JFL what "sub 8" really implies

[ionlycopenow]

When people claim sub-8 is law, they don't mean anyone that is under sub 8 can't get a girlfriend or whatever. Copes aside, Normies actually usually have low tier Becky girlfriends, and like the name implies they're in the 5 range. The term mostly just refers that women find anything under sub 8 as sexually repulsive. They may date normies, but they secretly hate them and are disgusted by them. These relationships are guaranteed to be filled with cucking and passive insults and just a whole load of problems in general.

usually the whores are just doing it for the social benefits of simply having a boyfriend, because women who don't have one are usually seen as trash tier, especially by other women (considering they view men as accessories like a purse or new watch to show off). So most of them choose to get a normie they might as well view as dickless just for the sake of it, especially when young. It's also because they need an emotional tampon or betabux (most cases).

Most normie men with girlfriends are secretly repulsive to their girl. They don't view them as sexually or biologically attractive. That's what "sub 8" refers to.

 

[NEETard]

Stop making posts about sub 8 ffs

 

[ItsOver4cel]

At last an accurate post tbh
jfl chadlite = incel copers

 

[WizardofSoda]

When I hear normies talking about their girlfriends & wives, it always drama and the woman never seems happy. Needless to say the woman dominates the normie too, ordering him around all the time.

That is a big reason Chad-lites I think go for ethnic women. The ethnic women are happy to have a fairly good looking white husband, and try to please him.

 

[IamJacksBrokenHeart]

sub 5 = over
sub 8 = ascending with subpar foid and thinking you hit the jackpot

only chad truly wins in the end

 

[ionlycopenow]

When I hear normies talking about their girlfriends & wives, it always drama and the woman never seems happy. Needless to say the woman dominates the normie too, ordering him around all the time.

That is a big reason Chad-lites I think go for ethnic women. The ethnic women are happy to have a fairly good looking white husband, and try to please him.

I have never heard of a normie in a happy relationship. It's signing yourself up for heartache, turmoil, and being degraded.

 

[Copemaxx]

sub 8-subhuman laughingstock denied love and respect by the human race
'b-but you can betabuxx and simp for pussy'
you will never be desired by a toilet
you will never be asked out
you will never be able to ask out a girl first try and be accepted without any reluctance
you are the last possible choice a woman could have, and an overall failure in the eyes of humanity.

 

[ionlycopenow]

sub 8-subhuman laughingstock denied love and respect by the human race
'b-but you can betabuxx and simp for pussy'
you will never be desired by a toilet
you will never be asked out
you will never be able to ask out a girl first try and be accepted without any reluctance
you are the last possible choice a woman could have, and an overall failure in the eyes of humanity.

Brutal reminder.

 

[Stalin]

So true.

 

[Sparrow's Song]

This is exactly how I describe Sub-8 theory to normies and you can tell they feel like shit after I remind them of how their gfs really feel about them.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

You’re underestimating the superficiality of men in relationships. All relationships are superficial, you think men would stay with their sub 8 girlfriends if an 8+ Stacy was available to them? Totally delusional. No man in a relationship with a low tier Becky is attracted to her either for the most part. Relationships are an alliance of convenience based on attaining the highest quality partner available within your smv JFL at thinking men are soft sentimental creatures who feel genuinely attracted to the women in their range they too are forced to settle for.

 

[FrothySolutions]

That's not what the original sub-8 proponents said. I'm not opening my books to any re-definitions to sub-8.

 

[ShadowTheEdgehog]

Stop making posts about sub 8 ffs

Does it hurt yet?

 

[ionlycopenow]

That's not what the original sub-8 proponents said. I'm not opening my books to any re-definitions to sub-8.

Who are the original proponents?

 

[Numb]

Sub 8 = "i'm a 7.9999999999999999999/10 trucel !!

 

[Deleted member 23682]

You’re underestimating the superficiality of men in relationships. All relationships are superficial, you think men would stay with their sub 8 girlfriends if an 8+ Stacy was available to them? Totally delusional. No man in a relationship with a low tier Becky is attracted to her either for the most part. Relationships are an alliance of convenience based on attaining the highest quality partner available within your smv JFL at thinking men are soft sentimental creatures who feel genuinely attracted to the women in their range they too are forced to settle for.

LOL @ this damage control.

