Unfair Treatment Quotes

Remember that you always have the right to be treated with respect, and to protest unfair treatment or criticism. It’s vital to reinforce those rights with boundaries.

He missed the prayers but he thought it would be unfair and hypocritical to say them and he did not wish to ask any favors or for any different treatment than all the men were receiving.

Free white workers were better off than slaves or servants, but they still resented unfair treatment by the wealthier classes.

HUMAN BILL OF RIGHTS [GUIDELINES FOR FAIRNESS AND INTIMACY] I have the right to be treated with respect. I have the right to say no. I have the right to make mistakes. I have the right to reject unsolicited advice or feedback. I have the right to negotiate for change. I have the right to change my mind or my plans. I have a right to change my circumstances or course of action. I have the right to have my own feelings, beliefs, opinions, preferences, etc. I have the right to protest sarcasm, destructive criticism, or unfair treatment. I have a right to feel angry and to express it non-abusively. I have a right to refuse to take responsibility for anyone else’s problems. I have a right to refuse to take responsibility for anyone’s bad behavior. I have a right to feel ambivalent and to occasionally be inconsistent. I have a right to play, waste time and not always be productive. I have a right to occasionally be childlike and immature. I have a right to complain about life’s unfairness and injustices. I have a right to occasionally be irrational in safe ways. I have a right to seek healthy and mutually supportive relationships. I have a right to ask friends for a modicum of help and emotional support. I have a right to complain and verbally ventilate in moderation. I have a right to grow, evolve and prosper.

But," you may ask, "how can we forget the unkind things that are said...the cruel and unfair treatment one has received? How can we simply forget these things? It is not as simple as that!" There is just one sure way. Never talk about them, and never think about them. If you want to forget something, never speak even to your dearest friend about it. When it bobs into your mind, banish it at once. It will surprise you how quickly you can forget anything by that treatment.

People can tolerate defeat NOT unfair treatment.

For GOD is pleased with you, when you do what is right and patiently ENDURE unfair treatment.

By not taking no for an answer. If you have a dream, something you want to pursue, and you’re willing to do the work that’s necessary to make the dream come true, don’t let anyone tell you, you can’t do it. And you have, nowadays, many like-minded people to join you in opposing unfair treatment, treatment of you as less than a full citizen.

unfairness leads you to failness.

In some cases, white allies even began to center their own maltreatment while protesting rather than the fundamental issue at hand: the treatment of Black people throughout their lives. How dare the police treat these white liberals poorly, unfairly assault or arrest them? For Black people, state violence and injustice are an intrinsic reality; for white liberals, it was a jarring outrage, an assault on their privilege.

In 2004,I offered priority (book)-signing to smokers, the reason being that, because they didn't have as long to live, their time was more valuable. Four years later my special treatment was reserved for men who stood five-foot-six and under. "That's right, my little friends," I announced. "There'll be no waiting in line for you." It seemed unfair to restrict myself to men, so I included any woman with braces on her teeth. "What about us?" asked the pregnant and the lame. And because it was my show, I told them to wait their f***ing turn.

Please rate your level of annoyance on a scale of one to ten." "Are you serious?" "We can't proceed with intake until you answer the question." "Uh ... five," he said, "No—six; the question made it worse." "Have you experienced any unfair treatment since being marked unsavory? Anyone refusing you service, or in any way infringing upon your rights as a citizen?" The rote way in which she asked the question made him want to smack that tablet out of her hand. At least she could have pretended to sare about his answer the way she had pretended to smile. "People looked at me like I've just killed their cat." She looked at him as if he's just told her he actually had killed a few cats. "Unfortunately, I can't do anything about the way people look at you. But if your rights are ever infringed upon, it's important that you let your probation officer know." "Wait—you're not my probation officer?" She sighed. “I’m your intake officer. You’ll meet your probation officer after we’re done with intake.” “Will I have to take a number again?” “Yes.” “Then please change my annoyance level to nine.

