S
I see it over and over again that people claim that believing in sub8 theory is "a meme", "cope", or "low iq". It is neither, and most likely stems from a misunderstanding of what sub8 theory is actually claiming. It is NOT claiming only 8+ males are getting laid. It is also NOT claiming that only 8+ males get into relationships.
What sub8 theory is claiming is that in order for a female to be physically and aesthetically attracted to a male, he needs to be at least in the top 20% of male attractiveness.
There are multiple studies detailling how skewed male attractiveness is perceived by woman, one of them conducted in the classic blackpill article written by okcupid with the title "Your Looks and your Inbox".
It shows that a mere 5% is deemed as attractive by woman, and that the average male is rated at about an 1/5. (For comparison, this is how male rate woman)
The following graph contrasts the perceived attractiveness for each gender in a more detailed and conclusive way (Source: Dataclysm)
It's basic blackpill knowledge by now already that only a very small amount of the male population is seen as physically attractive by woman - you can see that the high attractiveness ratings from woman are barely existing.
Now, is it possible for a sub8 male to get sex or in a relationship? Of course it is. But in these relationships, woman aren't fully physically attracted to their partner - they are also known as beta bucks relationships, and generally have status and ressources as their basis.
Only Chad (8/10+ at best) can reap the benefits of looks-based, mutual physical attraction, the rest need to rely on paying the woman in another form (status, power, money,...). This is what sub8 law says. Sub8 in its essence concludes that it's either Chad (8/10+) for true attraction, or having to pay with some other things in order to attain sex or a relationship, that lacks TRUE AFFECTION.
IT'S EITHER CHAD (looks based actual attraction) OR BETA BUCKS (fake attraction based on ressources and other values).
What sub8 theory is claiming is that in order for a female to be physically and aesthetically attracted to a male, he needs to be at least in the top 20% of male attractiveness.
There are multiple studies detailling how skewed male attractiveness is perceived by woman, one of them conducted in the classic blackpill article written by okcupid with the title "Your Looks and your Inbox".
It shows that a mere 5% is deemed as attractive by woman, and that the average male is rated at about an 1/5. (For comparison, this is how male rate woman)
The following graph contrasts the perceived attractiveness for each gender in a more detailed and conclusive way (Source: Dataclysm)
It's basic blackpill knowledge by now already that only a very small amount of the male population is seen as physically attractive by woman - you can see that the high attractiveness ratings from woman are barely existing.
Now, is it possible for a sub8 male to get sex or in a relationship? Of course it is. But in these relationships, woman aren't fully physically attracted to their partner - they are also known as beta bucks relationships, and generally have status and ressources as their basis.
Only Chad (8/10+ at best) can reap the benefits of looks-based, mutual physical attraction, the rest need to rely on paying the woman in another form (status, power, money,...). This is what sub8 law says. Sub8 in its essence concludes that it's either Chad (8/10+) for true attraction, or having to pay with some other things in order to attain sex or a relationship, that lacks TRUE AFFECTION.
IT'S EITHER CHAD (looks based actual attraction) OR BETA BUCKS (fake attraction based on ressources and other values).
Last edited:
