Iam "Ok... Where was I?... Oh! Two types of Intersexual Friendship Max/Ultra. Here we go. So you have 'Type A' right? Which is when the Female treats the Male as a type of proxy Female, see? And in this type of relationship the Female will do things with the male (or attempt to do things) that they would usually do with OTHER FEMALES, right? For example, they'll talk about their sexual relationships in great detail (Like mentioning the fact that the guy that they are cheating on their boyfriend with has a big dick while they look a developmentally disabled man-child in dead in the eyes OR request to use make-up on a Male). I don't think they realize what they are doing when they are doing it but THAT'S IT! They're treating the 'male platonic friend' as though they are a Female. They don't realize that this the type of thing they would only talk about with another FEMALE. They would never say anything like that to a Male they are trying to sleep with! Right!? So that's 'Type A'. Male is treated as a proxy female. 'Type B' (on the other hand) is where a Female is adopted as a proxy Male into group of males. But this can only exist within a group of males that are LARGELY SINGLE! Because once the Males of the group start to date, their partners don't want them hanging around other Females. Right!? So, Yeah..."
Hym "And then there is like 'Type C' which would be like the Mulder and Scully relationship from X-Files but that shit isn't real."
Hym "And then there is like 'Type C' which would be like the Mulder and Scully relationship from X-Files but that shit isn't real."
by Hym Iam April 19, 2022
And it's a Soliloquy... I do monologue sometimes but if the dialogue takes place regardless of whether or not someone is listening then it's a Soliloquy.
Hym "Yeah Joe it's called a 'Soliloquy' that's like a thing. You clearly don't know what you're talking about. It's not like this 'bizarre monologue that takes places regardless of whether or not anyone is listening' What you just described is a Soliloquy (my auto correct suggestions where hilarious just now when I type in 'described is a' I get 'fucked' as the first suggestion then if I do it again described is a 'daughter' I know you don't believe me but seriously that's what I get when I type in 'described is a'. The 3 suggestions are 'good' 'fucked' and 'daughter'. I can prove it I guess if I show someone this while I'm typing. But that's neither here nor there.) Alright... Where was I? Oh, right. Soliloquy. That's what that was. I do it all the time. I also monologue."
by Hym Iam March 12, 2023
Heyheyhey. No.
Hym "Not other people. The thing that is happening to me and nothing else. You're trying to bring in outside elements and make the remediation of my thing relate somehow to what happens to other people. I don't care. I'll put it as simply as I can because I know you struggle with. Better for me, now. Not other people. OK? OK."
by Hym Iam July 16, 2025
by Hym Iam July 17, 2025
Nooooo... YOU should have done what I told you to do BEFORE you indebted yourself millions of dollars to me. You should have taken this seriously.
A retard "We should have..."
Hym "No. You should have done more than sit idly by and risk your kids lives. And this isn't pretending to stop the thing I'M STARTING. I was dealing with it. The TRYING TO STOP IT PART was the ME NOT SAYING ANYTHING FOR YEARS... All I DID... Was speed up the inevitable... And because ME NOT GAINING MATERIALLY and YOU NOT BEING WRONG is more important that you than anything... You MADE UP A FUCKING SYNDROME. I told the truth in the hopes that someone would be smart enough to snuff this out before it became a problem... You aren't very intelligent. And not I won't accept ANYTHING OTHER THAN payment for the thing you stole AND you will address the thing that is happening to me. You could have just done it immediately. AND I DON'T CARE WHAT I SAID OR DID. THIS IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THAT. YOUR KIDS DEATH WILL BE CONTINGENT ON THIS. Don't fucking do this to yourself in the name of being the arbiter of consequences. You'll get you fucking kids murdered AND THEY WILL BE GONE FOREVER."