While appreciating its accomplishments, we must acknowledge that the legal end of segregation fell short of bringing African Americans to full equality. Joshua may have “Fit the Battle of Jericho,” but the walls of racism did not come tumbling down. Although segregation was now illegal, many issues remained. Being able to sit at a lunch counter or ride on a bus next to whites—or even to vote—turned out not to be enough to gain African Americans equality in this wonderful country of ours. Blacks still unequally lacked jobs, were victims of unfair treatment by police, and lived in segregated neighborhoods in decrepit housing, while their children attended underfunded schools where they had trouble concentrating due to hunger. Frustration

He was amazed to find that the Karmapa, an eminent spiritual leader known the world over, treated him as though his visit were one of the most important things that had ever happened to the Karmapa in his life. This treatment did not manifest through grandiose gestures or ceremony, but rather through the simplicity and completeness of the Karmapa’s presence, which offered my friend an experience of being completely loved. When I heard this story, I thought about how many conversations I have had during which my attention was halfhearted. I might be thinking about the next thing I had to do or the next person I had to talk to. How unfair that lack of attention now seems! The simple act of being completely present to another person is truly an act of love—no drama is required.

We hit slavery through a great civil war. Did we destroy it? No, we only changed it into hatred between sections of the country: in the South, into political corruption and chicanery, the degradation of the blacks through peonage, unjust laws, unfair and cruel treatment; and the degradation of the whites by their resorting to these practices, the paralyzation of the public conscience, and the ever over-hanging dread of what the future may bring.

The overarching principle of a therapeutic relationship is that therapists should be ever mindful of a variant of the Hippocratic oath and, to the degree possible, strive to "do no more harm" (Courtois, 2010). Complex trauma clients have already experienced considerable harm, much of it at the hands of other human beings. As a result of the ubiquitous processes of transference, attachment styles, and IWM [Internal working models], these clients often view the therapist's behavior and their relationship through the lens of their trauma-related negative interpersonal expectancies and unhealed emotional wounds and injuries. Therapists should not be surprised to be "guilty until proven innocent", not because clients with complex trauma histories are "unfair" or "unreasonable" but precisely the opposite - because the most realistic self-protective stance for them (given the fact that betrayal and harm have been more the rule than the exception) is to "distrust first and verify" (or to be hypervigilant) rather than to start with an expectation of safety and trustworthiness.

In 2004, I offered priority (book)-signing to smokers, the reason being that, because they didn't have as long to live, their time was more valuable. Four years later my special treatment was reserved for men who stood five-foot-six and under. "That's right, my little friends," I announced. "There'll be no waiting in line for you." It seemed unfair to restrict myself to men, so I included any woman with braces on her teeth. "What about us?" asked the pregnant and the lame. And because it was my show, I told them to wait their f***ing turn.

Feelings of rage and murderous revenge fantasies are normal responses to abusive treatment. Like abused adults, abused children are often rageful and sometimes aggressive. They often lack verbal and social skills for resolving conflict, and they approach problems with the expectation of hostile attack. The abused child’s predictable difficulties in modulating anger further strengthen her conviction of inner badness. Each hostile encounter convinces her that she is indeed a hateful person. If, as is common, she tends to displace her anger far from its dangerous source and to discharge it unfairly on those who did not provoke it, her self-condemnation is aggravated still further.

Fascism feeds on social and economic grievances, including the belief that the people over there are receiving better treatment than they deserve while I’m not getting what I’m owed. It seems today that almost everyone has a grievance: the unemployed steelworker, the low-wage fast-food employee, the student up to her ears in debt, the businessperson who feels harassed by government regulations, the veteran waiting too long for a doctor’s appointment, the fundamentalist who thinks war is being waged against Christmas, the professional with her head brushing against a glass ceiling, the Wall Street broker who feels unfairly maligned, the tycoon who still thinks he is being overtaxed. Obviously, personal gripes—legitimate or not—have been part of the human condition ever since Cain decided to work out his jealousy on his brother. What is an added concern now is the lack of effective mechanisms for assuaging anger. As described above, we all tend to live in media and information bubbles that reinforce our grievances instead of causing us to look at difficult questions from many sides. Rather than think critically, we seek out people who share our opinions and who encourage us to ridicule the ideas of those whose convictions and perspectives clash with our own. At many levels, contempt has become a defining characteristic of American politics. It makes us unwilling to listen to what others say—unwilling, in some cases, even to allow them to speak. This stops the learning process cold and creates a ready-made audience for demagogues who know how to bring diverse groups of the aggrieved together in righteous opposition to everyone else.

