its job, which is not reacting to drugs that don’t exist. the cop, on other hand, saw a black man, and was sure he had drugs.


Drug dogs have also been found to be ineffective in many cases, basing their reactions on the cop’s body language.
“For the purpose of this post, though, I want to focus on what’s missing from Colb’s analysis and, should the Supreme Court decide to hear the case, will almost certainly also be missing from oral arguments, the court’s ruling and most discussion of the case: that narcotics-detecting dogs and their handlers aren’t very good at discerning the presence of illegal drugs. Multiple analyses of drug-dog alerts have consistently shown alarmingly high error rates — with some close to and exceeding 50 percent. In effect, some of these K-9 units are worse than a coin flip.
For some units, the reason may be sinister — the police handler may have trained the dog to alert on command. I’ve asked dog trainers to look at videos of roadside searches in the past, and, on more than one occasion, they said they saw clear indications that a dog was being cued to alert.
But it needn’t be so malicious. While dogs are indeed capable of sniffing out illicit drugs, we’ve bred into them another overriding trait: the desire to please. Even drug dogs with conscientious handlers will read their handlers’ unintentional body language and alert accordingly. A 2010 study found that packages designed to trick handlers into thinking there were drugs inside them were much more likely to trigger false alerts than packages designed to trick the dogs. (Police-dog handlers and trainers responded to that study by refusing to cooperate with further research.) Many drug dogs, then, are not alerting to the presence of drugs, but to their handlers’ suspicions about the presence of drugs. And searches based on little more than law enforcement’s suspicions are exactly what the Fourth Amendment is supposed to prevent. (Tracking dogs that pick suspects out of “scent lineups” have had similar problems, and have led to numerous wrongful convictions.)”


^^^!!!

uncleromeo: feet-man-ahhh-sucker-of-the-toes: emotionsclashagainstemotions: thatpettyblackgirl: Because we know they value the lives o...

Children, Cute, and Facts: pervocracy child handling for the childless urse My current job has me working with children, which is kind of a weird shock after years in environments where a young" patient is 40 years old. Here's my impressions so far Birth 1 year: Essentially a smail cute animal. Handle accordingly, gently and affectionately, but relying heavily on the caregivers and with no real expectation of cooperation Age 1-2: Hates you. Hates you so much. You can smile, you can coo, you can attempt to soothe they hate you anyway, because you're a stranger and you're scary and you're touching them. There's no winning this so just get it over with as quickly and non-traumatically as possible Age 3-5: Nervous around medical things, but possible to soothe. Easily upset but also easily distracted from the thing that upset them. Smartphone cartoons and who wants a stickerrl1?1? are key management techniques Age 6 10: Really cool, actually. I did not realize kids were this cool. Around this age they tend to be fairly outgoing, and super curious and eager to learn. Absolutely do not babytalk, instead, flatter them with how grown-up they are teach them some Fun Gross Medical Facts, and introduce potentially frightening experiences with hey, you want to see something really cool?" Age 11 14: Extremely variable. Can be very childish or very mature, or rapidly switch from one mode to the other. At this point you can almost treat them as an adult, just... a really sensitive and unpredictable adult Do not, under any circumstances, offer stickers. (But they might grab one out of the bin anyway.) Age 15-18: Basically an adult with severely limited life experience. Treat as an adult who needs a littie extra education with their care. Keep parents out of the room as much as possible, unless the kid wants them there. At this point you can go ahead and offer stickers again, because they'll probably think it's funny And they'll want one. Deep down, everyone wants a sticker nurse unlocks secret to raising kids
Children, Cute, and Facts: pervocracy
 child handling for the childless
 urse
 My current job has me working with children, which is kind of a weird shock after
 years in environments where a young" patient is 40 years old. Here's my
 impressions so far
 Birth 1 year: Essentially a smail cute animal. Handle accordingly, gently and
 affectionately, but relying heavily on the caregivers and with no real expectation
 of cooperation
 Age 1-2: Hates you. Hates you so much. You can smile, you can coo, you can
 attempt to soothe they hate you anyway, because you're a stranger and you're
 scary and you're touching them. There's no winning this so just get it over with
 as quickly and non-traumatically as possible
 Age 3-5: Nervous around medical things, but possible to soothe. Easily upset
 but also easily distracted from the thing that upset them. Smartphone cartoons
 and who wants a stickerrl1?1? are key management techniques
 Age 6 10: Really cool, actually. I did not realize kids were this cool. Around
 this age they tend to be fairly outgoing, and super curious and eager to learn.
 Absolutely do not babytalk, instead, flatter them with how grown-up they are
 teach them some Fun Gross Medical Facts, and introduce potentially frightening
 experiences with hey, you want to see something really cool?"
 Age 11 14: Extremely variable. Can be very childish or very mature, or rapidly
 switch from one mode to the other. At this point you can almost treat them as an
 adult, just... a really sensitive and unpredictable adult Do not, under any
 circumstances, offer stickers. (But they might grab one out of the bin anyway.)
 Age 15-18: Basically an adult with severely limited life experience. Treat as an
 adult who needs a littie extra education with their care. Keep parents out of the
 room as much as possible, unless the kid wants them there. At this point you
 can go ahead and offer stickers again, because they'll probably think it's funny
 And they'll want one. Deep down, everyone wants a sticker
nurse unlocks secret to raising kids

