Skip to main content

I don't like you in that way 

What a girl says to a guy "friend" when he tries to express feelings for her that go beyond friendship. When a girl has a guy "friend", this almost always means that he is interested in her, which is why he hangs out with her, but she almost always sees him strictly as a friend.
<Girl> You're a great guy, but I don't like you in that way.

*translation*

<Girl> You're a great guy, and you have all the qualities in a guy I'm looking for, but I'm not going to be your girlfriend. I will, however, use you as a basis for comparison for all other guys who hit on me, but I'm going to be with someone who is far less nice, and who is probably an abusive alcoholic. Then, if he doesn't work out, I'll move on to another guy, but still not you. In fact, I will never be with you, but I will call you from time to time to complain about the guy that I am with.

i don't like mondays 

1. The answer Brenda Ann Spencer gave after she shot several people in a highschool in '79
2. Bob Geldof and his band the Boomtown Rats made a song about it
2. Tell me why ? I don't like Mondays. Tell me why ? I don't like Mondayyys

I didn't like it. I... LOVED it.

If you were watching America's Talent and heard Simon Cowell say this and you were puzzled, this is something he says sometimes to screw with the performer/performers and scare them, and he is technically telling the truth because he did not simply like the performance, he LOVED it.
Simon Cowell: I didn't like it. I... LOVED it.

I don't like your FACE.

Conversational non-sequitur designed to kill an internet discussion stone dead. Always, ALWAYS, FUCKING ALWAYS DAMMIT to be spelt out as above, capitalised final word, full stop and all. Originated in Scotland.
Dave: Scotland Scotland Scotland
Splog: I don't like your FACE.
Dave: ...
Splog: I don't like your FACE.

Immanuel Kant: Nature is the existence of things, so far as it is determined according to universal laws. Should nature signify the existence of things in themselves, we could never know it either a priori or a posteriori. Not a priori, for how can we know what belongs to things in themselves, since this never can be done by the dissection of our concepts (in analytical judgments)? We do not want to know what is contained in our concept of a thing (for the concept describes what belongs to its logical being), but what is in the actuality of the thing superadded to our concept, and by what the thing itself is determined in its existence outside the concept. Our understanding, and the conditions on which alone it can connect the determinations of things in their existence, do not prescribe any rule to things themselves; these do not conform to our understanding, but it must conform itself to them; they must therefore be first given us in order to gather these determinations from them, wherefore they would not be known a priori.
Splog: I don't like your FACE.
Immanuel Kant: ...

I don't like the cut of your Jib 

In the early 1700's the cut of the jib sail, often signified the nationality of a vessel. The term was being used figureatively by the 1800's to express like, or dislike for someone. So, the 'Cut of one's jib' refers to their general appearance of personality.
Little Jr. Son of a bitch: Hi Mr.
Me: I don't like the cut of your jib.

K-pop Soju Party I don't like it 

K-pop Soju Party I don't like it
K-pop Soju Party I don't like it