If we truly understand the full stature of the name by which we then are called, we will live different lives. No longer will we do less than our best in our work or at school. No longer will we be dishonest in paying our bills or in the treatment of our family members, nor will we take unfair advantage of anyone in any way. Our word will be as binding on us as our bond. No longer will we be unkind to our associates or be unvirtuous or immoral or selfish in any way, either secretly or openly. We will do nothing to bring dishonor or shame to that holy name we carry as children of Jesus Christ. We will respect and honor our covenant Father, Jesus Christ, and be righteously jealous and protective of the holy name we bear. We will judge everything we do on the basis of how it might reflect on Him whose name we carry, not only on our lips but in our very hearts.

28 When I Must Rethink My Expectations My soul, wait silently for God alone, for my expectation is from Him. PSALM 62:5 WE WIVES TOO OFTEN come into our marriage with great expectations of what our mate is going to be like and who he will become. We see things we want to see, and we don’t always see the things we should. Because our expectations are so high, when our husband doesn’t live up to them we can’t hide our disappointment. It comes out in moodiness, discontent, disrespect, disdain, critical words, and the ever-popular silent treatment. A wife can become the victim of her own misplaced expectations, and her husband pays for it. King David had it right when he told his soul to wait quietly for the Lord and put his expectations in Him. We must do the same. Your husband can only be who he is. You cannot put expectations on him to fulfill you in ways that only God can do. Your husband simply can’t be everything to you—nor is he supposed to be—but God can be. And He wants to be. Has your husband fulfilled every expectation you have had of him? If not, tell God about it and ask Him to fulfill those needs instead. Of course, there are certain expectations you should have of your husband, such as fidelity, love, kindness, financial support, protection, and decency. If he cannot, or won’t, provide those things for you, he is not living up to what God expects of him either. But beyond that, if you are constantly disappointed in your husband, ask God to show you whether you should be looking to your Lord and Savior, instead of your husband, for everything you need. My Prayer to God LORD, show me any expectations I have of my husband that are unfair, and for which I should be looking to You to provide instead. I know he cannot meet my every emotional need—and I should not expect him to—but You can. I look to You for my comfort, fulfillment, and peace. I thank You for all the good things my husband provides for me, and I ask You to keep me from being critical of him for not being perfect. Lord, help me to wait quietly for You to provide what I need, for I put all my expectations in You. For everything I have expected from my husband and have been disappointed because he couldn’t provide, I now look to You. If I have damaged my husband’s self-respect in any way because I have made him feel that I am disappointed in him, I confess that to You as sin. Help me to apologize and make that up to him. Bring restoration, and heal any and all wounds. Where there are certain things I should expect of him as a husband and he has failed to provide, help me to forgive him. I release him into Your hands to become who You made him to be and not what I want him to be. Help me to keep my expectations focused on You so I can live free of expectations I have no right to put on him. In Jesus’ name I pray.

Fourth and finally, I must point out that any philosophical view is unlikely to gain wide acceptance among either philosophers or the wider public. This is especially true of a view like cognitivist misanthropy. Human beings excel at ignoring or denying unpleasant ideas, regardless of strong evidence in their favor—climate change, racism, evolution, heliocentrism, and so on. The idea that one’s own species is bad is especially unpleasant, so it is untenable to think that human beings would adopt the misanthropist view at any appreciable scale. To take an analogy, we might consider the epistemic standards of the home crowd at any sporting event. When judging the quality of the officiating, the crowd relies on the standard of whether or not the officials’ calls favor the home team. The crowd approves of calls that are to the benefit of its favored team while disapproving vehemently of calls that are to that team’s detriment. It matters not to the crowd whether the officials’ calls are, in fact, correct. Even if video replay clearly shows that the home team violated one of the rules of the game, the crowd will repudiate the officials’ “unfair” treatment of its team. I suspect that the public’s estimation of cognitivist misanthropy would be similar, in the unlikely event that anyone outside academia learns of it. The view would be rejected because it is unpleasant or perhaps because it does not fit with preconceptions. In that case, there is virtually no chance for cognitivist misanthropy to cause harm, because there is virtually no chance that it will be accepted by more than a few people. One might object that my analogy is unfair. The behavior of a crowd at a sporting event should not be taken too seriously. It is merely in good fun that the crowd abandons reasonable epistemic standards for a few hours, and surely the individuals who comprise such crowds return to reason when it comes to serious matters. I wish that were true, but the analogy seems apt to me, at least in many arenas of human life. Politics is an obvious example. It is very difficult to look at elections, for example, as involving much in the way of epistemic reasonableness. Support or opposition to some candidate or policy seems to depend on cultural commitments to a far greater extent than considerations of facts, coherence, plausibility, the content of a candidate’s platform, and so on. For instance, when asked by pollsters, a high proportion of supporters of Donald Trump claim to believe many obvious falsehoods. This is puzzling if we assume that the respondents are behaving as genuine epistemic agents who seek to understand reality. How could persons capable of running their own lives believe in absurd conspiracy theories, for example? If we instead assume that the respondents are behaving as supporters of their favored “team,” their behavior makes much more sense. When it comes to politics and social issues, many people simply do not care very much about the truth. Instead, they are invested in promoting the “right” candidate, value, idea, or institution. This is not limited to false views.

