TL:DR - Big data from almost half a billion people on the internet searching sex uncovers TRP truths and then some more, at least for me.

I just finished reading "A billion wicked thoughts". The study they did could very well be the largest human experiment ever given the sheer size of the internet user base they got their data from. To quote "...Ogas and Gaddam analyze a billion wicked thoughts on the Internet: a billion Web searches, a million individual search histories, a million erotic stories, a half-million erotic videos, a million Web sites, millions of online personal ads, and many other enormous sources of sexual data in order to understand the true differences between male and female desires...."

To get an idea how big is big data, I have in my life never seen a book where the list of references is so huge it forms the last 40-50\% of the entire book! I thought I was halfway through as per my reader, but it turned out to be the bibliography*!*

Apart from confirming every RP truth out there, it also throws up some interesting stuff I didn't notice earlier. Note, the authors are neuroscientists and not psychologists, which means that while they may not see face to face cases, their approach to the subject is entirely analytical. It's worth pointing that while a single coin's toss is unpredictable, large sample sizes quickly converge to a neat pattern of 50% heads and 50% tails and that applies to anything in nature despite individual variations.

There's a lot of resistance towards studying aspects of feminine sexual nature out there - especially from women, who hate being analyzed and put up all sorts of DEER walls in response. They'd rather be experienced and felt. This tendency of the feminine to conceal itself is in built. But then the nature of female sexuality kind of mandates this.

Women's breasts are getting larger and men's testosterone levels are dropping - this means estrogen levels are increasing. Those damned xenoestrogens are real! Personally, I wonder something that can screw with hormones and personality like contraception also has a secondary impact.

In women, there is a distinct disconnect between psychological and physical arousal - in men never. This might come as a surprise to men, but women have compartmentalization and cognitive dissonance built into their brains.

Sometimes this is a shit test, sometimes it's a lie, but in many cases this is a very real phenomenon - it's why the consent issue has been blown up like this, and why the process of attraction and escalation is such a big thing. The psychological aspect of her arousal is very conscious and has everything to do with the man's SMV, a huge variety of cues from both the man and even the environment and prevailing society around, all meant to serve a plethora of different needs, and the whole rollercoaster of drama and emotions before actually getting to the sex, and even there it's more about the feels, even if female orgasms are enormous. Getting these two aligned is what the whole process of attraction is about. When certain drugs that inhibited conscious processing of emotion were given to women as anti-depressants, it also resulted in their libidos surging and a substantial reduction of the body-mind disconnect.

Basically, a confirmation of the basic truth that men's sex drive is fundamentally proactive, while women's is mostly reactive.

Therefore behaviour alone is ultimately the best test of character and you can never totally trust a female.

This also confirms that women can love a partner without the sex being a priority while this is impossible for men.

Men by contrast are far more visual and physical and get straight to the sex, while there are huge passionate emotions involved for men, we all know what follows what. In women it's the other way around.

The data analysis confirms that women are hungry for alpha seed (and briefly polyamorous) and more masculine men in their ovulating phase - this is probably the only time when hypergamy and polygamy can be in sync. At other times, they and prefer more provider and caring behaviours. Women ruminate long over emotions and dynamics and play detective to see how that influences the relationship - the side effect of this however creates fluctuations, fears and insecurities that lead to women having more emotional issues than men.

Testosterone and masculinity on the other hand, has a tendency to get into feedback loops - confidence --> more testosterone --> more confidence --> more success --> even more confidence --> even more testosterone. Negative feedback can decrease it the same way. In fact in certain species of monkeys, an alpha who loses his confidence can lose so much testosterone that it significantly alters bright regions on his body that indicate his status and dominance.

And then this -- Fan fiction is dominated by women! 90\% of FF writers are women. And speaking of stories, it's surprising to know the size the book market occupied by romance for women. The book concludes what we know all along - the needs of men and women are based on very different biological survival criteria.

A lot of our sexual preferences are encoded by experiences during the early adolescent years.

Women want exclusivity much more than men do, in the sense that their definitions of 'exclusivity' are quite different - men can want many women, but they do want their women to themselves. Women want a man only for her alone. The part I wasn't aware of really is just how much. Women's reaction to men watching porn or dread, or even reading about sex is very different from men's - because the feels are as important as the physical reality - they react like they've been cheated on - this has happened to me personally with my ex, over a sidebar book. Women also hate porn because it's almost never in feminine first person, nor can it capture the psychological dimension she needs very well. This reaction happens even though logically we are all aware of just where all we get our 'sex-ed' from and how much we're influenced by the external environment. Men have no issues with women reading romance novels, which is literally psychological porn for women (and might even use them to find and test several ideas), but when cheating happens in reality, then it's like a total trust violation (which is another term for rape). Overall, men are more grounded in physical reality and not emotional reality.

Testosterone means the male sex drive is always on or in the background and needs next to nothing to wake up and arouse itself to orgasm - even the sight of a beautiful woman will do it. But women actually have an off button and many many on buttons, a synergy of which kicks it off. The book was mainly about exploring sexual triggers and areas of interest.

