2+2=4 does not=2+2=4

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!'

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

Flag

Get the 2+2=4 does not=2+2=4 mug.

<.7.9.7.6.>Unisex Can Do It But Does Not Want To<.7.9.7.6.>

by AnudaJaniceRobles June 05, 2025

Flag

Get the <.7.9.7.6.>Unisex Can Do It But Does Not Want To<.7.9.7.6.> mug.

Does her dress have pockets? Because where in the world is she keeping her audacity?

"Does her dress have pockets? Because where in the world is she keeping her audacity?" is a 2021 colloquialism that expresses astonishment in response to an action perceived as rude, intrusive, or tactless. It is often shortened to "Can you believe the pockets on them?" or, simply, "the pockets."

"My mother-in-law just left a voicemail that she's on her way to stay with us for the next month..."
"Does her dress have pockets? Because where in the world is she keeping her audacity?"

"The new hire just interrupted the CEO during a meeting. Can you believe the pockets on that guy?"

"Deborah came right up to me at the bake sale and complimented my snickerdoodles even though I know for a fact that she told Trisha that she thinks my snickerdoodles taste like chlamydia. The absolute POCKETS on this bitch."

by eggsaladsocks September 25, 2024

Flag

Get the Does her dress have pockets? Because where in the world is she keeping her audacity? mug.