https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232368611_Interacti...
and this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3394231/
I recall also reading something similar regarding sexual imagery specifically, but I cannot immediately locate it.
I do think your immediate leap to "misogyny" is uncharitable and unfair. There's nothing inherently implausible or sexist about the hypothesis.
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/232368611_Interacti...
and this:
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3394231/
I recall also reading something similar regarding sexual imagery specifically, but I cannot immediately locate it.
I do think your immediate leap to "misogyny" is uncharitable and unfair. There's nothing inherently implausible or sexist about the hypothesis.