Is sub5 supossed to be high subhuman or what?

[andrej]

I've heard both terms used so are they the same thing?

 

[Mohamedömar]

I've heard both terms used so are they the same thing?

Sub5 is a subhuman in 2026 standards

 

[ihatelife2]

It means anything below 5 on a scale of 1-10

 

[kanabo]

Sub3 is Subhuman but Sub5 has replaced it, as anything below 5 is now Subhuman.

 

[The Death Devil]

It's probably close, but I don't think I would actually say that a four or a five is a subhuman.

 

[goyim next door]

It's probably close, but I don't think I would actually say that a four or a five is a subhuman.

I would consider the average person these days to be a 4-5 out of ten. Most of them have high body fat which means they'll look bloated or less attractive than what they're supposed to be.

 

[The Death Devil]

I would consider the average person these days to be a 4-5 out of ten. Most of them have high body fat which means they'll look bloated or less attractive than what they're supposed to be.

I understand what you're getting at, but I have to disagree just on the basis that it would imply that incels are a point or so away from being like the average person. Inceldom would only realistically be definite if you were at minimum three points away from the average. I would say that most people are sixes.

Truthfully, the look-rating scale has always been a bit imperfect, so it's difficult to sometimes assign ratings to people solely using it.

 

[goyim next door]

I understand what you're getting at, but I have to disagree just on the basis that it would imply that incels are a point or so away from being like the average person. Inceldom would only realistically be definite if you were at minimum three points away from the average. I would say that most people are sixes.

Truthfully, the look-rating scale has always been a bit imperfect, so it's difficult to sometimes assign ratings to people solely using it.

One thing I've noticed is when it comes to women rating men online, especially when it comes to over-exaggerating their attractiveness for virtue signaling purposes, is that the actual rating itself is about 2-3 points below what they've actually rated them as.

So a 5 to her is actually a 3, or a 2.

8 is 6 and so on, unless it's someone who's a genuine eight.

Best example I could give us again the one and only ER where women would (falsely so) call him handsome, decent looking or cute which in reality means he's a 3-4/10. Only that they're boosting his rating 2 points up to prove their own faulty worldview.

I would consider for someone to be an incel, they must be a 3/10, maybe even a low 4, if it comes to my rating, which is, again, my opinion on this matter based on what I've experienced and went through.

 

[andrej]

Sub3 is Subhuman but Sub5 has replaced it, as anything below 5 is now Subhuman.

I get it now. I was looking at the Chad-o-Meter and it basically said that anything below a 4 is subhuman and that high subhuman is someone who is 3.1-4

 

[vic624]

I would consider the average person these days to be a 4-5 out of ten. Most of them have high body fat which means they'll look bloated or less attractive than what they're supposed to be.

Yeah, there seems to be a divergence between relative ratings or ideal ratings. It's surprising to me that more incels don't blame the absolute shit selection of available holes as a causative factor. The subset of ideal weight, fertile age holes are getting attention from men of all age groups.