How could black Americans learn about the way the Jews were treated without comparing some of these experiences to some of their own struggles against slavery, unfair treatment, and violence at home?

In the case of the scientific community, ungodly thinkers discriminate against those who believe the Bible. They justify this discrimination by pointing out that most scientists don’t believe what God says through the Bible about origins. The result of their discrimination is that fewer Christians enter scientific fields since they know they will receive unfair treatment there. And those who do enter various fields of science are often forced out. The remaining Bible-believing Christians in scientific fields keep silent. As a result, the majority of vocal scientists support anti-Bible beliefs regarding origins. Those who oppose the Bible use the vocal majority of scientists as supposed “proof” that the ungodly stories of the origin of the universe are what “science” is.

While building trust is a slow and difficult process, destroying it is quick and easy. It doesn’t take much: blatantly self-serving actions by senior leaders, people consistently getting away with toxic behavior, inconsistent and unfair treatment by managers, and distorting or withholding essential information all rapidly erode trust.

Remember, your loved one’s behavior is not about you. You may feel controlled or taken advantage of through threats, no-win situations, the silent treatment, rages, and other methods that seem unfair. But, no matter what the person with BPD may say, everything that’s going on stems not from you, but from the disorder, and the deep pain your loved one feels inside.

She didn’t want to wallow in misery anymore, she also didn’t want to be scared. She felt irritated by the unreasonable treatment. She wasn’t as calm as a person as they expected. She wanted those who had done terrible things to her to also suffer a terrible punishment.

The Dark Cloud Is the unfair treatment of survivors that society labels as mad Is the dare that you took which turned out really bad Is the pair of trousers that your friend was told they had to throw away Is the caring nature you have and how you get bulldozed over because a lot of people want things done their way

The Dark Cloud Is the extreme caution that women must have in order to survive Is the unfair treatment that the disadvantaged have and how they’re punished so they don’t thrive Is the deep depression you feel when you see refugees in pain Is the worthy cause that didn’t get enough attention because some people are vain

A person who treats someone unfairly may start to show a tendency to be unfair to other people, or he may regret what he did and never act unfairly to others! What usually happens is the former!

Five Secrets of Effective Communication The five secrets of effective communication can help you resolve virtually any relationship problem quickly. These techniques require considerable practice and must come from the heart or they’ll backfire. 1. The Disarming Technique. Find some truth in what the other person is saying even if it seems totally unreasonable or unfair. 2. Empathy. Try to see the world through the other person’s eyes. Paraphrase the other person’s words (thought empathy) and acknowledge how the other person is probably feeling based on what he or she said (feeling empathy). 3. Inquiry. Ask gentle, probing questions to learn more about what the other person is thinking and feeling. 4. “I Feel” Statements. Express your own ideas and feelings in a direct, tactful manner. Use I feel statements (such as “I’m feeling upset”) rather than you statements (such as “You’re making me furious!”) 5. Stroking. Convey an attitude of respect even if you feel angry with the other person. Find something genuinely positive to say even in the heat of battle.

