Orgasmic tights

[Gob]

A New York woman is suing a tights manufacturing company because their product didn't give her the orgasmic experience she had hoped for.




Meng Wang, of Queens, purchased a pair of Kushyfoot shaping tights for $7 at Duane Reade and was disappointed -- or unsatisfied -- when she didn't have some sort of orgasmic experience that the woman in the company's advertising commercial had, according to the New York Post. In the sexually suggestive commercial for the pantyhose, a woman is seen walking down the street, seemingly in the throes of passion.
Between moans, the woman says 'that's the spot,' and 'oh yeah, that's it.' At the end of the commercial, the woman is surrounded by a group of women eager to know her secret and the woman pulls a package of the stockings from her purse and says 'Kushyfoot.'

All the while, a chorus is heard in the background singing 'I'm super satisfied, super satisfied.' Apparently, Wang wasn't 'super satisfied.' She filed a class action lawsuit in Brooklyn Monday against the Canadian based company Gildan Outerwear.

Wang's lawyer, C.K.Lee, told the Post that the advertisement indicated that Wang would get 'a massage through her pantyhose.' But the product turned out to be 'just socks,' he said. Wang purchased the shaping tights and wore them for a week, the suit claims, but experienced no pleasurable sensations. The product's description on the Kushyfoot website claims the shaping tights include a 'massaging sole for extra comfort' and a 'firm shaper that tames your tummy, hips and thighs.

[Lord Jim]

This would be kind of like somebody suing a cologne company because their ads showed a guy putting on their cologne and then having beautiful women flocking around him...

Because the schlep put on the cologne and beautiful women didn't flock around him....

[wesw]

maybe if she rode her bike?

[Lord Jim]

Or maybe if she leaned against the washing machine during the spin cycle...

[Sue U]

Of course, this lawsuit has absolutely nothing to do with anyone being "disappointed -- or unsatisfied -- when she didn't have some sort of orgasmic experience" by wearing Kushyfoot stockings. If anyone actually bothers to read the Complaint in the case, it is apparent that the entire basis for the consumer fraud action is that Kushyfoot markets its products as having "zigzag and massaging soles" that are "designed by Reflexology experts" with "the Science of Reflexology" to produce therapeutic benefits by "massag[ing] your feet with every step," thereby "reliev[ing] tension and discomfort in achy feet -- and stress and fatigue throughout the body." Because of these claimed "benefits," the products are sold at a premium price.

Plaintiff alleges that in fact the products provide no such benefits, that they cannot be differentiated from any other manufacturer's hosiery when worn, and that the manufacturer's claims are therefore false and deceptive, misleading consumers and inducing them to pay significantly more for the Kushyfoot products than other similar products. The "orgasmic tights" commercial is merely one example of the manufacturer's over-the-top advertising; no one is actually claiming they expected an orgasm from wearing the products. (See in particular paragraphs 29-33.)

But of course, making shit up about the basis for a lawsuit is par for the course for the corporate interests whose goal is to convince the public that all lawsuits are frivolous.

[Lord Jim]

And just what would you say her "damages" are, counselor?

I'd say $7.

[Sue U]

And just what would you say her "damages" are, counselor?

I'd say $7.

Individually, yes, I think that's right (plus fees and costs for litigation, because consumer fraud is a fee-shifting claim). But this is a class action, and the value of damages for the class as a whole is alleged to be in excess of $5 million, which is why it's filed in federal court rather than NY Supreme.

[wesw]

of which the consumer s will get about a dollar each, and the lawyers can laugh all the way to the bank.

the Chinese guys I worked with told me that they knew people who would chop off a finger for a guaranteed settlement with their employer. please don t say I just hate the Chinese, the guys I worked with thought their compatriots were nuts too

[Sue U]

of which the consumer s will get about a dollar each, and the lawyers can laugh all the way to the bank.