nurse unlocks secret to raising kids

Children, Cute, and Facts: pervocracy child handling for the childless nurse My current job has me working with children, which is kind of a weird shock after years in environments where a "young" patient is 40 years old. Here's my impressions so far: Birth 1 year: Essentially a small cute animal Handle accordingly; gently and affectionately, but relying heavily on the caregivers and with no real expectation of cooperation. Age 1- 2: Hates you. Hates you so much. You can smile, you can coo, you can attempt to soothe; they hate you anyway, because you're a stranger and you're scary and you're touching them. There's no winning this so just get it over with as quickly and non- traumatically as possible. Age 3-5: Nervous around medical things, but possible to soothe. Easily upset, but also easily distracted from the thing that upset them Smartphone cartoons and "who wants a sticker?!!?!?" are key management techniques. Age 6- 10: Really cool, actually. I did not realize kids were this cool. Around this age they tend to be fairly outgoing, and super curious and eager to learn. Absolutely do not babytalk; instead, flatter them with how grown-up they are, teach them some Fun Gross Medical Facts, and introduce potentially frightening experiences with "hey, you want to see something really cool?" Age 11 14: Extremely variable. Can be very childish or very mature, or rapidly switch from one mode to the other. At this point you can almost treat them as an adult, just... a really sensitive and unpredictable adult. Do not, under any circumstances, offer stickers. (But they might grab one out of the bin anyway.) Age 15 18: Basically an adult with severely limited life experience. Treat as an adult who needs a little extra education with their care Keep parents out of the room as much as possible, unless the kid wants them there. At this point you can go ahead and offer stickers again, because they'll probably think it's funny. And they'll want one. Deep down, everyone wants a sticker. mikkeneko This is also a pretty excellent guide to writing kids of various ages Child handling for nurses
Children, Cute, and Facts: pervocracy
 child handling for the
 childless nurse
 My current job has me working with children,
 which is kind of a weird shock after years in
 environments where a "young" patient is 40
 years old. Here's my impressions so far:
 Birth 1 year: Essentially a small cute animal
 Handle accordingly; gently and affectionately,
 but relying heavily on the caregivers and with
 no real expectation of cooperation.
 Age 1- 2: Hates you. Hates you so much. You
 can smile, you can coo, you can attempt to
 soothe; they hate you anyway, because you're
 a stranger and you're scary and you're
 touching them. There's no winning this so just
 get it over with as quickly and non-
 traumatically as possible.
 Age 3-5: Nervous around medical things, but
 possible to soothe. Easily upset, but also easily
 distracted from the thing that upset them
 Smartphone cartoons and "who wants a
 sticker?!!?!?" are key management techniques.
 Age 6- 10: Really cool, actually. I did not
 realize kids were this cool. Around this age they
 tend to be fairly outgoing, and super curious
 and eager to learn. Absolutely do not babytalk;
 instead, flatter them with how grown-up they
 are, teach them some Fun Gross Medical Facts,
 and introduce potentially frightening
 experiences with "hey, you want to see
 something really cool?"
 Age 11 14: Extremely variable. Can be very
 childish or very mature, or rapidly switch from
 one mode to the other. At this point you can
 almost treat them as an adult, just... a really
 sensitive and unpredictable adult. Do not,
 under any circumstances, offer stickers. (But
 they might grab one out of the bin anyway.)
 Age 15 18: Basically an adult with severely
 limited life experience. Treat as an adult who
 needs a little extra education with their care
 Keep parents out of the room as much as
 possible, unless the kid wants them there. At
 this point you can go ahead and offer stickers
 again, because they'll probably think it's funny.
 And they'll want one. Deep down, everyone
 wants a sticker.
 mikkeneko
 This is also a pretty excellent guide to writing
 kids of various ages
Child handling for nurses