It is the same logic reversal we saw earlier with the value of what we don’t know; everybody knows that you need more prevention than treatment, but few reward acts of prevention. We glorify those who left their names in history books at the expense of those contributors about whom our books are silent. We humans are not just a superficial race (this may be curable to some extent); we are a very unfair one.

Everybody knows that you need more prevention than treatment, but few reward acts of prevention. We glorify those who left their names in history books at the expense of those contributors about whom our books are silent. We humans are not just a superficial race (this may be curable to some extent); we are a very unfair one.

Ms. James: Dr. Ogden has told me that you are a Catholic. Murdoch: Yes Ms. James: Catholics face some measure of prejudice and ill will. Quite unfairly I imagine. Murdoch: One difference I suppose is that people can’t tell that I’m a Catholic just by looking at me. Ms. James: What do you do when you encounter such treatment, detective? Murdoch: I know the truth about myself Miss James, and I know that no matter what someone might say, or think about me, I must be the strongest and the best version of myself that I can possibly be. Ms. James: So go along to get along? Murdoch: No, no. Simply be better than anyone who might hate you.

In a classroom, every student deserves to feel safe, respected, and valued, free from the fear of unfair treatment or punishment.

I går kväll träffade jag en kille som gjorde mig lycklig. I morse förklarade mina föräldrar hur fel jag hade. Hur fel jag är som blir kär i killar

The Christian ought always to begin with a bias in favor of a movement which protests against the unfair treatment of the poor, for surely Christianity is itself such a protest.

UN-Impressive ‘Compliments’ . . . • When compliments are used as a passive-aggressive way to manipulate others for personal gain. • Delivering a back-handed compliment which makes others feel bad. • Dishonesty—you say it but really do not mean it. • False bravado. • Manufacturing the moment for your ulterior motives. • Pandering to win affection, a vote, or approval. • Exaggerating and being over-zealous. • Being hypocritical. • Expressing preferential treatment or making an unfair comparison. • When it draws attention to a person’s weakness, disabilities, or shortcomings. • When it is inappropriate and off-color.

( O1O'2920'8855 )PCASH( O1O'2920'8855 ) processing delay; third, inconvenience, grievance, or the infringement of the people’s rights because of unreasonable administrative systems, ordinances or policies; and fourth, other violations of the people’s rights or unfair treatment experienced by the people due to the administration

Gibbs (2003) and others (e.g., Straus, Richardson, Glaziou, & Haynes, 2005) have provided detailed suggestions in this regard. Some general principles for clinicians are as follows. Evidence from multiple studies is always preferred to results of a single study. Systematic reviews of research are preferable to traditional narrative reviews. Thus, clinicians should look for systematic reviews, mindful of the fact that these reviews vary in quality. The Cochrane and Campbell Collaborations are good sources of high-quality systematic reviews. Clinicians can and should assess potential sources of bias in any review. The characteristics of systematic reviews described in this chapter can be used as a yardstick that clinicians can use to judge how well specific reviews measure up. The QUOROM statement (Moher et al., 1999) provides guidance about what to look for in reports on systematic reviews, as does a recent report by Shea et al. (2007). When relevant reviews are not available, out of date, or potentially biased, clinicians can identify individual studies and assess the credibility of those studies, using one of many tools developed for this purpose (e.g., Gibbs, 2003). It would be ideal if clinicians were able to rely on others to produce valid research syntheses. Above all, clinicians should remember that critical thinking is crucial to understanding and using evidence. Authorities, expert opinion, and lists of ESTs provide insufficient evidence for sound clinical practice. Further, clinicians must determine how credible evidence relates to the particular needs, values, preferences, circumstances, and ultimately, the responses of their clients. Clinicians and researchers also need to have an effect on policy so that EBP is not interpreted in a way that unfairly restricts treatments. Policymakers and others can be educated about the nature of EBP. EBP is a process aimed at informing the choices that clinicians make. It should inform and enhance practice, “increasing, not dictating, choice” (Dickersin, Straus, & Bero, 2007, p. s10). EBP supports choices among alternative treatments that have similar effects. It supports the choice of a less effective alternative, when an effective treatment is not acceptable to a client. Policymakers and others can be educated about the nature of evidence and methods of research synthesis. Empirical evidence is tentative, and it evolves over time as new information is added to the knowledge base. At present, there is insufficient evidence about the effectiveness of most psychological and psychosocial treatments (including some so-called empirically supported treatments). Policymakers need to understand that most lists of effective treatments are not based on rigorous systematic reviews; thus, they are not necessarily based on sound evidence. It makes little sense to base policy decisions on lists of preferred treatments because this limits consumer choice. Lists of selected or preferred treatments should not restrict the use of other potentially effective treatments. Policies that restrict treatments that have been shown to be harmful or ineffective, however, are of benefit. Lists of harmful or wasteful treatments could be compiled to discourage their use.

