Pity sex doesn't exist. So, no, men don't have pity sex. But neither do women.
The whole concept is just a rationalization. A way for women to justify sleeping with someone they probably don't want to have a relationship with.
Its like the "beer goggle" theory. That if you drink enough beers, an ugly duckling starts looking like a swan. Many a dude has explained away a poor life choice by using the "beer goggle" defense.
Let's be honest, most of us are attracted to multiple types of people, and when the lights are out, what feels good matters more than what everyone agrees looks sexy. "Beer Goggles" suggests that a man has had so much to drink, the booze suddenly, magically, makes a woman look physically different. That's bull, of course. The beer just makes it easier to the dude not to care what his friends think. He has less inhibitions, is less susceptible to peer pressure, and wants to get nizzz-asty with the whoever it is makes his manhood give a standing ovation. Crying "beer goggles" the next day is a form of cover.
But back to "pity sex." Unless you're sleeping with The Elephant Man, you're not having "pity sex." You're just inflating your ego by lying to yourself about your motivations. You want to sleep with a dude, but you don't want to date him, see him again, or acknowledge he exists. Oh, you playa. If you don't want to have sex with a person, you don't have sex with them. Have you ever really had sex with someone you really, really didn't want to? It's gross. You can fake an orgasm, but it's impossible to fake zero sexual attraction. Unless you're well-stocked up on lube, and have a serial killer's propensity for putting on an act. "Pity sex" is just a term women use to explain to their friends at brunch why they banged that guy with the mustache.
Men don't have "pity sex." Neither do women. Own who you bang. Don't make excuses.
Nope. You are very wrong. Plenty of women have sex because they think they "should" or "have to" rather than because they actually want to. It shouldn't happen, but it does, especially when we're young. Your reasoning is ludicrous: do you really think that without sexual arousal a vagina is a sand-caked leather sack? No. Why the hell do you think they invented panty liners? Do you really think all or even most guys care enough to read past the yes? "Wait, I know you said ok, but I see some doubt in your eyes?" Please. It's even worse with oral sex. No orgasm to fake, and he can't even see your face. This happened to me many times. I don't blame the guy, I blame myself, and being taught that only a freak wouldn't love sex and want it all the time. I was relieved when I found out it happened to others too. I don't know if you are right about guys, but as regards at least some women you are way off base on this answer.
Oh pity sex happens. In college, I knew a guy who was very nice but physically unattractive. We became friends and I found out he was a virgin and had never had a girlfriend before. After seeing him get snubbed by several girls at a party, I decided to "cheer him up." It was the saddest sex of my life and it was unfair to both of us, but it was by no means hard to fake. All it takes is a little genital stimulation.
That first comment is ridiculous. Pity sex is not the same as just flat out not standing up for yourself and what you want or don't want to do. That's called a pushover.
As for the second comment, I believe you're doing what this guy was talking about. If you weren't attracted at all then you wouldn't of done anything at all with the guy. You had to have seen some kind of redeeming quality, or maybe you just wanted to get off.
Just own up, no one forces you to do anything unless it's by physical force.
You're right, what I described isn't really "pity sex". But John said "If you don't want to have sex with a person, you don't have sex with them." and stated it is physically impossible to have sex with someone without wanting to. He broadened the statement beyond "pity sex", and he is flat out wrong.
There's nothing to "own up." I'm not ashamed of having sex with that guy, and I have no problem "getting off." Pity sex, like drunk sex, is not an excuse.
The point I was trying to make is that pity sex, sex with someone you otherwise would never have considered had you not felt sorry for them, exists.
John is wrong is stating that sex is impossible without physical attraction. I feel his view is a bit egotistical. No man wants to accept that a woman only slept with him out of pity, and so he reasons that if he got laid, it MUST be because the woman really is into him.
In a way, John perfectly answered the asker's question: Men don't have pity sex because the concept of it escapes them. If a man feels sorry for a woman he is not attracted to, he gives her a pat on the shoulder and a pint of beer.
Sex is something that is willfully given. I don't care what your motivation is, if you go to bed with a guy, you're choosing to do it. Call it what you want. I think a lot of women get off on the concept of "pity sex." It gives them cover, and makes them feel superior to the men benefiting from their... charity.
But it's still a form of self-deception. You're still banging it out with someone you look down on, don't want to be seen with, or just aren't interested in. No one is forcing you, save for your ego.
I'll also add that if a woman has sex with a man because she's pressured to do so isn't having "pity sex." No woman should ever feel she "has to" or "should" have sex with a man. Never feel obligated or bullied into doing anything you don't want to do.
I never said anything about being forced. Of course sex is a choice. I chose to have pity sex, I'm not denying it. But is it really fair to judge so harshly on someone who does it?
Everyone has felt bad for someone before, be it friend, classmate, relative. Shit happens. And usually, you try to comfort them, whether it's buying them lunch and letting them talk out their problems, or something simple and small as a hug. It's not about feeling superior. It's not about ego. Perhaps it's "charity" but it boils down to good intentions and a desire to comfort.
I'm not advocating pity sex. It's misguided well-meaning, but often ends up more cruel than anything. Like I said before, it's unfair to both parties involved. But it does happen.
BTW, if you bang someone you look down on or don't want to be seen with, you're using them as a sex tool and/or booty call and that is an entirely different matter.
I disagree with that statement "Everyone has felt bad for someone before, be it friend, classmate, relative. Shit happens. And usually, you try to comfort them, whether it's buying them lunch and letting them talk out their problems, or something simple and small as a hug. It's not about feeling superior. It's not about ego. Perhaps it's "charity" but it boils down to good intentions and a desire to comfort. " Feeling bad for someone and having sex with them IS NOT THE SAME as buying them a sandwich, or a simple hug.
And I agree. Pity sex isn't letting someone make you feel bad or pressured into doing it.
Maybe I'm just not getting the point. But I really don't know anyone who would be like "Oh hey, you're not getting laid. I feel bad so here ya go, have a go at me."
Ya, I'm going to have to go with Reformed on this one. The thought of "pity sex" is just (no offense) stupid. I guess I see it the same as Reformed pretty much down to the "t". If a person would have sex with someone simply because they feel like the owe it to a person then I'm sorry to inform you but you need to grow a backbone. Saying that I pity fucked someone is like saying " I was toucing myself last night and I told myself I didnt want it, but I know I did" You have sex with someone because you want to get laid. Plain and simple, and for those ladies out there that "pity fuck" then tone the ego down a bit, you really thing that if you don't have sex with him that he's going to look at it like it's the end of the world?