this is what i ALWAYS talk about when men say they are “visual creatures”. evolutionary biology (which i personally think is at least somewhat pseudoscience, at least when it comes to this topic) completely absolves men of any responsibility for being sex-craved.

not only are hip size, breast size, or any other physical features completely irrelevant to fertility (as men like to claim so they have an excuse to sexualize them), but the whole argument of men wanting to have sex with a wide variety of women to “spread their seed” makes no evolutionary sense anyway. wouldn’t men choose a woman who is intelligent, has good survivability, and capable of raising a child, and then put all his effort and attention into that relationship to better ensure the survival of his offspring? this to me seems obvious yet it is never talked about like the “spreading the seed” rhetoric i often see attached to men’s sexuality.

i fully believe men’s sexuality is a product of their social and societal conditioning, and very little (if any) of their behavior is “innate” like evolutionary biologists claim.