Hym "No. You should have done more than sit idly by and risk your kids lives. And this isn't pretending to stop the thing I'M STARTING. I was dealing with it. The TRYING TO STOP IT PART was the ME NOT SAYING ANYTHING FOR YEARS... All I DID... Was speed up the inevitable... And because ME NOT GAINING MATERIALLY and YOU NOT BEING WRONG is more important that you than anything... You MADE UP A FUCKING SYNDROME. I told the truth in the hopes that someone would be smart enough to snuff this out before it became a problem... You aren't very intelligent. And not I won't accept ANYTHING OTHER THAN payment for the thing you stole AND you will address the thing that is happening to me. You could have just done it immediately. AND I DON'T CARE WHAT I SAID OR DID. THIS IS NOT CONTINGENT ON THAT. YOUR KIDS DEATH WILL BE CONTINGENT ON THIS. Don't fucking do this to yourself in the name of being the arbiter of consequences. You'll get you fucking kids murdered AND THEY WILL BE GONE FOREVER."
by Hym Iam April 11, 2024
Inter-subjectively
Hym "I really don't think that's the issue. I think when I say 'God is Evil' you hear 2+2=5. So, 2+2=4 does not=2+2=4. Unless... Do you think whether or not God is good is subjective? Either subjective or objective. If it's objective, it's either objectively good or it's objectively evil. If so, which is it? O'Connor let's it. And that's the problem with the online discourse. You're allowed to say 2+2=5 all you want but you aren't allowed to BE Nick Fuentes or 👉 Let me ask you this: How is what Nick Fuentes believes any different from someone who believes in Sharia law? He's a theocract. So he believes the state should be controlled by the religion (which is what Shraria). Whay else? The women have a role? Anti-Lgbt? Your protestations about him (and me) being in public entirely validates their 'Islamophobia.' The can just transpose his beliefs onto the believes of the Muslims and say 'This guy believes what they believe and even THEY don't want them here!'
Hym "I really don't think that's the issue. I think when I say 'God is Evil' you hear 2+2=5. So, 2+2=4 does not=2+2=4. Unless... Do you think whether or not God is good is subjective? Either subjective or objective. If it's objective, it's either objectively good or it's objectively evil. If so, which is it? O'Connor let's it. And that's the problem with the online discourse. You're allowed to say 2+2=5 all you want but you aren't allowed to BE Nick Fuentes or 👉 Let me ask you this: How is what Nick Fuentes believes any different from someone who believes in Sharia law? He's a theocract. So he believes the state should be controlled by the religion (which is what Shraria). Whay else? The women have a role? Anti-Lgbt? Your protestations about him (and me) being in public entirely validates their 'Islamophobia.' The can just transpose his beliefs onto the believes of the Muslims and say 'This guy believes what they believe and even THEY don't want them here!'
And you give them an excuse to be dismissive and ignore you on the topic. Which is what they're doing. And you can probably broaden that and say they can transpose THAT onto the the Palestinians and THAT justifies them being dismissive about the protests! And THAT is where the 'If those protesters when to Gaza... (They would get thrown off a roof for being gay or something being the insinuation)' rhetoric comes from. All justified by you without you realizing it. That's why they use the plants. That's the point of doing it. They set you up to approve of 'Islamophobia' by boosting a guy with a Quasi-Sharia interpretation of the religion. they watch you justify excising him from society, you say 'It's not the religion it's the fundamentalism', and then they can internalize that and say 'The fundamentalism is why I'm doing this!' I mean, you're like God's bipolar girlfriend. 'StoOoOop! You're hurting him!' But the bombs keep falling. They'll ignore you and just keep doing whatever they're doing all justified by your own manufactured consent. It's the conservative rhetoric not dismissive? But I digress... The idea that 2+2=4 does not=2+2=4 (inter-subjectively) speaks to a broader point about how people justify behavior or decision and what people accept as true. I could even go further and say it speaks to how people justify 'Evil.' But I'll have to get into that later."
by Hym Iam May 31, 2024
Hym "Because I didn't take you out of context at all. I don't have to constantly conflate the literal and the metaphorical just so I can avoid addressing the fundamental truth claims of the bible. And in regards to you using my work, the true part of my work is the conclusions I draw. Andy outlines what you're doing perfectly. I'm saying 2+2=4. You're saying 2+2=5. The creator of the universe either spoke to humans... Or it didn't. If it didn't.... The religion is a lie. You don't need unearned authority... You needed... To kill yourself. That's what YOU need to do. Burn all the books. Just into the fire. Burn there forever."
by Hym Iam March 10, 2024