The Aunt Jemima Suit: Should I Also Sue The Egyptians For Chasing My Ancestors Across The Red Sea?
Okay, truth be told, I'm an atheist and I don't actually believe the Big Man In The Sky saw all his cute Jews on the run from the mean Egyptians and then went, "Yoo hoo, over here!" and cut a nice little trail for them through the water.
But the point is, at a certain point, there has to be a cutoff of sue-ability. Cato's Walter Olson points it out in this tweet:
This is about a lawsuit filed by the heirs of the woman who portrayed Aunt Jemima -- a character who became a subject of contentiousness as a "black mammy" figure and was afterward cleaned up:
Debbi Baker writes at U-T San Diego about the suit:
Shortly after the famous pancake mix debuted in 1889 the Aunt Jemima character was brought to life by former slave Nancy Green who served as the R.T. Davis company's "mammy" mascot, a role she continued until her death in 1923. Anna Harrington, the daughter of sharecroppers, began her career as Aunt Jemima in 1935.After the Quaker Oats Company bought the brand in 1926 it made Aunt Jemima its registered trademark in 1937. The image helped make the product a popular and trusted brand.
Now, heirs of one of the women who portrayed the Quaker Oats advertising icon have filed a class-action lawsuit against the manufacturer and its parent company PepsiCo Inc. for $2 billion and a share of future sales revenue.
The lawsuit claims that the company exploited Green, Harrington and other women who played Aunt Jemima by using her image and recipes without proper compensation.
"Aunt Jemima has become known as one of the most exploited and abused women in American history," said D.W. Hunter, one of Harrington's great-grandsons.
The company responded by saying that the lawsuit had no merit and that no contracts between Aunt Jemima models and their pancake bosses exist.
Agree that the suit is ridiculous. "Most abused woman in history"? I do not think the word "abuse" means what you think it means.
But... Pepsico. Schadenfreude. Just sayin'.
Cousin Dave at October 8, 2014 6:44 AM
This is a shakedown. They probably threatened the companies first to try and extract a settlement.
When that didn't work, they filed suit.
The end of a cause of action for this kind of thing, is a person's lifetime, for a very sound reason, getting long dead people into court to testify, is impossible, and violates the rules of evidence.
Isab at October 8, 2014 6:58 AM
What a bunch of crap. Get your picture posted as the very symbol of goodness at breakfast, then claim you were exploited?
By the way - about Jews and fleeing Egypt: got any census numbers, any records of slave possession in Egyptian records? I think it was poetic license to claim thousands wandering for 40 years, because there is precious little sign of that happening.
Radwaste at October 8, 2014 7:08 AM
Amy Alkon
http://www.advicegoddess.com/archives/2014/10/08/the_aunt_jemima.html#comment-5207735">comment from RadwasteI see the entire bible as a giant book of poetic license. I just went with the whole legend.
Amy Alkon at October 8, 2014 8:25 AM
Statute of limitations, because most people or companies don't keep detailed of records of employment or pay from 100 yrs ago.
But you can put on a sign or a headline and it will sound horrible, "She was only paid $x."
Of course ignoring that with 100 yrs of inflation how much that is actually equivalent to today.
Joe J at October 8, 2014 9:17 AM
I think it was poetic license to claim thousands wandering for 40 years, because there is precious little sign of that happening.
Most archaeological evidence suggests the "Egypial fleeing" jews were in fact rural goat herders who became "new money" due to a freak crop blight and married into the political power structures of a few cities
lujlp at October 8, 2014 10:19 AM
Isab: The end of a cause of action for this kind of thing, is a person's lifetime, for a very sound reason, getting long dead people into court to testify, is impossible, and violates the rules of evidence.
So, you think the Cadaver Synod should have been declared a mistrial?
Patrick at October 8, 2014 10:45 AM
Aunt Jemima didn't claim she was exploited. Her ancestors did ... 100 years later. Or 50 years later, depending upon which Aunt Jemima's ancestors are suing.
Does this mean they'll be coming after Uncle Ben next?
Conan the Grammarian at October 8, 2014 11:01 AM
"Aunt Jemima didn't claim she was exploited. Her ancestors did ."
No, her descendants did.
Isab at October 8, 2014 11:18 AM
"So, you think the Cadaver Synod should have been declared a mistrial?"
Hey, England put Cromwell's corpse on trial. And sentenced it to death.
Cousin Dave at October 8, 2014 11:52 AM
Maybe they had a seance.
Okay, my bad.
Conan the Grammarian at October 8, 2014 12:39 PM
Isab: The end of a cause of action for this kind of thing, is a person's lifetime, for a very sound reason, getting long dead people into court to testify, is impossible, and violates the rules of evidence.
So, you think the Cadaver Synod should have been declared a mistrial?
Posted by: Patrick at October 8, 2014 10:45 AM
Wouldn't even make it to court, under modern American rules of Evidence, and Civil Procedure.
To have a mistrial, a judge has to agree to let it into court in the first place.
But Rome in the 9th century operated under different rules. No surprise there.
Isab at October 8, 2014 1:37 PM
Next up, the descendants of slaves suing the descendants of slave-owners. Why not?
My ancestors weren't slaves, but there had to have been some exploited Irishmen in there. So maybe those folks who track their ancestors back for generations are on to something. I could be rich. Or not.
MarkD at October 9, 2014 5:16 AM
Ah, the Aunt Jemima suit.
That scene was, fortunately, left on the cutting room floor when they were finishing 'Silence Of The Lambs'.
Gog_Magog_Carpet_Reclaimers at October 10, 2014 8:58 PM
My sensitive snoot detects the stench of Jesse Jackson nearby...
Lastango at October 10, 2014 11:19 PM
Leave a comment