A woman's opinion of her worth and desirability is extremely important to her arousal and experience of sex. They have an urge to feel desired and validated. Being irresistibly desirable, especially by an alpha can turn her on. Feelings of unworthiness can kill her drive and her attraction. Men's egos and drives usually take care of this for them, but if a man has forgotten what naturally masculine means, a man's opinion of himself can totally affect the attraction process critical to a female's psychological arousal.

There's a whole chapter titled "Women love alphas". Romance novel heroes are the stuff of hypergamy's wet dream (and even the heroes AND villains of all good movies - in some cases, purely on SMV, the bad guy can and often does have more SMV than the heroes, until he is on the verge of defeat) . They are always extraordinarily badass, intelligent, competent, creative, never buckle under pressure, have ridiculous situational awareness and high value and zero clownish behaviors. High social value and professions are a further asset.

There isn't a romance story ever that was all about the daily mundanity of living, if there is one, there must be a major splash of spice somewhere for sure.

Women can be attracted to desirable men (pre-selection), but ultimately want him for herself. For women, the love affair climaxes when after all the drama, she's secured her partner's love exclusively for her ever after. Even the orgasms and the kiss and the sex, as amazing as it is for women, is still subservient to this goal in mind. Sex is not the climax of a relationship for a woman, even if it seemingly appears to be in some stories - what it really means is that it's sealing the fact that she's got him for her and has fun for a while.

And so comes the obvious -- Happily ever after, soulmates, twin flames (and all that poetry BS), monogamy, oneitis, etc...etc... you name every BP idea is a feminine invention, for defining the climax of a relationship in a feminine experience, and we are far more influenced by the feminine than we're aware of. Many popular stories have been written and innumerable movies have been made with a decidedly feminine slant (because Briffault's Law) in their climax. Men can be conditioned to want monogamy, and oneitis is a real thing if you're not aware of RP and hook up an emotional hose, but men's sex drives and thoughts do not lie.

EDIT (My point) : A hot staple of romance stories are the ones with star crossed lovers, who don't get to stay with each other at the end, but there's hope! Sometimes it's a tragedy where death is involved, but regardless, it basically leaves the woman pining for her man. Love in separation is intense, it goes to show just how important dread, wanting and chasing is to a woman. Fan Fiction goes wild with stories like this.

Men want to love women, take women for themselves, get her to respond positively and submit to him (how she treats and responds to him and enjoys him is a huge arousal cue), fuck and have orgasms ever after. Sex IS the climax of the story for a man, and unlike women, not just once, every day. Even a marriage or declarations of love happen in a plot, is never the end of a story in a man's mind.

The end goal for men IS the sex and love. The end goal of a woman is to secure that love for her exclusively. And then it will be about her children. Considering biology, it makes perfect sense.

Every woman wants to feel that an alpha has a soft side which only she can conquer, (but if she does, it's downhill from there).

One may therefore describe a marriage as 'post climax' for a woman by default, while for a man it's the beginning of another phase. It means a man never climaxes in a relationship for too long, before he goes for it again. A woman however would climax at the point of securing love for her. This is why nearly all happy endings go like "She secured his love, and they went happily ever after." - because that's the peak. That means if the female actually succeeds in her climax, the betaization process is almost inevitable, the only way to prevent it is to enforce separation and dread and variety, keep her chasing and winning you again and again.

Female fantasies and male fantasies are quite complementary to each other. Now regarding fantasies, people do a lot of stuff in the freedom of their fantasies that they wouldn't dare do in physical reality as soon as consequences and limitations are involved - sexual fantasies are no different. Besides, even in cheating fantasies, the one fantasizing is the script writer so that kind of makes the whole perspective sollipsistic. Hence fantasies aren't the test of how personalities will behave in real life. Nevertheless let's not forget that the world exists because of our attempts to recreate our fantasies in real life. This kind of confirmed another thing -- Contraception seems to have fundamentally altered women's personalities by removing the concept of consequences for sex and changing their hormonal profiles.

Anger, thrills, and danger significantly influence passion and by extension, both male and female arousal.

Now I must add I skipped the whole homsexuality section as it has no relevance to me (personally I find it squicky even) - but I did take a point away that it is much more common than it seems. The experiment also identifies some women to be more masculine than others with more testosterone in their systems, which in fact translates into a higher sex drive, but also more masculine, lesbian and even bisexual behaviours - which kind of confirms that many feminists and female leaders are often decidedly less feminine and attractive in both appearance and behaviour, while still very much women all the same.

The book concludes wondering that if it weren't for attraction, the male and female would be two totally different species with opposite characteristics that can be complementary, but also opposing and conflicting. Nevertheless, humanity survived because that grand canyon can be bridged (an indirect reference to frame).

EDIT : As expected, psychology today has an article trying to claim NAHALT for it, that people who use the internet for sex are somehow not the same as people who don't (umm, who hasn't used the internet for sex?) but concedes that ultimately it's very hard to argue with the data. The hamster just cannot conceive defeat.