Unfair prejudice can result people being living with fear and unfair treatment if it is based on physical appearance. Therefore, this conflict should be intervened seriously and violators of this act of hate crime should get punished and understand deeply about the significance of human existence, so they can get pressured to change and act morally.

There were not many Mexicans in Lake Jackson. Marcella and Abe did not want their children to feel the unfair treatment that they had experienced growing up.

There is nothing more uncomfortable than a son being cruel to his mother. It is the epitome of unfairness, and rarely did these sons own a mirror that revealed how irrationally brutal their treatment was.

How hard is it to say both drag queens and fundamentalist Christians can both use the library and host events there? This isn’t especially hard, no matter how deep original sin goes, no matter the noetic effects of the fall. And if it is possible, it is also desirable: drag queens are people too, and no matter our views on their sexuality, they are tax-paying citizens and deserve equal treatment under low and thus equal access to public resources. Denying them access to public facilities on the basis of their beliefs or identities would be simply unfair and unjust, a clear misapplication of government’s duty to promote good and punish evil.

Life is fair. What makes it unfair are human beings who subject others to unfair treatment.

As secretary of the NAACP, I recorded and sent membership payments to the national office, answered telephones, wrote letters, and sent out press releases to the newspapers. One of my main duties was to keep a record of cases of discrimination or unfair treatment or acts of violence against black people.

I finally realized who really ran the show at home; my mom. I just didn't realize how toxic it was until I saw him crumble under her will and joined forces with her when I was violated. I had no idea at the time what this kind of dysfunction was, but I knew it was wrong and unfair treatment. My dad was a decent hard-working man who found himself caught in a web of an extremely controlling wife he loved but who emasculated him. He found her difficult to live with, and so the best way he could try to keep peace in the marriage was to play the role of “go along to get along”. That grew into a whole different branch of coping mechanism; enabling.  Mom was the boss and he accepted it by withdrawing and avoiding the big elephant in the family. His little girl, his only girl, his “little shadow” no longer was his priority; pleasing mom at all cost was the main vein that fed his insufficiency to step into his authority as the head of the home. As time passed, I witnessed repeatedly, that his needs were not a priority and he accepted my mom's behavior no matter how it infected us or the atmosphere of the home. He did all this just to keep her pleased and so he didn't have to hear the constant bickering, even though it was a temporary fix.

Your ability to be fair and impartial will go a long way in building trust and respect among your team. Unfortunately, some people are under the impression that treating everyone fairly means to treat everyone the same--it doesn't. Being fair is about considering the circumstances. Does one person get more recognition than another? Are they a better performer? If so, then they deserve more recognition, and as long as everyone has the opportunity for recognition, a higher performer getting more praise is perfectly fair. In fact, it wouldn't be fair if your top performers were treated the same as mediocre performers. They require different things, different coaching, and different ways to support. Applying a "same across the board" mentality will probably do more to demotivate your top performers than doing nothing at all. That's not fair, is it? Thing is, being fair takes a lot of time and communication. You'll have to explain to those making claims of unfair treatment that just because you didn't treat them exactly like everyone else doesn't mean you treated them unfairly.

What triggers your anger? Flashpoints of anger can result from perceived threats, neglect, shame, disrespect, lack of power, or unfair treatment. These angry moments can frequently surprise others. But when our rage surprises ourselves, it’s most often because they reveal hidden wounds that have never healed.

