Pity sex

[udolipixie]

Wrong, they will both be "doing it."

Or because she feels compassion. It's a matter of perspective and semantics as to whether the act is a negative or a positive one.

 

Or is it only wrong when it's not what you want?

 

Why don't more women view sex other than as a medium of exchange? Why do so many women conceive of sex as something a man 'gets' from a woman instead of the consensual, mutual, pleasant activity that it is?

Perhaps because many men don't but view sex as an exchange. I was nice to you so you should have sex with me.They view it as pleasant activity for them her attraction to him or desire to have sex with him is irrelevant as long as she does what he wants.

 

Take the poster who liked your answer for example he stated he wanted to get his rocks off and he presented a convincing argument to why she should have sex with him when she didn't want to.

 

Characterizing men, other than a tiny minority of sociopathic men, as viewing women as mere "holes" is a sure sign of thorough indoctrination. Been reading a bit too much Dworkin?

More like been reading a bit too much of your posts and several other male posters on here.

 

Care to show where I characterized men as viewing women as mere holes?

 

Though in general I think I think asking a woman to give away sex would likely get a negative reaction because it may suggest that her attraction/desire of wanting a partner she wants to have sex with is irrelevant seeing her as hole rather than a human being. As well as it may suggest that she's being selfish or greedy by having sex with people she wants to have sex with because she's attracted to them and desires them.

 

Nope no stating men view women as holes.

Nope no stating even the amount of men who view women as holes.

Possibly yeah that it seems a sure sign of indoctrination to make quite reaching projections and pull your own agenda of feminism issues onto that. Especially when the person constantly states "it is a fact" and says it's unreasonable to ask to evidence (studies, statistics, factual evidence)

Edited March 30, 2012 by udolipixie

[AIDsFan1488]

Well Cypress and Udolipixie, you guys want to paint me as the villain here and saying it was all about sex, but it really wasn't. I'm not a "nice guy" doormat either by the way, but I really did have good intentions.

 

The point is that this isn't just about sex, it's about comradery. I was very close and had what I thought was close comradery with said woman. I am very good and try my best to be selfless with my male friends as well. IF I needed desperate help in something and they had a solution but did not help me as I would for them, I would tell them off too!

 

It's how the world is defined nowadays that changed, not the logic behind it. In WWI for example, women who were under foreign occupation would have sex with soldiers that they saw as liberators. Not because the soldiers were all pretty or wealthy or because they particularly found them sexually attractive, but instead to show grattitude to young men who were risking everything to protect them (in their eyes) in a uniquely female way. That's how it should be, but isn't, because doing that would bring the artificial, speculated high value of your snatch down .

[AIDsFan1488]

I love also the mentality that guys like me are just so "misogynistic" that we don't want women to feel pleasure during sex.

 

The issue isn't about what I WANT either. I would love to have a woman who is passionate, attracted, and loves me, that would be amazing. But that isn't around, and it's not changing. This is a less than perfect world, so a lot of us have to settle for the lesser of two evils.

 

It isn't either like I look like Seth Rogan. I'm a decent looking guy, with a decent looking body, who is caring and affectionate, as well as dominant and masculine. All the things women hate about me are things that only matter in an insane society like the one we live in now. It's not like any woman sound of mind would be so horrified by it, it's that women cannot budge on their ridiculous sex fetishes even ONCE AS A FAVOR that enrages me.

 

Add to that the fact that the very bitches that wouldn't touch me with a 10 foot pool just because they don't like how I look, my height, my financial status, my body build, or anything else, are the same ones lobbying to keep prostitution illegal and unaffordable.

[ThaWholigan]

It's "happy hour" in lots of areas of the world, why so foul tempered? Having a nice Dos Equis myself.

Sure is, just came from Piccadilly, their all happy . Had a nice chat with a few ladies from Portugal . Happy hour rules......

 

-----------------------------------------

 

OT: Might be against the grain, but I would be a little insulted if I were offered pity sex. It's likely I would turn it down....the very nature of pity sex is that she wouldn't actually be doing it because she wants to have sex with me (or would she?....), but as some kind of favor. I'd be like "sorry love, but I'm not so desperate that I need that kinda favor......maybe if I'm still a virgin in 15 years time :laugh:".

