Firia said:
I think you're missing the point. Placement wasn't the issue. The actual temperature, and the level of damage that coffee did far exceeded healthy levels. She could have been holding the coffee (although, with coffee that hot, I'd set it somewhere else too), and it could have [em]melted[/em] through the cup, putting those nasty burns on her hand, forearm, and lap. (And she was in a drive through. Did she have a cup holder? We don't know.)
The point is, it was a hot enough drink to cause real actual harm. We point and laugh because it sounds absurd, but many people don't seem to be concerned with the facts of the story. With this cheese story, it has that same ring of absurdity, but we don't know all the facts (through this article).
That's the problem, we go 'lololol, it's supposed to be hot' and all that but we forget that 'hot' is a scale.
Specifically 'hot' is a scale with 'just above external body temperature' at one end and 'centre of a nuclear reaction' at the other. In both the coffee case and this cheese case the temperature was way above what could be safely ingested. In neither case did the person
actually attempt to put it in their mouth so I doubt it can be called idiocy.
As that picture proves (and pictures of the coffee incident) the food was so hot it caused real actual injuries, not as in the burn you get in your mouth when you eat pizza too quickly, actual skin-removing burns. The coffee woman needed skin grafts, this child will most likely be scarred for life. In no circumstance should a restaurant serve food at that temperature, it's against basic safety and common sense.