nobody's refusing subjections to the Supreme Pontiff, only to an Antipope. Of course, formally, you are the one in schism for claiming that it's permitted to refuse subjection to the Supreme Pontiff and to communicate with members of the Church (i.e. by refusing to attend the NOM). So once again you condemn yourself from your own mouth.
Besides that, the SVs have quoted myriad times from Canonist who state that one is not a schismatic if one refuses subjection based on well-founded doubts regarding their legitimacy.
Ironic, given that Stubborn has been repeatedly quoting Pope Boniface VIII's dogmatic pronouncement on this point:
Pope Boniface VIII, Unam Sanctam, Nov. 18, 1302: “Furthermore, we declare, say, define and pronounce that it is absolutely necessary for the salvation of every human creature to be subject to the Roman Pontiff.”
How exactly is one subjecting themselves to the Roman Pontiff if they deny every doctrine he teaches to the universal church? If one were subject to Bergoglio as the Roman Pontiff, then they would have no reason to avoid the New Mass, in fact, given
Traditionis Custodes, they would be defying his authority and are
obligated to go to the New Mass.
If you truly believe that Jorge Bergoglio is a legitimate Roman Pontiff, then act like it and
subject yourself to his authority like a good "Catholic." The R&R position fundamentally denies the dogmatic teaching of Vatican I:
Session 4, Chapter 3.9. So, then, if anyone says that the Roman pontiff has merely an office of supervision and guidance, and not the full and supreme power of jurisdiction over the whole church, and this not only in matters of faith and morals, but also in those which concern the discipline and government of the church dispersed throughout the whole world; or that he has only the principal part, but not the absolute fullness, of this supreme power; or that this power of his is not ordinary and immediate both over all and each of the churches and over all and each of the pastors and faithful:
let him be anathema.