 

I'm a proud man admittedly, I want a girl to want me, not for a girl to say "well, he's going through a rough patch......he ain't what I want, but......hmmm, yeah I'll have sex with him". I'm not expert, but surely if her heart ain't in it, the sex will end up being meh? **** that, I don't do meh. I'm a Wholigan damnit .

 

-------------------------------------------------------

 

Hey Aidsfan, you're in NY right?? My bro went there and ****ed a few girls in Harlem. You tried hollering at some chicks down there??

[johan]

Do you mean as in feeling like the guy cannot protect them? Or that they feel that the guy is a threat?

 

If they feel nervous around the guy or don't trust his motives, it won't happen.

[KathyM]

That's just your opinion, not a fact.

Yes, it is my opinion--men are not respecting women and not respecting themselves if they resort to prostitutes. Do you think it's showing respect for women to buy and sell them like cattle? Do you think it's respectful to treat them like a piece of meat to be chewed up and spit out along with hundreds of other guys? If that truly is your opinion, then I'd say you are just rationalizing. That's not showing compassion or empathy for the women you are using. That's contributing to a destructive lifestyle.

[Cypress25]

In WWI for example, women who were under foreign occupation would have sex with soldiers that they saw as liberators. Not because the soldiers were all pretty or wealthy or because they particularly found them sexually attractive, but instead to show grattitude to young men who were risking everything to protect them (in their eyes) in a uniquely female way. That's how it should be, but isn't, because doing that would bring the artificial, speculated high value of your snatch down.

 

That is NOT how it should be. Sex should not be done out of obligation or gratitude. Sex is for both partners to enjoy, it should never be done at the expense of one partner. Sex should only be done out of mutual desire and attraction. Sex is not money, it is not payment for a job well done, it is not a reward for good behavior.

 

If a friend does something nice for me or helps me out in some way, I return the favor by taking him out to dinner or helping him move or looking after his dog when he's out of town. I do NOT return the favor by having sex with him. That's outrageous. You think a woman owes you sex just because you did something nice for her? Doing something nice for her doesn't mean she now has to repay you by degrading herself. Why can't she repay you in a way that doesn't make her feel violated?

 

It's not like any woman sound of mind would be so horrified by it, it's that women cannot budge on their ridiculous sex fetishes even ONCE AS A FAVOR that enrages me.

 

This is the attitude that women find offensive. Sex is not something to be given out as a favor. If you want sexual favors, you're gonna have to find a woman who does that for a living. Normal women have too much self-respect to be coerced into sexual activity that they would not enjoy. No one owes you any favors, sexual or otherwise. If you are enraged by the fact that women won't allow you to use them and degrade them, and make them feel bad about themselves in general, then you need therapy.

 

I love also the mentality that guys like me are just so "misogynistic" that we don't want women to feel pleasure during sex.

 

You obviously don't care about the woman's pleasure at all. Here this woman is telling you that she would not derive any pleasure from having sex with you, and you think she should do it anyway. You obviously have no idea how horrible it would feel to have sex when you don't want to. It's not a feeling that goes away overnight, either. But what do you care? Her feelings don't matter.

[FitChick]

There is a guy who lives in the garage of a house down the street from me. It's a garage. Not an apartment or a room in the house. As I was running by, I saw a cute girl there with him. He's obviously no doctor

 

But they were probably playing doctor.

[AIDsFan1488]

That is NOT how it should be. Sex should not be done out of obligation or gratitude. Sex is for both partners to enjoy, it should never be done at the expense of one partner. Sex should only be done out of mutual desire and attraction. Sex is not money, it is not payment for a job well done, it is not a reward for good behavior.[/Quote]

 

I'm not saying it is. But if you knew something would make a young man who is selflessly fighting for you extremely happy, why wouldn't you do it?

 

Better yet, why do women give sex out to men who do nothing for them?

 

If women were all virgins until marriage, I would not ask them for sex. But it's the opposite. Every second there is a woman somewhere having sex with a man who does not care if she lives or dies. Why doesn't that make her feel violated?

 

If a friend does something nice for me or helps me out in some way, I return the favor by taking him out to dinner or helping him move or looking after his dog when he's out of town. I do NOT return the favor by having sex with him. That's outrageous. You think a woman owes you sex just because you did something nice for her? Doing something nice for her doesn't mean she now has to repay you by degrading herself. Why can't she repay you in a way that doesn't make her feel violated?[/Quote]

 

I never do good things with the idea of people owing me, but I do get hurt if someone I care about refuses to do something for me I would do for them.