The point is that when men have a becky girlfriend, they don't secretly hate her like women hate their normie boyfriends. Men are not sexually repulsed by average women in the same way women are sexually repulsed by average men.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

LOL @ this damage control.

The point is that when men have a becky girlfriend, they don't secretly hate her like women hate their normie boyfriends. Men are not sexually repulsed by average women in the same way women are sexually repulsed by average men.

‘Damage control’ for what exactly? Put down the bottle before initiating a debate man. Women ‘hate’ their normie boyfriends? If what you are saying is true then a ‘50s style patriarchy or a ‘government mandated wife’ (lol at this autist cope) or whatever extravagant solution you have for the problem of hypergamy won’t solve anything because clearly women hate all non Chad men so much that it is pointless for them to have any interaction with them at all. I cannot deal with the insane level of contadiction and cope by the sub8 autists on this forum. For low-tier betabuxxers, what you have said may be true, but for looksmaxxed normies there is absolutely no evidence they are ‘repulsive’ to their partners. Especially in the initial phases, relationships are superficial as hell because they are predicated entirely on a ‘best I can do’ basis for both parties involved. But once the door is open, there is room for genuine affection to grow there over a matter of years. Imagine the kind of emotional stamina you would need in order to keep up the facade of love with someone you genuinely hated and were physically repulsed by for over a course of years. I’m serious, imagine a woman in your head who is so hideous that you would describe yourself as physically repulsed by her, then imagine that on top of that you hate everything about her with an intense burning passion. Imagine the kind of acting skills and mental stamina you would need to maintain the facade of an intimate relationship with that person, you are implying that every woman in a relationship with a non-Chad is capable of doing just that.

If that were true then you can never describe women as stupid or weak ever again, because the mental strength and emotional intelligence required to do something like that is more than what is required to live out your days in isolation as an incel, and I know you don’t fucking believe that, so stop coping for the love of god.

 

[Deleted member 23682]

‘Damage control’ for what exactly? Put down the bottle before initiating a debate man. Women ‘hate’ their normie boyfriends? If what you are saying is true then a ‘50s style patriarchy or a ‘government mandated wife’ (lol at this autist cope) or whatever extravagant solution you have for the problem of hypergamy won’t solve anything because clearly women hate all non Chad men so much that it is pointless for them to have any interaction with them at all. I cannot deal with the insane level of contadiction and cope by the sub8 autists on this forum. For low-tier betabuxxers, what you have said may be true, but for looksmaxxed normies there is absolutely no evidence they are ‘repulsive’ to their partners. Especially in the initial phases, relationships are superficial as hell because they are predicated entirely on a ‘best I can do’ basis for both parties involved. But once the door is open, there is room for genuine affection to grow there over a matter of years. Imagine the kind of emotional stamina you would need in order to keep up the facade of love with someone you genuinely hated and were physically repulsed by for over a course of years. I’m serious, imagine a woman in your head who is so hideous that you would describe yourself as physically repulsed by her, then imagine that on top of that you hate everything about her with an intense burning passion. Imagine the kind of acting skills and mental stamina you would need to maintain the facade of an intimate relationship with that person, you are implying that every woman in a relationship with a non-Chad is capable of doing just that.

If that were true then you can never describe women as stupid or weak ever again, because the mental strength and emotional intelligence required to do something like that is more than what is required to live out your days in isolation as an incel, and I know you don’t fucking believe that, so stop coping for the love of god.

LOL no, you are so fucking wrong. Women are by nature hypergamous and picky, and are only attracted to top tier men.

https://incels.is/threads/the-empat...ou-think-average-is-enough-these-days.187005/

Also look at Tinder and ok Cupid stats.

Your damage control is trying to attack sub8 as complete BS, and nullify it entirely. At first you used the common strawman argument that sub8 means all sub8 are incels, which it never was. Then when we complain to you that sub8 means women aren't attracted to sub8 men, you say that men and women view each other in equal lights, when the opposite is true and the EVIDENCE SAYS SO.

 

[Deleted member 23682]

, you are implying that every woman in a relationship with a non-Chad is capable of doing just that.

yes, that is why the divorce rate is so high and dead bedrooms exist

 

[Deleted member 23944]

LOL @ this damage control.

