Pity sex

[dasein]

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.

 

If I had a female friend who was sexually frustrated due to whatever, and asked me for sex, if I found her repulsive to the point of not being able to function, I'd turn her down. Same with a gay friend, I'm not equipped to naturally satisfy those needs, and arguing that someone should do something repulsive to them, as several have done here is a gigantic strawman.

 

Otherwise, of course I'd have sex with her, go down on her, kiss her, whatever, as long as she understood there would be no emotional content, and that it would be a one time thing. I believe many, if not most men would do similarly. This is a function of basic human -compassion-, not responsibility, not pity, and if the above is the typical female attitude (and IME it definitely is) then why don't women have the same level of compassion towards their friends and acquaintances that the average man would?

 

I believe the answer why women don't feel compassion in this way is that it's their stock in trade and they find it offensive when its suggested that they should just give it away.

 

Now because sex is so easy for all but a tiny minority of women to get, the above is unheard of.

 

It's not a matter of responsibility, but compassion.

[Cypress25]

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?

 

Because for many women, sex without an emotional connection leaves them feeling empty and depressed. It's not satisfying or pleasurable for them. For these women, emotional intimacy is an essential part of sex; they can't enjoy sex without it.

 

I know, women and their pesky feelings. Life would be so much easier for men everywhere if women could just learn to ignore their emotions.

[johan]

What do you mean you're not equipped? You have the same equipment any other gay guy has. All you have to do is bend over. Out of a sense of comaraderie.

[Cypress25]

why don't women have the same level of compassion towards their friends and acquaintances that the average man would?

 

Because they find it repulsive to have pity sex with someone they are not attracted to. You described this feeling perfectly in your first paragraph. If they were not repulsed by it, they would probably do it.

 

I believe the answer why women don't feel compassion in this way is that it's their stock in trade and they find it offensive when its suggested that they should just give it away.

 

No, it's because engaging in pity sex would leave the woman feeling like crap because the whole experience is repulsive and degrading to her. No one wants to feel like that.

 

It's not a matter of responsibility, but compassion.

 

I might have compassion for a guy who is sexually frustrated, but I'm not going to sacrifice my own feelings for his temporary benefit. I'll sympathize with him, pat him on the back, reassure him that he'll find true love someday, but I'm not going to whore myself out just to make him feel better. My compassion only goes so far.

[AIDsFan1488]

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.[/Quote]

 

LOL! Ok GI Jane.

 

I'm just positive you've never had any male orbiters or friends who did uniquely masculine things to make you happy, even if it made them unhappy in some way.

 

Personal unhappiness of the ego for the happiness of the other = Altruism, sacrifice. Things that used to be considered beautiful in western civilization, even if they were also tragic at the same time (like the Homeric hero). Now number 1 is the only factor, I really am living in the wrong epoch.

 

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.[/Quote]

 

Ok, do you not see my point then?

 

How is sex so amazing and precious if at some point most modern women sleep with someone who doesn't care if you live or die (often times women still do it AFTER they find out, FYI), yet those very same women feign moral outrage at having sex with a man who is a real companion and genuinely cares about them, but is two inches shorter than she'd like or has the wrong hair color or whatever other stupid thing women nitpick about?

 

I'm not appealing to the LAW. I'm not appealing to EGO. I'm appealing to common sense and a sense of justice.

 

 

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.

 

I've been in numerous brutal fights and also am "horny and frustrated". I doubt you've ever been through either. I've fought groups of people, gone down and gotten relentlessly kicked in the face while on the ground where I was sure I was going to die.

 

I will tell you right now, that what I'm feeling at the moment is far more overwhelming and painful than that. I would rather get jumped 10 times than feel the pain of seeing skimpy dressed women who won't put out for "the likes" of me. You don't know what it feels like, what other males here attest it feels like, so you shouldn't opine.

 

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. [/Quote]

 

Actually, most men screw women they arent that attracted to all the time, and actually make an effort to do so.

 

I do not. But again if I had a person close to me in my life who would do anything for me, within natural reason, I would be at their bidding for anything. This isn't about helping a chick with boxes and asking for sex. This is about someone you've known for years who would do anything for you, and you not doing it back.

 

And don't come at me with the whole "you see women as sex objects" red herring. I don't, and if I do to an extent, it's definitely less than all the women who drench their panties when some guido that wears sunglasses indoors unbuttons his shirt and shows off his six pack.

