She came to me, M&M in hand, bemoaning the fact that it did indeed melt in her hand, not in her mouth.
Jane went on to explain that since the first was clearly defective she would like another to replace it.
Sadly, in this world you can’t make it to your second birthday before you learn the realities of marketing ploys and the even harsher news about reading the “fine print”.
Because, as I explained to her, even if the “not in your hand” part of the slogan were a true warranty I’m certain that the fine print on such a thing would ensure that any moisture on the M&M would render the entire warranty null and void.
I then went on to clarify that, yes, sucking on it and spitting it back out numerous times does constitute “moisture” on the M&M.
And so she was left with her unsatisfactory M&M situation until the next time she uses her potty chair.