Child handling for nurses

9gag, Alive, and Being Alone: hou 300kcal 41,200 kcal TOmin +1200kcal RGER KIN 9GAG.COM Forever Alone with 9GAG.COM skeletonmug: duckbunny: kate-wisehart: drtanner-sfw: rikakuuma: vulnerate: the-exercist: dreamofunconsciousness: the-exercist: my-way-to-get-skinny: Still hungry? Absolutely! The average active adult needs 2,000 calories per day in order to function in a safe and healthy manner. If I’m active to the point where I consistently run 1+ hour every day, then it is far more likely that my caloric needs are around 2,400-2,500. Considering that, a meal of 1,200 calories would perfectly suit my needs. It would supply roughly half of my calorie requirements, which is a God-send since a fast food meal is relatively cheap. It’s a great value, especially if I don’t have much time to cook or have the resources to prepare my own meals! The average burger is going to supply me with significant protein and carbs. That’s exactly what I’d need in order to build more muscle and have enough energy to make it through a workout. Even the sugar within the meal can be beneficial in supplying me with a boost of energy and can stop me from feeling hungry for a prolonged period of time. Not half bad. Is this the most healthy meal known to man? Of course not. But it’s still a very reasonable deal and the calorie count is well within the average adult’s daily needs.  Don’t let calories scare you! You need them. If you were capable of burning off an entire meal within the hour, you’d probably be dead by now. 1200 empty calories in a meal next to no nutrition. all the calories are sugar and fat. that’s it. you’ll have no energy and have glucose spikes in your blood because the lack of fiber because of the lack of complex carbs. this is diabetes in a meal.  so no, you should not be hungry for diabetes Nutritionally, this BK meal contains roughly 28g of protein and 3g of dietary fiber. It potentially also includes 35% of our Vitamin C daily requirements, 2% Vitamin A, 12% calcium, and 27% iron. Of the 1,010 calories (that I could verify directly from the company’s nutritional information guide), only 410 are from fat. That isn’t a terribly significant amount of fat, in the long run, nor are the nutrients small enough to be viewed as negligible. Eating this will not cause you to get diabetes. Eating this meal is perfectly fine if you do have diabetes, as long as you are able to adjust your insulin intake accordingly. So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop. “So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.” I want that and variations of that on t shirts. damn, man. Someone just got completely schooled by a nutritionist. THIS A GOOD POST I’ve reblogged this again but I feel like it needs to be SAID again. Also someone needs to please come drive me to burger king and buy me a burger. Pretty please? I am diabetic, and the only thing that would give me pause is the drink. If that’s a diet soda, then it’s all fine. I mean sure, white bread isn’t the best possible thing, but it is the kind I mostly eat, and fried potatoes are basically OK because they’re starch, not simple sugar. Fries and a burger are better for me and more predictable than fruit. Fruit is a wild gamble. This meal - assuming diet soda - is one I can dose for. (I am diabetic because autoimmune conditions run in my family, and my pancreas has been randomly targeted for death by my immune system. Diet didn’t cause it and couldn’t have prevented it. Do not tell me I’m sick because I eat wrong. I’m alive because I eat.) We also need to ditch the idea that there is any such thing as food that is just “empty calories”. Presumably what people mean by that is that the only nutritional value something gives you is it’s calorific content.  The only foods that do that are things that are literally pure sugar. If you are eating pure sugar then yes you are only getting calories in the form of short chain carbohydrates/sugars that are broken down into glucose quickly. But for some people and in some instances that’s not a bad thing.  “empty calories” aren’t morally or even nutritionally bad. Sometimes that’s what our body needs -  a quick injection of glucose and calories for energy. Honestly I would rather glug a glucose drink like lucozade than a high caffeine “energy drink” when I am tired and need a boost any day of the week. But when people apply the “empty calories” thing to actual foods that aren’t pure sugar it is just inaccurate and frustrating. I mean, let’s take a step up from pure sugar and mix it with a fat in order to make buttercream frosting. If you at a spoon full of that it wouldn’t be “empty calories”. Sure it is a high sugar content so you are getting a high number of calories per spoonful and they are short chain carbohydrates so it’s not lasting energy but it’s still vital energy. But you are also ingesting fat. Fat isn’t bad for you, we need fats in our diet. It’s not a “empty calorie” it’s a vital part of how our body works. OK let’s look at something more sensible, a burger bun. Just he bun mind you, not even a complete meal like a full on burger. Even white bread contains a lot of nutrients which are useful to your body. You are going to be getting a mixture of carbohydrates both short and long so your body will have ongoing energy. Even white flour contains some proteins and trace minerals such as iron. There’s small amounts of fat, and salt in there too. Certainly not an “empty calorie” - quite a lo of useful stuff for your body. But please for the love of fluffy kittens stop thinking that “calories” are discrete magical food particles which are in some way separate from the things which actually make up our food. Food is pretty complex and our bodies even more so. We need calories, we also make use of a lot of different things that are found in all sorts of food.  Remember that a calorie is a unit of measurement to show how much energy something produces. Calorie content is calculated literally by burning food. A calorie isn’t a nutrient in the same way as carbohydrates, proteins, amino acids, fats and minerals are. A food item isn’t made up of calories. It is made up of molecules of carbs, fats proteins and so on. It is the burning of those that gives us calorie content. If something has calories then it HAS to have other nutritional content in order to physically exist even if that content is just short chain carbohydrates.  Unless somebody is only eating pure sugar they aren’t eating “empty calories”. 
9gag, Alive, and Being Alone: hou
 300kcal
 41,200 kcal
 TOmin
 +1200kcal
 RGER
 KIN
 9GAG.COM
 Forever Alone with 9GAG.COM
skeletonmug:
duckbunny:

kate-wisehart:

drtanner-sfw:

rikakuuma:

vulnerate:

the-exercist:

dreamofunconsciousness:

the-exercist:

my-way-to-get-skinny:

Still hungry?

Absolutely!
The average active adult needs 2,000 calories per day in order to function in a safe and healthy manner. If I’m active to the point where I consistently run 1+ hour every day, then it is far more likely that my caloric needs are around 2,400-2,500.
Considering that, a meal of 1,200 calories would perfectly suit my needs. It would supply roughly half of my calorie requirements, which is a God-send since a fast food meal is relatively cheap. It’s a great value, especially if I don’t have much time to cook or have the resources to prepare my own meals!
The average burger is going to supply me with significant protein and carbs. That’s exactly what I’d need in order to build more muscle and have enough energy to make it through a workout. Even the sugar within the meal can be beneficial in supplying me with a boost of energy and can stop me from feeling hungry for a prolonged period of time. Not half bad.
Is this the most healthy meal known to man? Of course not. But it’s still a very reasonable deal and the calorie count is well within the average adult’s daily needs. 
Don’t let calories scare you! You need them. If you were capable of burning off an entire meal within the hour, you’d probably be dead by now.

