Even if you take sub8 law to mean that if ytoure sub8 its over, how is that any less believable than that women would fuck a dog rather than an ugly male?
JFL How can people here take dogpill seriously but then turn around and act like sub8 law is outrageous
Denying the dogpill is mean you're denying life
I thinks it's because a sub8 can still try to fuck a 5/10 and have some chance to succeed, something most truecels only dream about
What does the dogpill say is the cutoff rating?
I believe in both tbh. Sub8 especially applies if you have autism or another mental condition.
You can’t tell me this dog doesn’t mog everything in existence. Over for Chadcels.
You can’t tell me this dog doesn’t mog everything in existence. Over for Chadcels.
H
dogs me
No I mean how ugly does a guy have to be for the dogpill to apply
sub 8 law is legit.
foids only consider 19% of men to be normal looking or better
foids only consider 19% of men to be normal looking or better
Both are fucking ridiculous
hmm I get it now, I think if the guy is a 4/10 she would prefer to fuck a dog than him
White females are trash and traitors.
Because we're subhuman and subcanine.
thought dogpill was a meme tbh. 
K
The dog and horsepill are the most brutal
Realizing that females would rather get fucked by an animal than by an ugly male is painfull
Realizing that females would rather get fucked by an animal than by an ugly male is painfull
Dogpill no longer phases me anymore, i've been blackpilled too much on life to be surprised by anything anymore
Young padawan there is so much to learnthought dogpill was a meme tbh.
If you are a 4-7 you still have a possibility. It’s common for people that are having sex. Those including are mainly low tier normie to above. However for 1-3 it’s over.
I don't even know what I am, people were calling Elliot rodgers ugly and he mogs me infinity^10
Keep coping, 3/10 women are being ravaged by chad and then dumped. Their standarts are giga chad or chad
Because we have evidence that women would rather fuck dogs than ugly males
We dont have evidence for your retarded sub8 lookism tier fakecel shit
We dont have evidence for your retarded sub8 lookism tier fakecel shit
I mean, there are dogs out there that have had more sex with female humans that almost all of us in this forum... let that sink in.
Because the sub8 theory is bullshit. The sub 9.5 is the only legit theory.
The amount of foids who own dogs that also fuck their dogs is 1.8%. I argued against this idiotic meme yesterday
https://incels.is/threads/take-the-dogpill.101073/#post-1979631
Its oVeR if you're a 7.9/10
1.8% sounds really high, but let's go with that.
I happen to have the statistics at hand of the place I live in : it is 59.6dogs/1000households, that is 5.96% have dogs. 1.8% of that is 0.10723%, but since we are only interested in females, lets take half of that : 0.05364% of the female population is fucking their dogs. Now for the dogpill : my matching ratio in tinder is <1/2000 =0.05% which means, females in my area actually prefer to have sex with dogs than to date me
Because 6s and 7s are also getting laid
The math adds up, but your argument is missing a few components. I'll elab if you want
S
Elab
over for autismcels
Both theories are legit tbh.
So if I'm understanding this correctly, some dogpillers realize that a virtually irrelevant number of foids sleep with their dogs and are hung up on the principle of it alone, claiming that foids would rather sleep with dogs than them. The leap in logic occurs when you consider the fact that you will most likely never meet someone who fucks dogs IRL and using Tinder as a comparison is flawed because of the math behind it.
We know that there are roughly 50 million people who use Tinder but given what we know, the chances that you find a foid willing to have sex with their dogs there is virtually nonexistent.
First we'd have to remove bots, trolls, catfishers, chadfishers, and inactive accounts. Then we'd have to remove all men from the equation, and finally we'd have to remove those who don't own dogs. We also need to account for the fact that only 54% of Tinder users are single. I won't pretend as if I know how large the potential pool is now but for the sake of argument lets whittle our potential pool down to 5% of users or less who are legitimate sinlge females who own dogs. That would take us to 2.5 million users. You take 1% of that number and you end up with 25,000 foids worldwide who use Tinder and also fuck their dogs. You would also need to take into account your place of residence into account. In the end, mathematically speaking, you have less than a .0005% chance to come across one of these foids. Then when you bring critical thought and logic into the equation the number plummets even further. I'll also elab on this if you want but I'm off to eat dinner for a bit
S
Where did you get the 1% figure from? But let's say the number is 25,000 - you need to add nontinder woman who fuck their dogs as well and ask yourself: How many woman are fucking incels without paying? The answer is the dogpill: Less than the number of women who fuck dogs.
https://incels.is/attachments/cfe97fc8-e1fa-4317-8c3b-017fca867db3-png.80664/
I used Tinder in my argument because another user brought it up in his. As for the logic behind the dog pill, the entire situation is simply ridiculous and the fact that you're worrying about what a laughably small number of foids do is a waste of time. Those kinds of foids are extreme degenerates and have most likely done every slutty act in the book. Thinking about them and endlessly posting low effort threads on this topic is like when the West went into a panic over the Ebola "outbreak" and thought it was a bug deal. Some idiots even predicted that 30% of America was going to be wiped out by it when in reality, only 23 people died
please do so, I'm genuinely curious. My math does have some baked in assumptions, like the proportion of females in tinder having dogs being the same as the complete local population. There is also the fact that the place I live in happens to have a very high dog/household density. To be honest, I didn't expect the math to come out that way, the dogpill is supposed to be a hilarious hyperbole after all.
S
OK, so it's 2%, not one, so twice the number.
What you describe makes it even more suicide fuel and highlights the dogpill more. There is a minority of woman who is so degenerate they have sex with dogs, however, they won't even have sex with incels. Further more, the number of degenerate woman willing to have sex with dogs is far higher than the number of woman who has sex with incels.
just r0pe if ur sub 9 als0
You’re rounding up, but let’s not split hairs
This is where the lack of logic applies to your argument since we’ve already covered the math. Given that the amount of foids who have sex with dogs is insignificant be they on Tinder or not, you have probably never met one and therefore they aren’t passing you up for dogs. In fact there’s no evidence to suggest that these degenerates fuck dogs exclusively and if they do, we’d be crossing into mental illness territory. No matter how you slice it, this meme is nonsensical and treating it as a theory or legitimate facet of the blackpill is nothing short of sheer unmitigated autism
D
2 percent is a large number, and that's the figure that assumes everyone was being completely honest. So, 2 percent as a minimum. Even still it's substantially larger than the going rate of down syndrome in the general population. You've seen people with down syndrome before haven't you? You've also seen a woman who fucked a dog before, you just don't know it. Do the math and figure out approximately how many women in your city have gotten down with a dog before. It's higher than people think
That's 1.8% of people who own dogs, not the entire population. That means that a small percent of a small group of people who are themselves in a small group of people are having sex with their dogs
D
A lot of incels here like to cope and think that if they gained 2 SMV points through looksmaxxxing then they will get laid.
Too many bestiality videos online.
Whole damned websites with regular traffic.
D
No it isn't, your own source puts the number at 1.9% of the general population. It says nothing about dog owners. It literally says "by any estimation the numbers are still substantial."
Most people on this forum are low iq, it’s best not to take them seriously and get angry
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
