Latest news with #XUser
Daily Mail
10-05-2025
- General
- Daily Mail
Sixth-grade math problem leaves the internet confused... can you solve it?
PEMDAS has plagued many in elementary school math classes, but how many Americans remember how to use the acronym to solve problems? A simple sixth-grade math equation went viral on X for stumping adults who forgot how to solve a basic problem. 'Can you solve this!?' one X user asked their followers. The problem read: 16 - 4 ÷ 4 - 4. The comment section blew up with some internet users claiming the answer was 11, while others saying that it was -1. A few X users even claimed the answer was 12, some said 0, one answered 13, and another came to the answer of 6. To solve the equation, you have to reach back into the depths of your brain and use PEMDAS, which stands for Parentheses, Exponents, Multiplication, Division, Addition and Subtraction. The acronym represents the correct order to complete a math problem with multiple functions, starting by solving what's in between parentheses. So, can you solve the sixth-grade math problem? The correct answer to the equation is 11. To get the answer, four is first divided by itself because division comes before subtraction in PEMDAS. Four divided by four is one, which now makes the problem 16 - 1 - 4. Next is just simple subtraction. Moving left to right, 16 - 1 = 15 and 15 - 4 = 11; thus, the answer to the tricky problem is 11. Many users who got -1 made the mistake of going in order instead of starting with division. If you started the equation by subtracting four from 16, you would've ended up with 12 ÷ 4 - 4. 12 ÷ 4 = 3 and 3 - 4 = -1. The math problem was posted to X, and internet users were divided on the correct answer Those who accidentally came up with 12, 0, 13, or 6 may've made an error when subtracting or dividing.
Yahoo
09-05-2025
- Entertainment
- Yahoo
This Claim About Lingerie And The Declining Birth Rate May Be The Dumbest Argument Ever
From 2014 to 2020, the birth rate in the United States consistently decreased by 2% annually. U.S. births increased by just 1% in 2024, still near the record-setting low of 2023. Statisticians and sociologists chalk up the baby bust to a number of structural cultural factors, including sky-high child care costs, an unaffordable housing market, inflexible work schedules and demanding work cultures, and the economic fallout of the pandemic. The long-term trend can also happily be attributed to a substantial reduction in the number of teenage pregnancies over the last several decades. In a post that's gone viral this week, X user @thegenesisbl0ck volunteered a competing theory for plummeting fertility rates: People aren't having sex because women go to bed looking like absolute slobs! 'Birth rates would sky rocket if girls wore this at home instead of some oversized homeless core outfit,' wrote the poster, who goes by Andrea D. Huberwoman, a feminization of Andrew Huberman, a neuroscientist and podcast host who's popular with self-optimization bros. In the accompanying photos, we see two women with long blond hair wearing lacy pink lingerie sets. Birth rates would sky rocket if girls wore this at home instead of some oversized homeless core outfit. — Andrea D. Huberwoman, Ph.D. (@thegenesisbl0ck) May 3, 2025 Men and women on X and Bluesky were quick to call out lady Huberman for the bad take. 'I used to incinerate money on Stella McCartney stuff like this and it's a total waste. My ex preferred when I wore a cropped t shirt to bed. You're doing this nonsense for you not him,' replied podcast host Aimee Terese. 'Speaking as a guy this sort of weird woman shaming stuff about dressing sexy at home is very overrated because if a guy finds you attractive you can pretty much dress like Fred Durst and we'd still have sex with you whenever,' @ wrote on Bluesky of the post. Some responded with hard evidence: 'Spend all you want on Victoria's Secret lingerie but granny wore something like this and gramps gave her eight kids and paid all the bills,' one woman posted along with a photo of a woman wearing a baggy house dress in a pink generic animal print (a decidedly unsexy animal print, we should add). Spend all you want on Victoria's Secret lingerie but granny wore something like this and gramps gave her eight kids and paid all the bills. — The Lone Actor (@TheLoneActor) May 4, 2025 There's obviously a lot wrong with the lingerie-encouraging post. First, people are still very much into and buying lingerie: Victoria's Secret is still alive and kicking. Luxury lingerie brand Agent Provocateur saw its revenues double over the past three years. In spite of the narrative that men are visual creatures, most straight men don't really care all that much about lingerie. Most will be happy with a good old-fashioned naked woman (quite a visual in and of itself), or even a woman they're attracted to who just so happens to be wearing sweats and an old, ratty T-shirt as a comfy prelude to nakedness. William Costello, a doctoral researcher who studies evolutionary psychology at the University of Texas at Austin, asked about the lingerie theory in an unscientific poll on X, and found that most straight men and women who responded don't feel that lingerie makes much of a notable difference when it comes to triggering male desire. Men & women with opposite-sex partners:Has regularly wearing sexy lingerie instead of generic underwear reliably caused a shift from not wanting sex to wanting it (vs. just mildly increasing male desire)?Are you male (M) or female (F)? — William Costello (@CostelloWilliam) May 4, 2025 All this said, there's absolutely nothing wrong with putting a little effort into looking good for your partner, or for yourself. Some people feel especially sexy in lingerie, and more power to them. But you not slipping on a pricey Fleur du Mal garter belt before going to bed is not the reason the birth rate has taken a tumble. 'As a sex therapist who works with men, women and couples, I can tell you with confidence: No, men do not 'need' lingerie to be turned on,' said Tammy Nelson, a sex and relationship therapist and author of 'Open Monogamy: A Guide to Co-Creating Your Ideal Relationship Agreement.' What turns people on is considerably more complex, Nelson said. 'Eroticism starts in our head — it's emotional connection, availability, confidence and responsiveness,' she said. 'Just being naked works just fine for many couples. And yes, someone showing up — even in sweats — and being present, engaged, and into their partner can be incredibly sexy,' she told HuffPost. If anything is a sexual buzzkill right now, it's this stress of trying to make a living wage while maintaining your sanity in these chaotic, capital-letter Unprecedented Times. Working and just getting by can easily lead to compounded stress and anxiety, which can do a number on your libido. 'Wearing lingerie is a leisure activity, and as a sex therapist, I can attest that for most people today ― especially parents ― leisure is in very short supply,' said Stephen Snyder, a sex therapist in New York City and the author of 'Love Worth Making: How to Have Ridiculously Great Sex in a Long-Lasting Relationship.' The real barriers to intimacy and reproduction today are economic pressure, chronic stress, exhaustion from caregiving, and disconnection in relationships, Nelson said. She added that the framework of the social media post ― blaming women for this narrative of 'not turning on their man' ― reinforces the outdated idea that women are responsible for maintaining male desire and that their appearance alone should be responsible for sexual behavior. 'The idea that not wearing lingerie is somehow impacting birth rates is not only reductive, it's sexist and frankly absurd,' she said. Tasking women with the sexual responsibility to look sexy when they go to bed ― when they're also usually the ones doing most of the emotional labor at home, plus actual labor at work ― is ridiculous to Nelson. 'Passion is co-created,' she said. 'Real intimacy comes from mutual effort, vulnerability, and trust — not lingerie.' I Became A Bikini And Lingerie Model When I Was At My Highest Weight Ever The COVID-19 Pandemic Has Led To A 'Baby Bust,' Not A Baby Boom This 47-Year-Old Claims To Have The Penis Of A 22-Year-Old — And Doctors Have Thoughts
