Webdeveloper from Germany, nerd, gamer, atheist, interested in nerd-culture, biology of everything creepy, evolution, history, physics, politics and space.
Progressive. Ally. SocDem. Euro-Federalist.
Political Compass: -7.0, -6.62
Nyeah… partly.
If that were entirely true, a “power bottom” would make no sense.
The terms sexual usage originated in gay circles where it only delineates who penetrates and who gets penetrated. Traditional views on sex ascribe a submissive or passive role to the bottom and an active or dominating role to the top, but you can totally have a power bottom who takes control and an active role in the intercourse but is the one getting penetrated.
Hans and Sophie Scholl definitely need to be on every list of people to admire
fedora hat and sunglasses
HELL NO!
:.|:;
Hmmm, i wonder…
l₁|lL
nah, not as clean
You have Doors “Win” “Lose” and “Lose”
There is a 33% chance to pick a winning door and a 66% chance to pick a losing door.
If you pick one of the losing doors, the other losing door is revealed and switching gives you 100% success. That combines to 100% in 66% of cases.
If you pick the winning door one of the losing doors is revealed, switching gives you a 0% chance of success. That combines to 0% in 33% of cases.
Always switching gives you 66% chance of success overall. Always staying is betting on having picked the correct door when you only had a 33% chance of picking correctly.
For all the pedants out there: the remaining 1% is the chance of summoning the ghost of Monty Hall who then drags you to probability hell. Probably.
I heard he’s a Coca-Cola Plant