....it appears that their bodies want, well, anything. Literally. Read on:Now fast-forward to today. This research appears in a book that re-asserts the finding that women's sexuality is much more likely to be freaky than that of men who, for all our faults as a sex, possess a more comparatively straightforward sexuality. Which is all well and good, and I'm happy to test social science evidence against received conventional wisdom and perhaps adjust what I think to be true. But what got my attention, and the reason why I thought this DM article claiming that women were just was "animal" as men worthy of a blog-post, is how red pill the author's conclusions are. To wit:
No matter what their self-proclaimed sexual orientation, [the female subjects] showed, on the whole, strong and swift genital arousal when the screen offered men with men, women with women and women with men. They responded objectively much more to the exercising woman than to the strolling man, and their blood flow rose quickly — and markedly, though to a lesser degree than during all the human scenes except the footage of the ambling, strapping man — as they watched the apes. And with the women, especially the straight women, mind and genitals seemed scarcely to belong to the same person. The readings from the plethysmograph and the keypad weren’t in much accord. During shots of lesbian coupling, heterosexual women reported less excitement than their vaginas indicated; watching gay men, they reported a great deal less; and viewing heterosexual intercourse, they reported much more. Among the lesbian volunteers, the two readings converged when women appeared on the screen. But when the films featured only men, the lesbians reported less engagement than the plethysmograph recorded. Whether straight or gay, the women claimed almost no arousal whatsoever while staring at the bonobos.Now contrast this with the results from the guys:
Males who identified themselves as straight swelled while gazing at heterosexual or lesbian sex and while watching the masturbating and exercising women. They were mostly unmoved when the screen displayed only men. Gay males were aroused in the opposite categorical pattern. Any expectation that the animal sex would speak to something primitive within the men seemed to be mistaken; neither straights nor gays were stirred by the bonobos.It's hard to know where to start with the results of this ongoing study. For the men knew what aroused them: straight men only by pictures of women, homosexual men only by pictures of other men. And no men were aroused by images of bonobo sex.
This was not the case however with women in this study, whose bodies were aroused by pretty much everything as long as it had some sensual quality to it. Thus images of women masturbating, of two men making out, of male-female coupling, of lesbian lovin', and chimp porn all got women's engines revving. Regardless of their reported sexual orientation.
'Sexuality is a potentially anarchic force, and it is comforting to believe that - innately - half the population, the female half, is at least comparatively civilized when it comes to sex. It is soothing to believe that women are genetically scripted to serve as a stabilizing force,' he said.With that, Victorian blue-pill "just-so" conventional wisdom about the nature of men and women suffered yet another body blow. The notion that female sexuality is somehow more pure and innocent and controlled than men's runs smack into these findings that claim exactly the opposite.. Only one of these assertions can be true, and I suspect that the social science data is closer to actual truth than not.
...he added that many women were in denial about what they found to be a turn on. 'The plethysmograph was showing lots of arousal when women were telling Chivers they didn't feel turned on at all,'
Furthermore, that the author claims women are in denial about what arouses them only serves to buttress the manosphere advice to completely disregard what women say they want, and instead watch what they actually do, and behave accordingly.
Last, and this isn't necessarily red-pill per se, but an implication of these findings is that perhaps the ancients knew what they were doing when they invested leadership authority in men, and also in keeping the female libido under wraps for the good of their societies.