(brought to you from Heartiste)

I've honestly heard many blue pilled people say that women have an equal amount of libido to men when it comes to causal sex, even pointing to laughable victorian era concepts of women's insane lust. But just like feminists and their fat "fertility goddess" I just don't buy it.

Psychology Today article that basically says TRP is spot on:

https://www.psychologytoday.com/blog/sexual-personalities/201706/would-you-agree-sex-total-stranger

Lots of great quotes here for discussion:

Around 75 percent of men agreed to have sex with a complete stranger, whereas no women (0 percent) agreed to sex with a complete stranger. In terms of effect size, this is one of the largest sex differences ever discovered in psychological science (Hyde, 2005).

Guéguen (2011) had experimental confederates of various levels of physical attractiveness actually approach real-life strangers and ask if they would have sex. He found 83 percent of men agreed to have sex with a highly attractive woman, whereas only 3 percent of women agreed to have sex with a highly attractive man. Among confederates of average attractiveness, 60 percent of men agreed to sex with a woman of average attractiveness, but no woman (0 percent) agreed to sex with a man of average attractiveness.

The idea that women are open to average men as much as men are open to average women is laughable. 83 to 60 is honestly not that big a difference for men, as both are above 50%. For women, 3 to 0 is also insignificant. This means that a man needs personality/game (or "confidence" as women put it, because that is all they see) more than anything else.

(Gangestad & Simpson, 2000) men of high physical attractiveness are most able to successfully pursue a short-term sexual strategy (physical attractiveness fulfills women's evolved preferential short-term mating desires).

sex differences in agreeing to sex with strangers are not just a matter of safety issues, pregnancy concerns, slut-shaming stigma, or disease avoidance. Controlling for all of that, researchers still find large sex differences in willingness to have sex with a stranger.

nearly all studies ever conducted have found men have more positive attitudes toward casual sex than women, have more unrestricted sociosexuality than women, and generally relax their preferences in short-term mating contexts (whereas women increase selectivity, especially for physical attractiveness).

and men are less likely than women to regret short-term sex or “hook-ups.”

cock carousel has its price. Good thing women's concept of friendship is basically just enabling anything they hear to promote solidarity through affirming validation.

Many of these sex differences are culturally-universal, having been observed in dozens and dozens of samples all around the world (Lippa, 2009; Schmitt, 2005).

AWALT, bitches.

Schmitt (2015) found sex differences in the sociosexuality scale item "I can imagine myself being comfortable and enjoying ‘casual’ sex with different partners” were largest in nations with most egalitarian sex role socialization and greatest sociopolitical gender equity (i.e., least patriarchy, such as in Scandinavia). This is exactly the opposite of what we would expect if patriarchy and sex role socialization are the prime culprits behind sex differences in consenting to sex with strangers.

reducing patriarchy doesn't make these and most other psychological sex differences go away, it makes them larger (Schmitt, 2015).

Within the highly attractive celebrities condition, Conley (2011) found women were much more likely to agree to a brief sexual encounter with a high-profile celebrity (e.g., Brad Pitt, Johnny Depp) compared with an unknown stranger, but men were relatively unaffected by a stranger's celebrity status

celebrity findings confirm the view that women's (but not men's) short-term mating psychology is specially designed to obtain good genes from physically attractive partners (Thornhill & Gangestad, 2008).

As evolutionary psychologists have pointed out, women in their 20s generally prefer older partners as short-term mates compared to men (Buunk, Dijkstra, Kenrick, & Warntjes, 2001), and women tend to find already-mated prospective partners especially attractive (Parker & Burkley, 2009).

the Conley (2011) research method was highly contrived to provide a special set of conditions within which men and women would appear not to differ in choosing to agree to casual sex

Blue Pill attempts at minimizing differences are laughable. Science does not care about your ridiculously dogmatic ideology. Men and women are NOT equal, and never will be.

women who are nearing ovulation and are already in relationships with asymmetrical and submissive partners being more likely to consent to sex with extremely attractive men (Pillsworth & Haselton, 2006),

Beta Bux, Alpha Fux. Basically the only instance where I believe a woman's lust is reliably greater than a man is when she is dating a super beta, but is revved up after meeting alpha men.

this is the key point of the Conley (2011) study...it takes Johnny Depp to get women to even consider agreeing to casual sex. For men, the difference between agreeing to sex with Jennifer Lopez versus a complete and total stranger was minimal.

Loltastic.