Hannah: you think your good in bed? Ha, that's a joke.
Matt: I'm not just good in bed, I AM MATTINGUS, GOD OF COITUS AND COPULATION! I'm not just good, im absolutely unimaginably fantastic.
Matt: I'm not just good in bed, I AM MATTINGUS, GOD OF COITUS AND COPULATION! I'm not just good, im absolutely unimaginably fantastic.
by Mattingus, God of Coitus August 19, 2012
Get the Mattingus mug.by Pierre cat August 18, 2017
Get the mittsing mug.by Dumb guy 69 December 17, 2017
Get the Minting mug.Situational details regarding the catcher in a baseball game; specifically, factors which could justify his being viewed/treated more leniently regarding any perceived wrongdoing that he may have been involved in.
Charlie Brown's baseball glove is much too large for him, so the fact that he frequently misses or drops the ball should perhaps be viewed less harshly, given these mittigating circumstances.
by QuacksO December 14, 2020
Get the mittigating circumstances mug.by werdfakturi June 5, 2021
Get the Minting mug.To mott is to use the motte-and-bailey fallacy in an argument.
The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities, one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial (the "bailey").The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, they insist that they are only advancing the more modest position. Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer can claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte) or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).
The motte-and-bailey fallacy (named after the motte-and-bailey castle) is a form of argument where an arguer conflates two positions that share similarities, one modest and easy to defend (the "motte") and one much more controversial (the "bailey").The arguer advances the controversial position, but when challenged, they insist that they are only advancing the more modest position. Upon retreating to the motte, the arguer can claim that the bailey has not been refuted (because the critic refused to attack the motte) or that the critic is unreasonable (by equating an attack on the bailey with an attack on the motte).
A: Freedom of speech doesn't mean freedom from the consequences of that speech.
B: That's not true. If there is a consequence to any action, that action is not free.
A: Well, I am free to call you a cunt, and the consequences are that you can insult me back. Ipso facto, free speech with consequences.
B. Insulting you would be a consequent, not a consequence. Consequences are consequents of consequence. Your conflating the two is motting.
B: That's not true. If there is a consequence to any action, that action is not free.
A: Well, I am free to call you a cunt, and the consequences are that you can insult me back. Ipso facto, free speech with consequences.
B. Insulting you would be a consequent, not a consequence. Consequences are consequents of consequence. Your conflating the two is motting.
by Redbeard Edward November 26, 2021
Get the Motting mug.The legend of the miter states- mithing is the act of misting the panty to bring back the aromas before smelling the panty.
by Mitermithing January 20, 2022
Get the Mithing mug.