 

 

ou obviously don't care about the woman's pleasure at all. Here this woman is telling you that she would not derive any pleasure from having sex with you, and you think she should do it anyway. You obviously have no idea how horrible it would feel to have sex when you don't want to. It's not a feeling that goes away overnight, either. But what do you care? Her feelings don't matter. [/Quote]

 

I'm done with this idiotic debate.

 

Rock stars, millionaires, 6'3 male models, famous guys use can abuse women like they are a kleenex to sop up jizz, that's empowering to women.

 

A more average guy who has shown a woman love, affection, almost unconditional kindness, bravery, selflessness and isn't even that bad looking just not her exact "type", if he asks for sex he is doing the equivalent of raping her.

 

We are simply on two different astral planes, I will never understand your point of view and you will never understand mine. All I ask is that you not try and paint me as a villain, I could do the same exact thing to you.

 

I'm just going to start putting change in my piggy bank for a future hooker binge.

[AIDsFan1488]

Yes, it is my opinion--men are not respecting women and not respecting themselves if they resort to prostitutes. Do you think it's showing respect for women to buy and sell them like cattle? Do you think it's respectful to treat them like a piece of meat to be chewed up and spit out along with hundreds of other guys? If that truly is your opinion, then I'd say you are just rationalizing. That's not showing compassion or empathy for the women you are using. That's contributing to a destructive lifestyle.

 

 

Hey Kathy, I want to ask you a question:

 

Are you going to **** me or Ross? If not, then you are nothing but an unempathetic hypocrite.

 

Don't criticize men who try to carve out their own path in this dark age (for men) unless you are willing to provide some solutions. How about you gain some weight, chemically induce a stroke, and shave your head so that you can know the feeling of being eternally sexless with no foreseeable way out? Then multiply it by 100 by injecting yourself with testosterone that will give you an exploding sex drive that young men have. And even then, you'd still probably get more attention atleast for sex than me and Ross put together.

[AIDsFan1488]

The women who refuse to empathize with the situation many, many men are in are the real equivalent to a male predator looking to take women against their will. Neither consider the feelings of the other. While udolipixie will argue the legalism of this comparison (rofl), morally speaking willful inaction in the face of someone in extreme agony you can cure in 10 minutes is indeed just as bad as going out and being the cause of agony yourself.

[johan]

The women who refuse to empathize with the situation many, many men are in are the real equivalent to a male predator looking to take women against their will. Neither consider the feelings of the other. While udolipixie will argue the legalism of this comparison (rofl), morally speaking willful inaction in the face of someone in extreme agony you can cure in 10 minutes is indeed just as bad as going out and being the cause of agony yourself.

 

Would you blow a desperate gay guy?

[AIDsFan1488]

Would you blow a desperate gay guy?

 

Saw this red herring coming from miles away.

 

No, I wouldn't. First of all there is no such thing as a desperate gay guy, all he has to do is put his number up on a bathroom stall, if even has to resort to that. Second of all, I am not a homosexual.

 

The real analogy would be: would I sleep with a female who was not exactly my "type" (not that i particularly have one) but was absolutely dying for male intimacy? Absolutely YES I WOULD!

[johan]

Saw this red herring coming from miles away.

 

No, I wouldn't. First of all there is no such thing as a desperate gay guy, all he has to do is put his number up on a bathroom stall, if even has to resort to that. Second of all, I am not a homosexual.

 

That's not the point though. You have a pretty mouth, and he hasn't gotten any in a while. He's not getting anywhere in the gay world, and looking at you is killing him. It would only take you 10 minutes to satisfy him. Out of comaraderie. Maybe he helped you out at one point. What's the problem? Why don't you let him stick his d*ck inside you and get a little relief?

[AIDsFan1488]

That's not the point though. You have a pretty mouth, and he hasn't gotten any in a while. He's not getting anywhere in the gay world, and looking at you is killing him. It would only take you 10 minutes to satisfy him. Out of comaraderie. Maybe he helped you out at one point. What's the problem? Why don't you let him stick his d*ck inside you and get a little relief?

 

 

Is this the best you got?

