The difference is the importance of "visuals."

That's why I asked what the female 'winner' of the most sexy award looked like (in Sandi's example).

Her point was that what's 'sexy' is surprising, because it does not seem to contain 'the visuals,' as one would expect.

My counterpoint is that, when it comes to 'what men want,' the visuals ARE important!

When you say the bodice-rippers (romance novels) are the female equivalent to ****, I agree. The FEMALE equivalent. Men do not read those + women do not look at **** (generally). So, they may be 'equal' but they are not THE SAME.

Let's ask this question: Why does **** appeal to men and romance novels appeal to women (generally)?

What's the ***DIFFERENCE?***

Whatever your answer -- there IS a difference.

I'll leave it to everyone to decide the REASON for that difference -- but I don't see how one can deny that there IS a difference.

I think the difference is "the visuals." That's part of what that guy's info product addresses. Pardon the pun, but it cannot be overlooked!

-- TW