1200 empty calories in a meal
next to no nutrition. all the calories are sugar and fat. that’s it. you’ll have no energy and have glucose spikes in your blood because the lack of fiber because of the lack of complex carbs. this is diabetes in a meal. 
so no, you should not be hungry for diabetes

Nutritionally, this BK meal contains roughly 28g of protein and 3g of dietary fiber. It potentially also includes 35% of our Vitamin C daily requirements, 2% Vitamin A, 12% calcium, and 27% iron. Of the 1,010 calories (that I could verify directly from the company’s nutritional information guide), only 410 are from fat. That isn’t a terribly significant amount of fat, in the long run, nor are the nutrients small enough to be viewed as negligible.
Eating this will not cause you to get diabetes. Eating this meal is perfectly fine if you do have diabetes, as long as you are able to adjust your insulin intake accordingly. So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.

“So don’t use an illness as your debate point - Diabetic people are not a prop.” I want that and variations of that on t shirts.

damn, man. Someone just got completely schooled by a nutritionist.

THIS A GOOD POST


I’ve reblogged this again but I feel like it needs to be SAID again. Also someone needs to please come drive me to burger king and buy me a burger. Pretty please?


I am diabetic, and the only thing that would give me pause is the drink. If that’s a diet soda, then it’s all fine. I mean sure, white bread isn’t the best possible thing, but it is the kind I mostly eat, and fried potatoes are basically OK because they’re starch, not simple sugar.
Fries and a burger are better for me and more predictable than fruit. Fruit is a wild gamble. This meal - assuming diet soda - is one I can dose for.
(I am diabetic because autoimmune conditions run in my family, and my pancreas has been randomly targeted for death by my immune system. Diet didn’t cause it and couldn’t have prevented it. Do not tell me I’m sick because I eat wrong. I’m alive because I eat.)

We also need to ditch the idea that there is any such thing as food that is just “empty calories”. Presumably what people mean by that is that the only nutritional value something gives you is it’s calorific content. 
The only foods that do that are things that are literally pure sugar. If you are eating pure sugar then yes you are only getting calories in the form of short chain carbohydrates/sugars that are broken down into glucose quickly. But for some people and in some instances that’s not a bad thing. 
“empty calories” aren’t morally or even nutritionally bad. Sometimes that’s what our body needs -  a quick injection of glucose and calories for energy. Honestly I would rather glug a glucose drink like lucozade than a high caffeine “energy drink” when I am tired and need a boost any day of the week.
But when people apply the “empty calories” thing to actual foods that aren’t pure sugar it is just inaccurate and frustrating. I mean, let’s take a step up from pure sugar and mix it with a fat in order to make buttercream frosting. If you at a spoon full of that it wouldn’t be “empty calories”. Sure it is a high sugar content so you are getting a high number of calories per spoonful and they are short chain carbohydrates so it’s not lasting energy but it’s still vital energy. But you are also ingesting fat. Fat isn’t bad for you, we need fats in our diet. It’s not a “empty calorie” it’s a vital part of how our body works.
OK let’s look at something more sensible, a burger bun. Just he bun mind you, not even a complete meal like a full on burger. Even white bread contains a lot of nutrients which are useful to your body. You are going to be getting a mixture of carbohydrates both short and long so your body will have ongoing energy. Even white flour contains some proteins and trace minerals such as iron. There’s small amounts of fat, and salt in there too. Certainly not an “empty calorie” - quite a lo of useful stuff for your body.
But please for the love of fluffy kittens stop thinking that “calories” are discrete magical food particles which are in some way separate from the things which actually make up our food. Food is pretty complex and our bodies even more so. We need calories, we also make use of a lot of different things that are found in all sorts of food. 
Remember that a calorie is a unit of measurement to show how much energy something produces. Calorie content is calculated literally by burning food. A calorie isn’t a nutrient in the same way as carbohydrates, proteins, amino acids, fats and minerals are. A food item isn’t made up of calories. It is made up of molecules of carbs, fats proteins and so on. It is the burning of those that gives us calorie content. If something has calories then it HAS to have other nutritional content in order to physically exist even if that content is just short chain carbohydrates. 
Unless somebody is only eating pure sugar they aren’t eating “empty calories”. 