 

Again, 2 different mindsets that will never get along Johan. I'm sick of going back and forth with you, it's like we're speaking two different languages and it's impossible for you to see things from my point of view.

 

I'm also not ugly betty, I'm a normal looking guy who in better times would be womankinds ideal.

[dasein]

@ johan I'm not physiologically or psychologically equipped to respond to a male body, and once again, no one is suggesting people do things they find unsavory. No one is suggesting someone do something they wouldn't otherwise do under different circumstances. And sure, if women or men feel an emotional danger in showing such compassion to a friend, they shouldn't do it.

 

And moreover, to preempt, I'm not suggesting this be the standard of conduct, but the question is why is it almost never done? Why has no woman (or I missed it if they did), stepped forward and said, "yes, I have done such on occasion, NBD?" The answer IMO revolves around compassion and stock in trade.

[dasein]

No, it's because engaging in pity sex would leave the woman feeling like crap because the whole experience is repulsive and degrading to her. No one wants to feel like that.

 

The shopkeeper feels "degraded" when they don't sell their wares high enough.

 

My compassion only goes so far.

 

Based on your prior post, your compassion ends when -your- desires do. That's really not what I'd call "compassion."

[johan]

I would also say it's about respect. Women prefer to respect the guys they hang out with, even just as friends. If she is seriously is faced with the choice of handing out "pity sex", then there is no respect. Doing it would be like giving in and mutually acknowledging he's pathetic and willing to settle for anything. She would want more for a guy she actually cares at all about. The alternative would be to do it, then think less of him afterwards, even to the extent that the relationship could not continue.

[Badsingularity]

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)

 

Women are attracted to strength, inner confidence, and fearlessness.

 

There are men who possess these traits that are scum bags, but because he has these traits women will still feel strongly attracted to him. They can't help it. It is not a choice for them.

 

This should answer you question as to why women sleep with bad men.

 

There is good news though. Good men can develope these traits too.

[AIDsFan1488]

I remember reading about a 15 year old boy in England who was dying of cancer. His dying wish was to know what sex felt like before he died. Some male doctors and a male nurse that had connected with him snuck him out of his hospice one night and took him to a prostitute, they were reprimanded, I think one of them even lost their job, but I know they think it was worth it .

 

But then I read the comments, all from females displaying different degrees of disgust and outrage. The best comments were women saying "why couldn't the boy just have found a girl in the same situation and slept with her?" as if it's as simple as that. The other women were all applauding the dismissal and hell the men involved went through to do it, sex isn't a "right" even if you're dying and just want to feel an integral part of the human experience just once .

 

And you know what, if the people saying that stuff were all nuns or women who waited until marriage for sex, I'd be a little bothered but still have respect for them. But the reality is the same women who say stuff like that, are the same ones who will **** Charlie Sheen for a bag of blow. That is what infuriates me about these hypocritical women, they don't think sex is special or divine, they think sex is a trophy men win by pursuing money or working out 3 hours at the gym every day.

 

We're never going to understand one another, men and women, so just legalize prostitution, regulate it, and make it cheaper to buy for working class men. Or atleast just legalize it. We'll go our own ways and no man will ask you for "pity sex" ever again!

[Badsingularity]

Also 1488. The reasons you bend over backwards and do all these things for women is because you want something from them. Not because you truely care about them, because if that were the case you would not be so angry that they will not have sex with you. You may not be able to see this right now, but it is most likely true. Whether it be female attetion, approval, or sex. Women can feel when this is happening and it turns them off.

[AIDsFan1488]

I would also say it's about respect. Women prefer to respect the guys they hang out with, even just as friends. If she is seriously is faced with the choice of handing out "pity sex", then there is no respect. Doing it would be like giving in and mutually acknowledging he's pathetic and willing to settle for anything. She would want more for a guy she actually cares at all about. The alternative would be to do it, then think less of him afterwards, even to the extent that the relationship could not continue.

 

 

A woman who respects a man wouldn't be with him all the time and talk with him for hours a day, then go **** another guy.

 

Give me a break. A lot of women with awful taste in men deep down inside don't respect the guys they have sex with.

 

Women are attracted to strength, inner confidence, and fearlessness.

 

There are men who possess these traits that are scum bags, but because he has these traits women will still feel strongly attracted to him. They can't help it. It is not a choice for them.