 

My aunt is a terrible cook, but it means a lot to her when she does cook. Whatever she makes, she always manages to burn it, too much salt, too much this, too much that. The other day I ate at her place and wanted to puke, but guess what, I ate it anyway because I know it makes her happy.

 

That is the better analogy. If my aunt was trying to literally feed me turds the dog left in the yard, then that would be the adequate comparison in terms of how unnatural it is for a heterosexual to partake in a homosexual act.

 

I'm not even asking women to eat burnt food. I'm asking them to once, as a huge favor and act of love for someone who has shown them nothing but affection and selfless kindness for as long as he's known them, eat a food they don't prefer to their favorite . But apparently, feeding a woman anything other than chocolate ice cream is a gross violation of her person or the equivalent of cat litter soup

[Mme. Chaucer]

Sex and food are not analogous. Sex and sex are.

[johan]

I don't think it's different at all. The way a woman feels who isn't attracted to you is pretty much the same way you feel about a gay guy. You expect a woman to do what you wouldn't do yourself?

 

I think what you're saying is that because you moved her TV and caught the spider that she owes it to you to let you stick your d*ck inside her. She is specifically not offering you that, no matter what you did to think you earned it. So to get what you want, you would have to take it by force, in the same way a gay guy would have to take you by force.

[AIDsFan1488]

Sex and food are not analogous. Sex and sex are.

 

Sex and food (two vital components of human well-being, by most standards) are not analogous but gays and straights are?

 

So are women and men as different as gays and straights, or only different as long as it benefits womans baseless moral superiority?

 

Verzhn posted, and got her inbox flooded with offers to give her sexual intimacy, to date her, constant ego strokes, etc. That she herself rejected by the way. Even from me.

 

Somedude, Ross, me, what do we get? People offering us therapy

 

You see why men are more pissed off than women here? Or are you thinking in a completely different wavelength from me as the other women are?

[AIDsFan1488]

I don't think it's different at all. The way a woman feels who isn't attracted to you is pretty much the same way you feel about a gay guy. You expect a woman to do what you wouldn't do yourself?

 

I think what you're saying is that because you moved her TV and caught the spider that she owes it to you to let you stick your d*ck inside her. She is specifically not offering you that, no matter what you did to think you earned it. So to get what you want, you would have to take it by force, in the same way a gay guy would have to take you by force.

 

So why isn't a woman I'm not attracted to the equivalent? I would help out if she was a close friend who would do anything for me.

 

I guess Johan, you are also more on the plane of some of the women here who really just don't care if men live or die as virgins. Which is fine. This is a debate that will never get resolved as we are speaking two completely different languages (men and women/liberal feminist men)

[Cypress25]

But if you knew something would make a young man who is selflessly fighting for you extremely happy, why wouldn't you do it?

 

Because it would make me extremely unhappy. That's why I don't expect men to selflessly fight for me. I can take care of myself.

 

Every second there is a woman somewhere having sex with a man who does not care if she lives or dies. Why doesn't that make her feel violated?

 

She probably thinks he cares about her. If she knew the truth, she wouldn't be having sex with him. She'll be devastated when she learns the truth later, and she probably will feel violated then. But it's too late.

 

morally speaking willful inaction in the face of someone in extreme agony you can cure in 10 minutes is indeed just as bad as going out and being the cause of agony yourself.

 

Extreme agony? Don't be so dramatic. If you were bleeding to death on the sidewalk and no one stopped to help, that would be wrong. But you're not bleeding, you're not dying, and you're not in extreme agony. You're just horny and frustrated. You'll live.

[Cypress25]

I guess Johan, you are also more on the plane of some of the women here who really just don't care if men live or die as virgins.

 

Why are women supposed to care about that? It's not my responsibility to cure men of their virginity. If they're virgins and unhappy about it, that's not my problem. It's not my job to relieve them of their sexual frustration, especially when it would leave me feeling crappy.

[johan]

So why isn't a woman I'm not attracted to the equivalent? I would help out if she was a close friend who would do anything for me.

 

I guess Johan, you are also more on the plane of some of the women here who really just don't care if men live or die as virgins. Which is fine. This is a debate that will never get resolved as we are speaking two completely different languages (men and women/liberal feminist men)

 

Don't try to guilt me or question my manhood. That's the tactic of the defeated.

