Meanwhile her looksmatch is currently dead in his apartment with his body yet to be found.
This is what Chadlite has to go for. Do you honestly think a 6/10 male stands a chance?
Meanwhile her looksmatch is currently dead in his apartment with his body yet to be found.
This is what Chadlite has to go for. Do you honestly think a 6/10 male stands a chance?
P
Imagine thinking average guys can't be incels in this day and age
Oh fuck, this topic again, and I thought things were already calming down.
what the fuck is that skullmog
Proving sub-8 means proving a negative, which is impossible. Attractive men with fat women doesn't prove sub-8. Maybe he likes her. What you have to prove is that no one under 8 is getting any. And that's impossible to prove.
He has some weird fetish.
F
that's no chadlite
5/10
5/10
Man is zoophile
D
JFL the sub8 deniers are already seething
It has been said before...Put it in spoiler tags!
I nearly puked.
It's disgusting having to look at landwhale pigs.
I nearly puked.
It's disgusting having to look at landwhale pigs.
No you dumb shit, that way it would also be impossible to prove the positive, which is a negative of the negative. You just need the right condition. Proving a is the same as proving -(-a)
Get off my forum, foid apologist
Does giving you more replies in a single post give you more reply count
What's the positive? That a sub-8 can get laid? That's easier to prove than "A sub-8 can't get laid." Because then you have to show that no sub-8s are getting laid.
Yeah I didn't disagree with that I just said that you can prove a negative in a general sense. For instance you can prove that 1 + 1 =/= 3 because 2 =/= 3
I mean as far as philosophic burden of proof.
Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia
We're literally talking about two different things, I'm saying that proving a statement is the same as disproving its negative and vice versa, you're saying that we have no reason to believe anything until we have sufficient proof of it.I mean as far as philosophic burden of proof.
Burden of proof (philosophy) - Wikipedia
en.wikipedia.org
Did you really just quote wikipedia at me, I'm a MED STUDUNCE
Also the point of the convo isn't that sub-8 men don't get any, in fact I've seen the same thing said with sub 7 and sub 9. The point is just hypergamy, wamans want hotter men and so the few hot as fuck men get multiple pussios. y u so madde
Yeah, we're talking about two different things, I was explaining the thing I meant. My thing wasn't about math. Also my thing wasn't about medicine.
And that is the argument sub-8 proponents are making. That if you're a 7 or lower, you're incel. As in, you cannot get laid unless you pay someone whose job it is to have sex with you. No one ever, ever, will choose to have sex with you.
Yeah it didn't have anything to do with medicine but I was just meeming
Also how are you on an incel forum with 5 meme stars if you don't believe in hypergamy
Oh, I believe in it. But I dunno about all this "sub-8" stuff going around.
nobody likes that fucking shit, not even men who are into ssbbw porn. LOOK AT HER. I WOULD RATHER FUCK A LITERAL SWINE. and she's attention whoring with her normie cuckold on tiktok, what's there to like about this human(?) trash?
If you're going to make the argument then do it on its merits instead of reverse cherrypicking. Anyone with eyes who has ever been on a Uni or anywhere can see that these kinds of couples are absurd. There are normies who date women somewhat like this often not chadlites.
I see people would be rated here as 5s (actually they're 6/10s but people are harsh) who have been with 4/10s. In most parties, chadlites have plenty of opportunities to even get casual sex.
Sub8 is 95/5 maybe even less because I have never seen a 8+/10 in real life. It's not 80/20. I don't believe in Sub8 because there are Chadlites in my extended family who slay and I've always seen them with attractive women.
I see people would be rated here as 5s (actually they're 6/10s but people are harsh) who have been with 4/10s. In most parties, chadlites have plenty of opportunities to even get casual sex.
sub eight is retarded.
every time there's the same criticism:
"if sub 8 was true 95% of men wouldn't have sex and this is objectively false"
the reply is:
"sub 8 is not about having sex is about having a fulfilling sexual life, normies and high tier normies can occasionally fuck landwhales and if they get a gf they get cucked"
the point here is that "a fulfilling sexual life" is a relative concept,
there are men who want to fuck landwhales and there are men who are okay with having a girl that will evetually leave them(almost every relationship comes to an end).
sub eight boils down to "according to my standards you must have chad's sexual life in order to be fulfilled"
Well look at it like this
Of course it's not absolutely true. In fact, no sub-x rule can be true because it would be false since there are 0s going around smashing Stacies:
Note: How the fuck
What it's meant to allude to is which percentile of the population the hypergamy principle kicks in at. Assuming that male attractiveness is distributed on a normal bell curve, that means that about 70-80% of males are in the 3-7 range (or something like that). We know that about 80% of all males in a generation reproduce, and those are obviously the most attractive, therefore sub 2 or sub 3 you are removed from the gene pool.
