Men viewing erotic material suggestive of sperm competition (two men with one woman) produce ejaculates containing a higher percentage of motile sperm than men viewing explicit images of only three women.
(Ryan and Jethá, 231, referring to research by Kilgallon and Simmons)
I’m finding it a bit hard to draw that conclusion from this when there’s no precisely-one-male-present condition, and I don’t see any mention of any experiments that did do that in the actual article, either. It could just be due to the presence of a male, and not the number of them.
Perhaps more importantly, it’s also not clear that what pornography men like should correlate with what causes them to produce more motile sperm!
I would be surprised if a greater number of male actors does not also result in a salary increase for the actress. This does not contradict your point, but it may undermine it; I’m hardly familiar with pay structures. More significantly, what would you need to observe to conclude it was demand-driven?
Supply-driven. Male actors are much cheaper.
(Ryan and Jethá, 231, referring to research by Kilgallon and Simmons)
I’m finding it a bit hard to draw that conclusion from this when there’s no precisely-one-male-present condition, and I don’t see any mention of any experiments that did do that in the actual article, either. It could just be due to the presence of a male, and not the number of them.
Perhaps more importantly, it’s also not clear that what pornography men like should correlate with what causes them to produce more motile sperm!
I would be surprised if a greater number of male actors does not also result in a salary increase for the actress. This does not contradict your point, but it may undermine it; I’m hardly familiar with pay structures. More significantly, what would you need to observe to conclude it was demand-driven?