skeletonmug: duckbunny: kate-wisehart: drtanner-sfw: rikakuuma: vulnerate: the-exercist: dreamofunconsciousness: the-exercist: my-wa...

Dumb, Food, and Fucking: Follow IHoe IHOP @IHOP flat but has a GREAT personality RETWEETS F AVORITES 385 381S 6:00 PM-18 Oct 2015 feels-by-the-foot: edgelowl102: This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the company released an apology within two hours that read: “Earlier today we tweeted something dumb and immature that does not reflect what IHOP stands for. We’re sorry.” Referring to pancakes as flat is a perfectly normal claim. Applying personification to food is also commonplace in the social media marketing industry, as it lends a humorous personality to an otherwise boring corporate marketing campaign. The copywriter behind the post likely had innocent intentions and came up with this post using the same process he or she used for hundreds of other posts before it. However, this is a perfect example of a tasteless social media faux pas that created a severe backlash that did more harm than good to the brand’s public image.   The post itself personifies tastelessness more than anything else. By pairing a highly suggestive image with incredibly offensive copy, IHOP effectively told the world that they find misogyny humourous. The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes and business likely suffered accordingly. As far as I’m concerned, they deserved every inch of animosity they had thrown at them because of this blatant display of idiocy. And as a social media marketer myself, I’m offended that someone allowed this to be posted on an account as large as IHOP’s.   Why are feminists so weak? If you don’t like the joke, great, but some of us got a smile out of it. I’m eating at IHOP later because of this, for sure. They shouldn’t have to apologize.  “The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes”Boy howdy have you got that right. Get a fucking grip you offense-addicted diaper babies.
Dumb, Food, and Fucking: Follow
 IHoe IHOP
 @IHOP
 flat but has a GREAT personality
 RETWEETS F
 AVORITES
 385 381S
 6:00 PM-18 Oct 2015
feels-by-the-foot:

edgelowl102:

This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the company released an apology within two hours that read:
“Earlier today we tweeted something dumb and immature that does not reflect what IHOP stands for. We’re sorry.”
Referring to pancakes as flat is a perfectly normal claim. Applying personification to food is also commonplace in the social media marketing industry, as it lends a humorous personality to an otherwise boring corporate marketing campaign. The copywriter behind the post likely had innocent intentions and came up with this post using the same process he or she used for hundreds of other posts before it. However, this is a perfect example of a tasteless social media faux pas that created a severe backlash that did more harm than good to the brand’s public image.  
The post itself personifies tastelessness more than anything else. By pairing a highly suggestive image with incredibly offensive copy, IHOP effectively told the world that they find misogyny humourous. The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes and business likely suffered accordingly. As far as I’m concerned, they deserved every inch of animosity they had thrown at them because of this blatant display of idiocy. And as a social media marketer myself, I’m offended that someone allowed this to be posted on an account as large as IHOP’s.  


Why are feminists so weak? If you don’t like the joke, great, but some of us got a smile out of it. I’m eating at IHOP later because of this, for sure. They shouldn’t have to apologize. 

“The brand received the negative backlash of the highly sensitive collective voice of the Internet within minutes”Boy howdy have you got that right. Get a fucking grip you offense-addicted diaper babies.

feels-by-the-foot: edgelowl102: This advertisement from IHOP’s certified Twitter account was taken down within hours of posting, and the c...