The point is that when men have a becky girlfriend, they don't secretly hate her like women hate their normie boyfriends. Men are not sexually repulsed by average women in the same way women are sexually repulsed by average men.

There's a difference between being repulsive and just not being attractive/lacking sex appeal. Truly repulsive men don't have the option to get in relationships at all. Sub6/Sub5 are sexually repulsive.

This is why almost all young men in relationships are 6-7s.

 

[Deleted member 23682]

There's a difference between being repulsive and just not being attractive/lacking sex appeal. Truly repulsive men don't have the option to get in relationships at all. Sub6/Sub5 are sexually repulsive.

This is why almost all young men in relationships are 6-7s.

we were talking about 5/10 dudes

 

[Deleted member 23944]

we were talking about 5/10 dudes

Yeah, most 5s just get settled for later in life. But it's confusing to make a post about sub8 and then refer to everyone else as normies. He may not be on the same boat as you idk.

 

[Kurt Gödel]

I agree to this and i think we can reach consensus with this definition.

I have a cousin who has had this gf for 5 years and it's being happy one day and the next day she's the queen of naggers.

 

[Blacktarpill]

At last an accurate post tbh
jfl chadlite = incel copers

dudee im 7.6 /10 sub8 brutal im truecel.

 

[Deleted member 23682]

Yeah, most 5s just get settled for later in life. But it's confusing to make a post about sub8 and then refer to everyone else as normies. He may not be on the same boat as you idk.

I think we can agree chadlites are a grey area.

 

[FrothySolutions]

Who are the original proponents?

Here's a particularly extreme view.

https://incels.is/threads/if-a-sub-...ex-he-is-lying-until-proven-otherwise.177435/

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

Your damage control is trying to attack sub8 as complete BS, and nullify it entirely. At first you used the common strawman argument that sub8 means all sub8 are incels, which it never was.

Okay. first off, I have been here for well over a year longer than you have, and let me tell you; the forum used to be FULL of people claiming that anyone below 8/10 couldn’t get into a relationship at all and to my understanding, that was the original definition of sub8 theory - so I was not wilfully strawmanning anything - and btw there are quite a few people here who still believe that nonsense so you’ll have to forgive me for mistaking one theory for another when they both have the same fucking name, so I assure you; it was not a strawman.

Secondly, I agree that graph is extremely damning and I use it to make a point to bluepillers about the uselessness of online dating for ugly men very often myself. What it leaves out is the fact that women are using online dating (which is where the data from that graph comes from) primarily to fuck Chads and most relationships that involve normies are not initiated online because as we all know, it is impossible to compete when women who are flicking through a candy store of pictures of potential sex partners are scrutinising you in a side-by-side comparison with male models, JFL.

Normie relationships are born out of social circles, university friend groups overlapping, shit like that. I agree, the 30% of young women who are on dating apps are there looking for Chad and those that are 6+ will likely find him (I’m not conceding the autist cope that Chad fucks obese or truly ugly women on tinder) the other 60%, who, even if you insist all women are whores, you have to admit must at least be whores to a lesser degree if they aren’t actively seeking Chadcock on tinder 24/7, are getting into relationships the old fashioned way; through the social circle overlap I discussed earlier. Of course the ones on ok.cupid (a hotspot for balding, middle aged, post divorce-rape, low value men) are going to rate men lower when they are experiencing them by way of a side-by-side comparison with fucking Chads, no shit.

You realise women can get laid the minute they leave the door of their house if they want to? They don’t even need online dating if they are content with a normie instead of a Chad. So in order for them to even be on online dating in the first place they have to be the type to reject everyone who isn’t Chad, and that is what the Ok.cupid online data suggests. You are taking the most extreme example of hypergamous whores who are flicking through the lowest of the low of low value men and extrapolating it to encompass even the women who are not using online dating, who because of their lesser exposure to Chad (genuine Chads are very rare, and are unlikely to be found when not conveniently fast tracked through the latest technology) are not going to be as hypergamous as this absolute extreme of extreme examples. Susceptibility to hypergamgy is a social trend subject to variation across population groups. If you don’t believe that then you don’t believe that men 10-20 years ago had it easier than we do now, and I’m almost certain you do believe that because I’m pretty sure I’ve seen you say it before.

 

[ItsOver4cel]

dudee im 7.6 /10 sub8 brutal im truecel.