 

This should answer you question as to why women sleep with bad men.

 

There is good news though. Good men can develope these traits too. [/Quote]

 

I already have all those traits, and have had them since I was little. But guess what? Women have to be apt to get to know you before they can see those traits. My problem isn't seducing women after they like me, my problem is getting my foot in the door, which is almost impossible no matter what I do. Women just aren't attracted to me at first glance, and that seems to be the extent of which women decide whether a man is dateable or not.

[dasein]

Because for many women, sex without an emotional connection leaves them feeling empty and depressed. It's not satisfying or pleasurable for them. For these women, emotional intimacy is an essential part of sex; they can't enjoy sex without it.

 

Yet women very regularly trade sex for attention, drugs, power, proximity to power money wealth, super hot guys with no emotional connection, etc. as I posted prior without any visible ill emotional effects at all. Are you claiming that all these women suffer feelings of emptiness and depression? I disagree.

 

For many women, if what they get in exchange is worth enough, really hot, rich, powerful or close to such, all the emotional intimacy claptrap seems to go right out the window. Why aren't -those- women who are capable of separating sex from emotions more compassionate towards their friends and acquaintances? Stock... in... trade.

[johan]

@ johan I'm not physiologically or psychologically equipped to respond to a male body, and once again, no one is suggesting people do things they find unsavory. No one is suggesting someone do something they wouldn't otherwise do under different circumstances. And sure, if women or men feel an emotional danger in showing such compassion to a friend, they shouldn't do it. .

 

This isn't about psychological equipment. And a gay guy would probably say you have all he needs physiologically. You have the same equipment he has.

 

My point is the way you feel about that idea is pretty much how a woman who isn't attracted to you feels. She's just as ill equipped psychologically and physiologically. She won't get wet. She won't get turned on. She won't enjoy it. She's likely to be pretty pissed off about it all when it's over, even if she did submit to the idea up front. She's going to feel violated and bad about herself. You won't see much of her anymore.

[AIDsFan1488]

Also 1488. The reasons you bend over backwards and do all these things for women is because you want something from them. Not because you truely care about them, because if that were the case you would not be so angry that they will not have sex with you. You may not be able to see this right now, but it is most likely true. Whether it be female attetion, approval, or sex. Women can feel when this is happening and it turns them off.

 

No, I would still do those things if they were virgins or nuns and did not ever want to have sex with absolutely no problem. It's not just the sex, it's the idea. If it were just about sex, then I wouldn't do anything for anyone, I act the same way with my male friends (who I will fight with to the death), my family, and even a stranger I see getting victimized, I dont want to plug these people...

 

What enrages me is that they will put out for some guy that would have them bend over and **** through a mailslot at his front door so as not to deal with her before or after, and then moralize about how special and not-for-anyone sex is with me.

[Badsingularity]

 

 

 

I already have all those traits, and have had them since I was little. But guess what? Women have to be apt to get to know you before they can see those traits. My problem isn't seducing women after they like me, my problem is getting my foot in the door, which is almost impossible no matter what I do.

 

Women can feel and see these traits in a man. They can see it in his body language and feel it in his presence.

 

A women will often feel strongly attracted to a man who truly has these traits even if he is only average looking.

[AIDsFan1488]

Yet women very regularly trade sex for attention, drugs, power, proximity to power money wealth, super hot guys with no emotional connection, etc. as I posted prior without any visible ill emotional effects at all. Are you claiming that all these women suffer feelings of emptiness and depression? I disagree.

 

For many women, if what they get in exchange is worth enough, really hot, rich, powerful or close to such, all the emotional intimacy claptrap seems to go right out the window. Why aren't -those- women who are capable of separating sex from emotions more compassionate towards their friends and acquaintances? Stock... in... trade.

 

Said better than I ever could

 

I wonder how women will respond to this?

[dasein]

This isn't about psychological equipment.

 

Stop, it was a complete strawman when you brought it in and even moreso now when you won't simply drop it. No one is talking about having sex with someone outside their orientation, it isn't pertinent to the discussion here, and has been handily answered.

[johan]

A woman who respects a man wouldn't be with him all the time and talk with him for hours a day, then go **** another guy.

 

If she's just using the guy she hangs out with, then you're right. She doesn't respect him. And that makes it even less likely he'll ever get her into bed. If it's a friend she actually cares about, then what I said is still true.