 

I have no idea why you would do an unattractive woman out of a sense of duty. I wouldn't. Very few guys I've ever known would. I'm not even sure you really would. It's one thing to think about it hypothetically. It's another thing altogether when Ugly Betty actually shows up at the door. Talk about awkward.

 

Most guys would send her packing. Not to mention if I'm not attracted, then little johan isn't attracted either. And who wants to deal with the attachment that inevitably happens afterward or the fact that if you give it once, you sign up to give it again and again?

 

You think you would because you aren't really thinking it through. You aren't thinking of the woman as a complete person. She's just a curvy outline with a hole.

 

Maybe the difference is that you feel you have no options, so why not. If you actually thought you had a chance with a woman you really were attracted to, Ugly Betty would definitely be on her own.

 

Sex is not the currency of friendship.

[Mme. Chaucer]

Sex is certainly not the currency of friendship, and sex is not (for most of us) something that is embarked upon as a "favor" for somebody.

[dasein]

Or is it only wrong when it's not what you want?

 

Unresponsive non sequitur.

 

Perhaps because many men don't but view sex as an exchange. I was nice to you so you should have sex with me.They view it as pleasant activity for them her attraction to him or desire to have sex with him is irrelevant as long as she does what he wants.

 

Wrong. Men generally want sex as an end in itself, and always have. The act of persuading or seducing, being nice to a woman, is not an exchange. It's women who rarely have viewed sex as an end in itself historically, seeking to use it as part of an economic transaction, whether the consideration on the other end is "attention," "relationship," "marriage," "love," "shiny things," "trip," "drugs," "money," "power," "proximity to power, wealth, money." It wasn't too many decades ago that almost all women wouldn't trade sex for anything other than "marriage," or "money." It's heartening that more and more women are viewing sex as an end in itself, but the majority IME still view sex as specie to be traded for resources.

 

a convincing argument to why she should have sex with him when she didn't want to.

 

Whether a woman "wants to" or "doesn't want to" narrows the analysis simplistically. She can "not want" to have sex because she doesn't find the prospect attractive with a particular man, because she doesn't feel safe, or any other of a host of reasons, which is fine. Or she can "not want" to have sex due to there being little prospect in her getting -paid- in some way to do so. I contend that the latter reason is why most women, still in the year 2012, don't have more sex.

 

Now feminists have been preaching at us for decades that the female sex desire is every bit as intense as the man's, foreclosing the argument that she isn't -getting something- the pleasure of sex, whenever she chooses to have sex, or at least most times.

 

So the question remains, in an environment of supposed equal desire, why do a large number of women still treat sex as stock in trade, they get the pleasure of sex, yet still want some other thing too?

 

The answer to this is a question of supply and demand, I contend that in an environment or dating pool where lots of women receive the pleasure of sex, in itself, and are content with that, the other women in the pool will, over time, adjust their expectations of receiving "something more than sex." I believe this is the gradually emerging condition today.

 

The attitude "I only trade my precious p-ssy piggy bank for high dollar" is obviously a culturally fading attitude, a leftover "privilege" women had in the past, that like other archaic female privileges, many wanted to cling to unduly. Every day of the world p-ssy gets cheaper and cheaper, and when it gets cheap enough, via technology or whatever, women will no longer be able to get "more than" sexual pleasure when exchanging it.

 

Care to show where I characterized men as viewing women as mere holes?

 

You have characterized such and the equivalent on several occasions, in this thread and others, even though you use the word -may-, you do it lots, in essence implying or stating outright that the tendency of many men is to view women as mere vaginas or holes, that men only care about vaginas, not women as people, which may be how sociopaths and immature teenagers view people, but average, normal adults do not. I will not go back through your posts and dig up the several (at least) instances of this "view of men as lowest common denominator" in your posts, because I know it won't do a bit of good. Readers who want to are free to do that on their own.

[ThaWholigan]

The women who refuse to empathize with the situation many, many men are in are the real equivalent to a male predator looking to take women against their will. Neither consider the feelings of the other. While udolipixie will argue the legalism of this comparison (rofl), morally speaking willful inaction in the face of someone in extreme agony you can cure in 10 minutes is indeed just as bad as going out and being the cause of agony yourself.

 

Wait, what are you saying here?

 

Are you actually comparing women who won't sleep with men they have no attraction for to actual/potential rapists??