What's more interesting to the incelosphere is the Pareto principle and how it applies to sex. You see, even if you are above 3 and you can reproduce doesn't mean that you have lots of sex. After all, you only need to have one sex. Having many sex means that you're more attractive. The Pareto principle means that 80% of all male sex is had by 20% of all males. Since most women will have sex regardless of attractiveness, we can basically say that 20% of men fuck 80% of women (hurts, I know). This 20% is obviously the hyperchads, the top 20% of the male population with regards to hotness.
This top 20%, according to the bell curve, is something like all males over 7 or 8.
So this is what sub 7 or sub 8 or sub whatever means: That 20% of all males (that are over 7 or 8 or whatever) cuck the other 80% of men that get to lick up their coom from the pussies of their holes. This is also why women get so pissy over men wanting a virgin gf, because they've all been railed by Chaddock and have to settle for a sub 7 or sth, given that the sub 7 men are angry about having been cucked by the Ethereal Chads of Hypercock.
Maybe it's just the country I'm in, but this is not true as far as I know. I have seen 1 or 2 model quality male specimens (9 or 10) in my uni of 1000 students, and there may be more. That being said, they don't get all of the poontang. There are many averageish or chadlite faggots (even one 6) that get cute as fuck gfs. I can think of at least 3 right now, from a random pick of 20 people. That's definitely not 95/5. And none of the Chads are at the stage where they just fuck with reckless abandon, they're either casually dating like "normal people" or in stable relationships.
I rue the day when I will find myself in such a situation as the one you are in right now, because 95/5 would mean that out of a pick of 100 people, this horrifying phenomenon would occur:
There are 50 gallant vikings and 50 holes, and since most if not all holes get to explore their sexuality, all 50 holes would be having the sex. As far as the males go, 5% would be having almost the entire sex, so that's 2 or 3 vikings passing on their Skyrim intros. The rest 5% of the sex would be had by 95% of menschen. 5% means 2 or 3 women to be distributed in some way between 48-47 men. Maybe they all get a go (probably not), or those 2 or 3 settle for the next-best vikings (most probable), leaving 44-46 valiant conquerors completely sexless.That is a virginity average of 90%. Completely ridinculous.
Last edited:
D
High IQ
The Sub8 deniers will claim he’s a 3/10 at best.
The Sub8 deniers will claim he’s a 3/10 at best.
Average is Incel
I'm at Uni and I'm seeing the very monstrosity you're seeing in the video with chadlites WALKING IN HAND WITH THEM, only because they have a decent body (see my past thread on this).
what the fuck is that skullmog
Doubt, you're either exaggerating/being hyperbolic or you leave in an area where 8/10+ are more common like Australia or California. Either way, the same distribution is in play. Be in the T10-T15%. I see exactly what people here say with "landwhales" and 99% of the time what they actual mean is an average young American woman which is overweight but not obese.
There was one even posted here of the same phenomenon on social media with a chadlite and landwhale where they did cringy "breaking societal norms" shit. Then people here used this as "evidence" for Sub-8 when many in the comments were even mocking him.
Last edited:
Never been more over. I use to think it would be surprising that 5-6/10’s would be users on this site, but it’s not anymore. I’m genuinely terrified now. What happened to planet earth? Take their rights away HYPERGAMY IS EVIL.
H
guy must be a fag and that pig is his cover
Indeed I'm fucking tired of itOh fuck, this topic again, and I thought things were already calming down.
D
probably just a fatty lover
This shit has to be a joke
One cherry picked couple of a normie with a landwhale. Sub 8 theorists really reaching
I hate hypogamic over6 males so fucking much
Similar threads
Users who are viewing this thread