Do you understand the purpose of a class action and calculation of damages? If the consumers didn't suffer individual losses of more than $7 each, why should they receive any more compensation than that? If they did, you'd be complaining about how people "just sue to hit a jackpot." The class-action form of lawsuit allows consumers with individual small-value claims to litigate in a cost-efficient manner where the fraudulent practice has affected a large number of people. Otherwise it would be economically impractical to litigate individual claims, and you'd be essentially giving corporations free rein to commit mass-market consumer fraud as much as they want, as long as they keep the individual frauds under a dollar amount that makes litigation viable.

[wesw]

yes, I do understand that. do you understand what a ridiculous waste of time that this particular suit would be? do you have no respect for our judicial system? do you think that our judicial system is your personal cash cow to be milked at will.

maybe you could sue the company that sold x ray glasses in the back of comic books? or the one where the beefy guy kicks sand in the98 lb weaklings face?

oh my, the stockings, that don t magically massage your feet and nether regions don t actually do anything? oh the horror! society would fail without you to right this wrong

puh-leese

[Big RR]

Come on Wes, there's no magic here; there's a product marketed to give the wearer therapeutic benefits--benefits that are a lie. Is it that hard to believe you could purchase a pair of tights that provide support and some sort of dynamic massage while you walk; I don't think so and believing such garments work are certainly not akin to believing X ray glasses work; there is something that is known as reflexology that is used by massage therapists to relieve pain, and that is why people are shelling out a premium price for the product.

So the consumers were taken; do you deny that they should be compensated? And when they seek to stop the company from taking others by filing a class action suit ($7.00 by itself will stop nothing by itself, but $5,000 ,000 of speaks pretty loudly and discourages future scams) you claim they are disrespecting the court system. So what's your answer, do nothing and let them company continue with its bogus claims?

[wesw]

come on RR, how many products exaggerate their benefits? almost every one in my experience. from tennis shoes to health products.
save your powder for the important stuff. like meds that make your babies have withered arms, or products that are poisonous. anything that comes from china. it s a matter of judgement. if you can t figure out that a pair of stockings won t change your life you are in trouble. it was probably some ambulance chaser s idea to sue the sock maker anyway. to be honest I like expensive socks and shoes, they make my feet feel better, but I don t expect them to massage me into ecstasy no matter what their adds say. now if they had some kind of massaging motor which didn t actually massage me, I could see the point.

so yes, I feel that this particular suit is frivolous and a waste of the courts valuable time. if the product actually harmed someone I d be on the lawyers side, er... plaintiffs side....

[Big RR]

Well, IMHO if I sell something saying it has a property/benefit that I know it does not have, then I should be liable to the consumers I bilked. This is not a pie in the sky or ludicrous claim, only that the construction of the tights was such that they would help tired and aching feet. If it was a suit claiming that the customer did not get an orgasm or some other similalrly silly claim, I would agree with you, but this was not such a claim. To me it's kind of like saying that a diet soft drink has no calories, when it has the same calories as a a regular soft drink; the customer has a right not to be lied to.

[wesw]

I get what you are saying rr, but helping tired and aching feet is a very subjective area. high quality good fitting socks do help my feet. they don t helpmuch, but they do help. perhaps they are soothing to others as well. maybe they do nothing for corns, but help after a day on the concrete.

the principle of what you are saying is valid, but I think this particular case is part of the problem. excessive litigation. when I lived in Plymouth MA people would not even let their kids play because they were afraid that the neighbors would sue if their kid got a bloody nose or sprained ankle. I knew people at work there who moved from one lawsuit to another. need a new car? wait till you see a wet floor and take a fall....

[wesw]

oh yeah, I got hurt at work up there and I had law offices actually call my house asking if it was my employers fault and did I need their help. they would not tell me how they found out but I have my suspicions

[rubato]

Smartwool socks = happy feet!




For those long days on your feet in the lab.


yrs,
rubato

[Big RR]

wes--there are those who game the system on all sides; and people setting up an "accident" to collect are often found out after a few claims (if not earlier). As for the worry of lawsuits, it is pretty exaggerated and few people see the inside of a court room (or are even named in a suit) in their lives, despite the hysteria.

[MajGenl.Meade]

Do you understand....

A bit redundant there, Sue?

[Sue U]

Do you understand....

A bit redundant there, Sue?

More like redolent.

[MajGenl.Meade]

That's an anagram of El Rodent!