Nah dude beyond over I can tell you rn fam if you don't look like this it never began

 

[Deleted member 23944]

Okay. first off, I have been here for well over a year longer than you have, and let me tell you; the forum used to be FULL of people claiming that anyone below 8/10 couldn’t get into a relationship at all and to my understanding, that was the original definition of sub8 theory - so I was not wilfully strawmanning anything - and btw there are quite a few people here who still believe that nonsense so you’ll have to forgive me for mistaking one theory for another when they both have the same fucking name, so I assure you; it was not a strawman.

You're right it was like this when I first got here too.

If they are content with a normie instead of a Chad. So in order for them to even be on online dating in the first place they have to be the type to reject everyone who isn’t Chad, and that is what the Ok.cupid online data suggests.

The women in the OkCupid study messaged some of the men they rated unattractive to get resources (including emotional resources) from. Of course it's not the exact same demographic as Tinder.

It would be one thing if they WEREN'T messaging those men on OkCupid, but they were and I think almost all people on this forum know what the character of said relationship would be if formed or what the drive was for messaging men they think of as unattractive.

I think it's a pretty good representation of typical women although on OkCupid they have more options.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

we were talking about 5/10 dudes

Just seen this. What? No we weren’t dude, we were discussing sub8 theory, that includes all between 5-7.9. Show me where you specified we were discussing 5s specifically, I will 100% own my mistake if you are correct. To my perception, you are moving the goalposts an awful lot for a guy who accused me of strawmanning not long ago.

Yeah, most 5s just get settled for later in life. But it's confusing to make a post about sub8 and then refer to everyone else as normies. He may not be on the same boat as you idk.

I most certainly was not, I don’t consider 6-7s to be Chadlites necessarily because they might be average height or below. You can only really rate facial attractiveness in this progressive numbers way because once you add height to the equation it becomes too confusing to categorise by numbers. I consider a Chadlite to be anyone who is in the 6-7 range but is also tall, (6’+).

 

[Deleted member 23682]

Just seen this. What? No we weren’t dude, we were discussing sub8 theory, that includes all between 5-7.9. Show me where you specified we were discussing 5s specifically, I will 100% own my mistake if you are correct. To my perception, you are moving the goalposts an awful lot for a guy who accused me of strawmanning not long ago.

and like the name implies they're in the 5 range.

 

[Deleted member 13060]

Only sub 4 with small or average dick is truly over. Men who are 4+ can be found sexually attractive.

 

[ionlycopenow]

Only sub 4 with small or average dick is truly over.

Average anything means little to no sexual attraction, ever.

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

@Personalityinkwell

Normies actually usually have low tier Becky girlfriends, and like the name implies they're in the 5 range.

Urrr, no. Can’t tell if you’re trolling, drunk, genuinely retarded or trying to be sneaky and you genuinely think Im so dumb I won’t notice. He’s clearly talking about the ‘low tier beckies’ there. We we’re talking about men in the 5-7 range since that is who sub 8 theory applies to.

we were talking about 5/10 dudes

What are you on man? Literally making less and less sense by the second.

 

[Deleted member 23682]

Just seen this. What? No we weren’t dude, we were discussing sub8 theory, that includes all between 5-7.9. Show me where you specified we were discussing 5s specifically, I will 100% own my mistake if you are correct. To my perception, you are moving the goalposts an awful lot for a guy who accused me of strawmanning not long ago.

and like the name implies they're in the 5 range.

Urrr, no. Can’t tell if you’re trolling, drunk, genuinely retarded or trying to be sneaky and you genuinely think Im so dumb I won’t notice. He’s clearly talking about the ‘low tier beckies’ there. We we’re talking about men in the 5-7 range since that is who sub 8 theory applies to. What are you on?

@ionlycopenow

are you talking about normies being 5/10 dudes?

 

[ColdLightOfDay]

@ionlycopenow

are you talking about normies being 5/10 dudes?

He literally states ‘low tier beckies’ just before. How can your definition of sub 8 theory not include 6-7s... come on man, stop pretending to be retarded. You can count to 10.

 

[ionlycopenow]

@ionlycopenow

are you talking about normies being 5/10 dudes?

Yes, the 5/10 refers to the normie guys. Low tier Becky is probably either a 4-5 as well.

 

[Yerberito]

So true.