 

Give me a break. A lot of women with awful taste in men deep down inside don't respect the guys they have sex with.

.

 

They only have to respect those guys more than they respect themselves. But that's still more than they would ever respect a guy they had to give pity sex to.

[johan]

Stop, it was a complete strawman when you brought it in and even moreso now when you won't simply drop it. No one is talking about having sex with someone outside their orientation, it isn't pertinent to the discussion here, and has been handily answered.

 

Stop?! Now that you've said that that's the last thing I'm going to do. Maybe you should stop. You respond to me, I respond to you. That's how it works. If you don't like it, maybe an internet forum isn't the place for you.

 

And as far as I'm concerned, you can stick your "strawman" up your ass.

 

A guy a woman isn't attracted to is definitely "outside her orientation". It's a valid comparison, if you consider the physiological response she's having to the guy. As soon as you tell me you'll find a way to enjoy having a gay guy have his way with you, I'll say a woman can find a way to enjoy "pity sex."

 

Don't take it from me. There happen to be women right here on the board who can confirm or deny.

[dasein]

I would also say it's about respect. Women prefer to respect the guys they hang out with, even just as friends.

 

Some women may see it that way, but IMO that would be really immature. Her friend wants something that she could easily give, has a hard time getting it via normal means, and her giving it would be easy and painless for her to do, maybe even very pleasant. Where are the grounds for disrespect in that?

 

But if a woman did feel disrespect in that case, of course she shouldn't do it. The question remains though, for women who wouldn't feel such disrespect, why is the notion itself so outlandish? I've already answered it via the storekeeper analogy, stock in trade.

 

That many, many women view their p-ssy as a piggy bank is really not that controversial a statement. It's the natural state of many female animals to trade sexual access for resources, and this has been true of humans for eons. Saying otherwise flies in the face of settled anthropology. My question though, is why more women don't use their big human brains to counteract that biological imperative?

 

Where is the woman who will step up and say she has done this in the past and it was NBD? Why is the concept so outlandish and offensive to women? Stock in trade.

[Jane2011]

Haven't read the whole thread, but got some skims of a few posts in. Yes, it'd be disgusting to have sex with someone I'm not attracted to. I went on a date around New Year's Eve with a guy who I wasn't attracted to, and I actually french-kissed him out of pity. And I was disgusted with myself after. Seriously. I was just like...ugh. Why? Why did I do that? He texted me the next day, and I was just disgusted looking at the text alert on my phone. I can't even imagine actually having sex with him even if he was nice and 'deserved' to get laid.

[dasein]

And as far as I'm concerned, you can stick your "strawman" up your ass.

 

Oh, no, post whatever you like, regardless of how mindlessly supplicating, irrational, and fallacious it may be. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. Readers can certainly decide for themselves. Everyone has the right to make themselves look ridiculous here. I have it and you have it.

[johan]

In my experience, if you're doing something for someone out of pity, it's because they are helpless. If you do it for a puppy or a kitten or a disabled person, respect isn't a factor. You understand it couldn't be any other way for them. If you do it for a fully grown, perfectly capable adult, then respect vanishes and they become someone you detest.

 

When it comes to friends this matters. If a friend asks me to do something I know they are perfectly able to do themselves, I get irritated. If they feign helplessness, that pisses me off. The lst thing I need is to have an adult child hanging around.

[johan]

Oh, no, post whatever you like, regardless of how mindlessly supplicating, irrational, and fallacious it may be. Didn't mean to imply otherwise. Readers can certainly decide for themselves. Everyone has the right to make themselves look ridiculous here. I have it and you have it.

 

I absolutely will. I only post irrational, fallacious things when I'm drunk or goofing around. You seem to want to have the final word on what is a valid statement. Maybe some people would trust your judgment. But I'm planning to decide for myself. I'll let the rest of LS decide for themselves as well.

 

As far as having the right to make themselves look ridiculous, I agree. And every time you use the word "strawman" you exercise it.

 

If you don't like my point, saying so is sufficient.

 

As far as pity sex goes, I don't know how a grown man could even live with himself if he considered it. Why not also write up a "will work for food sign" and stand in the rain at an intersection. Sign up for welfare and go home and play computer games. Just give up on yourself completely.

Edited March 31, 2012 by johan