Yuuutsu-kun to Succubus-san - Ch. 101

[MangaDex]

 

[Ana-al-Haqq]

"Mine has been a life of much shame. I can't even guess what it must be to live the life of a human being."

 

[MontDilanus1343]

3XY+2XX = ?SEX (= 3SEX)
3X + 3Y + 2X + 2X = 7X + 3Y
7X + 3Y = ?SEX
6X + 3Y = ?SE
? = (6X + 3Y) / (SE)
(SEXY) = Constant
? = (4XY + 1XX) + EX
:: MMMF with EX
:: Your f(ex) is a bimbo

I'm rather upset by this.

There are 1 equation and 1 unknown, therefore unsolveable.
Unless the equation collapses into a single proof.
Also, how do you collect the terms.

It's implied in a doggy-style gang session proof.
But not the more general case swinger theorem!

 

[Hermann]

"The protagonist is Osamu Dazai."
Even knowing what "No Longer Human" is about, that's still blunt shots that were fired there.

 

[henman]

Oh right. The right to throw away your life as long as it doesn't bother anyone else. My favourite.

Succubus math is so profound. I like how the answer to "?sex" is "3sex".
Also, I love how the girls can just sit on bouncing balls during the class.

Thank you very much for the translation. Good sir.

 

[StormConstantine]

3XY+2XX = ?SEX (= 3SEX)
3X + 3Y + 2X + 2X = 7X + 3Y
7X + 3Y = ?SEX
6X + 3Y = ?SE
? = (6X + 3Y) / (SE)
(SEXY) = Constant
? = (4XY + 1XX) + EX
:: MMMF with EX
:: Your f(ex) is a bimbo

I'm rather upset by this.

There are 1 equation and 1 unknown, therefore unsolveable.
Unless the equation collapses into a single proof.
Also, how do you collect the terms.

It's implied in a doggy-style gang session proof.
But not the more general case swinger theorem!

The swinger theorem complicates the matter, as you need to know the number of individuals in reference to their relationships (R1 + R2 +... Rn = ?SEX) rather than on their own. You run into the issue of combinations and fucktorials. It's classic group sex theory. Using the already stated participants, there are already 8 different combinations for the types of relationships with at minimum 2 members and at most 4, as there needs to be at minimum one individual outside of the original relationship for it to be valid for the theorem. E.g.
1XY + 1XX, 2XY, 2XX,... 2XY + 2XX, 3XY + 1XX

 

[Potkeny]

3XY+2XX = ?SEX (= 3SEX)
3X + 3Y + 2X + 2X = 7X + 3Y
7X + 3Y = ?SEX
6X + 3Y = ?SE
? = (6X + 3Y) / (SE)
(SEXY) = Constant
? = (4XY + 1XX) + EX
:: MMMF with EX
:: Your f(ex) is a bimbo

I'm rather upset by this.

There are 1 equation and 1 unknown, therefore unsolveable.
Unless the equation collapses into a single proof.
Also, how do you collect the terms.

It's implied in a doggy-style gang session proof.
But not the more general case swinger theorem!

If we consider XY and XX as chromosomes, XY -> male, XX -> female, then 3 XY is not 3X + 3Y, just simply 3 [variable-name].

 

[Ironclad]

Oh they find him cringe too.

 

[Hardkorr]

Man, that YouTube panel is so real. They always start small, exploring niches, then once they find some fetishy one they start getting popular and do more and more of it until it defines them.

Edit: Referring to pg 1 middle left. Went from "try random things" to "I am the god of nipples"

 

[onipuck]

I have to wonder if that teacher ever gets through a full lesson with all those interruptions

 

[goodknife]

vibrator-chan is so hot