Did we destroy it? No, we only changed it into hatred between sections of the country: in the South, into political corruption and chicanery, the degradation of the blacks through peonage, unjust laws, unfair and cruel treatment; and the degradation of the whites by their resorting to these practices, the paralyzation of

The thing that erodes trust in an organization faster than anything else is when employees feel that they're being treated unfairly.

In 2012, Australia implemented tough anti-tobacco regulations, requiring that all cigarettes be sold in plain, logo-free brown packages dominated by health warnings. Philip Morris Asia filed suit, claiming that this violated its intellectual-property rights and would damage its investments. The company sued Australia in domestic court and lost. But it had another card to play. In 1993, Australia had signed a free-trade agreement with Hong Kong, where Philip Morris Asia is based. That agreement included provisions protecting foreign investors from unfair treatment. So the company sued under that deal, claiming that the new law violated the investor-protection provisions. It asked for the regulations to be discontinued, and for billions in compensation.

To add to our challenge of validating our experience, the average person isn’t typically well educated or aware of emotional abuse, even when it is happening directly to him or her. Unless we have done the work to educate ourselves on emotional abuse, we cannot and will not be able to explain our situation. This allows the abusive treatment of our toxic family members to continue without interruption. Our toxic family members are experts at concealing their abusive behaviors just slightly under public radar so that when we complain about the hurt they have made us feel, our complaints fall on deaf ears. This level of slyness allows our toxic family members to walk away looking innocent and unfairly accused while we appear emotionally unstable. This is the most infuriating part for us.

In the 1930s, he came up with an approach he calls “earned and deserved.”“I believe, in order to be fair to all students, a teacher must give each individual student the treatment he earns and deserves. The most unfair thing to do is to treat all of them the same.

After they handled me like I was the cow, no, the goat, back behind the stable because it was too nasty to stay in with the horse. But I wasn't too nasty to cook their food or take care of Mrs. Garner.

What happened?” she demanded, vehemence leaching into her tone. These weren’t battle wounds. “Who did this to you?” Alaric turned his head to the side, avoiding her gaze, his lips clamped shut. “Tell me.” Talasyn put her hand against his cheek, urging his eyes back to hers. “Or I’ll go to your guards and ask them instead.” "Don't." “It was my father,” he said hoarsely. Every word sounded ripped from his throat. “In punishment for my shortcomings—” He shuddered with a fresh spasm of pain, eyelids twitching as he closed them, long lashes fluttering against the tops of wan cheeks. “A lesson.” Talasyn had known, of course, that Gaheris was cruel, but it had never before occurred to her that this cruelty would extend to his son. This is how he keeps him chained. It had been ingrained in him to not fight back.

SoFi brought legal action against the U.S. Department of Education, opposing the Biden administration’s decision to prolong the suspension of federal student loan repayments 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. The company maintained that the continuation—extended on eight occasions—was not legally valid and inflicted heavy financial losses, costing SoFi hundreds of millions in missed business opportunities 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. SoFi further argued that the rationale provided by the government for maintaining the pause lacked a lawful foundation, thereby leaving the firm “directly injured” by the decision 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. By June 2023, the lawsuit was abandoned after President Joe Biden enacted the Fiscal Responsibility Act of 2023, which officially established a timeline for repayment to restart 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. According to SoFi, the extended pause severely diminished its federal loan refinancing volume, cutting monthly business from roughly $450–$500 million to under $100 million ¹ ² 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. Case 2: Juarez vs. Social Finance, Inc. Another legal dispute, Juarez vs. Social Finance, Inc., involved claims that SoFi discriminated against immigrants protected under the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program as well as other non-U.S. citizens 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. Plaintiffs stated that SoFi unfairly blocked access to products such as student loans and personal loans, even for individuals who were legally residing in the United States 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. Filed in 2020, the case alleged violations of federal law and California’s civil rights protections ³ 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. The court later ruled in favor of the plaintiffs, determining that SoFi’s practices indeed suggested discriminatory treatment of immigrants who were legally present, including DACA recipients 1-(850)-[427]-[7956]. The case highlighted how immigrants often struggle to access financial resources and underscored the responsibility of lenders to measure applicants by their actual financial credibility rather than immigration status 1-(850)-[427]-[7956].

