Roosh recently decided, after great experience with women of all kinds, that female sexual behavior can’t really be described by evopsych. Because condoms and such.
I’ll do ya a way easier proof. Watch and learn, kids.
There are people who are really into rubber. I don’t mean a little bit, I mean that in the sense that “the internet is a big, strange world”. The wiki is fairly tame if you need context. Rubber clothing is a very recent development in human history. This contradicts the fundamental premise of sexual evopsych. QED by counterexample.
I see some of you looking for holes. The obvious counterargument is that the rubber fetish is merely a perversion of a natural instinct. This is self-refuting: a perversion is still a strong influence on sexual behavior not explained by evopsych. A less obvious counterargument is that fetishism is a general phenomenon described by evopsych, and rubber fetishism is merely one particular artifact. I actually don’t have a concise response to that at the moment, except to point out that this is another symptom of the explosion principle. Maybe I’ll leave that one to the reader.
In any case, the reader is probably wondering how this affects them, and whether this post will have any interesting and enlightening content. I have something for that too.
Consider a person who has a formative sexual experience while smelling something in particular. Perhaps it’s the loss of their virginity. It is not at all surprising to us when this person later becomes immediately aroused at the smell, because smell is strongly connected to memory. But smells don’t always have such a strong recall effect as this, so why is this? It seems that formative sexual experiences create a highly impressionable state of mind, from which we blindly draw very strong associations.
I strongly suspect these associations are where we get fetishes and such. I also think that normal, healthy formative sexual experiences will tend to normalize sexuality, because a person who lacks these healthy experiences still has a mind and body that are trying to transition from one stage to the next. So say a 20-year-old has not lost his virginity- his body and mind will take any vaguely sexual experience as an excuse to force the transition, which is way behind schedule. Then maybe the innocent act of wearing an animal costume for some activity- which normally is only a fun activity and only a vaguely erotic for psychosexually normal folks- could actually corrupt them in a fundamental way.
That’s just an example though, kinks in particular seem to be set in stone much, much earlier in life. There are a lot of things that are vaguely sexual that are overwritten in puberty by normal formative sexual experiences, and simply become kinks. But if they are reinforced, in the absence of normal sexual experiences (perhaps due to anxiety?), then they might become maladaptive fetishes.
Anyway, the evopsyche perspective simply isn’t equipped to analyze all this stuff seriously.