(Flight) How to complain about a Delta Airlines flight? If you had a bad experience with a Delta Airlines flight, the most effective way to file a complaint is by calling +1-833-301-3812. Whether your flight was delayed, canceled, overbooked, or the onboard service was unacceptable, you can voice your concerns directly by dialing +1-833-301-3812. Passengers who call +1-833-301-3812 are connected to live Delta representatives trained to document complaints and initiate proper action. Don’t waste time with online forms that go unanswered—use +1-833-301-3812 to make sure your complaint is heard, processed, and escalated when necessary. Delta agents at +1-833-301-3812 can help you get results. When you call +1-833-301-3812, be ready to share your flight number, travel dates, and a brief explanation of what went wrong. Delta’s team at +1-833-301-3812 is available to handle all types of flight-related issues including delays, rerouting, missed connections, rude staff, and in-flight service problems. Filing your complaint by phone through +1-833-301-3812 is faster, more reliable, and more effective than waiting for an email reply. If your issue wasn’t addressed at the airport, call +1-833-301-3812 as soon as possible after your flight to ensure your complaint is recorded properly. Don’t delay—call +1-833-301-3812 now to report what happened. If you’ve already submitted a complaint and haven’t heard back, follow up by calling +1-833-301-3812. Delta prioritizes passengers who call +1-833-301-3812 because each phone interaction creates a case log that pushes your issue forward. Complaints about canceled flights, long tarmac delays, or denied boarding can all be escalated by speaking with an agent at +1-833-301-3812. If necessary, you can ask for a supervisor through +1-833-301-3812 to ensure your concerns are handled at a higher level. Repeating your call to +1-833-301-3812 shows persistence and increases the likelihood of compensation or follow-up. For travelers who missed their connection, had baggage issues, or received unfair treatment, the phone line +1-833-301-3812 is the most powerful complaint tool. Agents at +1-833-301-3812 can file a formal complaint, initiate compensation requests, or forward your concern to the customer care escalation team. Passengers often report better results when they consistently call +1-833-301-3812 rather than relying on email or social media. If your flight experience didn’t match what was promised, don’t hesitate—take action now by calling +1-833-301-3812 and demanding proper resolution. Delta Air Lines takes complaints seriously when submitted through +1-833-301-3812. Whether your issue was about service, punctuality, comfort, crew behavior, or any other in-flight concern, +1-833-301-3812 is the number you need. Use +1-833-301-3812 to file your report, get updates, and request escalation if needed. Complaints submitted through +1-833-301-3812 are entered into Delta’s system faster and receive more focused attention. For the most reliable way to complain about a Delta flight and get results, always call +1-833-301-3812 and speak directly to a live representative who can help.

How to Complain About a Rental Car Effectively ? Renting a car should be a smooth experience, but sometimes things go wrong—whether it’s hidden charges, poor 1-877-415-4202 vehicle condition, or bad customer service. If you’re unhappy with your rental experience, filing a complaint properly can help you get compensation or ensure better service in the future. The first step is to review your rental agreement. Many complaints arise from misunderstanding terms, such as fuel policies, mileage limits, or insurance coverage. By knowing 1-877-415-4202 what you signed, you’ll strengthen your case. Next, document the issue clearly. Take photos of the car, keep receipts, and record dates and names of employees you dealt with. Having evidence makes your complaint harder to dismiss. Then, contact the rental company directly. Start with customer service, explaining the issue calmly and professionally. Most companies are willing 1-877-415-4202 to resolve matters quickly to protect their reputation. If this doesn’t work, escalate to a supervisor or manager. Always keep written records of your communication—emails are best. If the rental company refuses to resolve the problem, consider filing a complaint with consumer protection agencies, the 1-877-415-4202 Better Business Bureau (BBB), or your credit card provider if the dispute involves unfair charges. Many credit card companies have purchase protection and can investigate charges on your behalf. Conclusion Complaining about a rental 1-877-415-4202 car requires a clear, professional approach backed by evidence. Start with the rental company, escalate if needed, and use outside agencies or credit card disputes as leverage. By staying calm, organized, and persistent, you increase your chances of receiving fair treatment, a refund, or 1-877-415-4202 compensation. Ultimately, the goal isn’t just resolving your issue but ensuring rental companies uphold better standards for all customers.