HomeGrown Humans - Wednesday Martin, Ph.D. - Sexuality - Hosted by Jamie Wheal

HomeGrown Humans - Wednesday Martin, Ph.D. - Sexuality - Hosted by Jamie Wheal

In our latest episode, Jamie Wheal and Dr. Wednesday Martin are intent on taking us out of our comfort zones, with the goal of changing the way we think about women and sex forever. Dr. Martin presents the case that “junk science” and regressive cultural narratives have shaped our beliefs about female infidelity for centuries and that female sexual autonomy may be the most meaningful metric of gender equality. We spotlight:

  • Female non-monogamy across cultures and species
  • The case for a reclassification of the scientific term “alpha male”
  • Cultural shifts from plow agriculture to polyamory
  • Defining and exploring the Orgasm gap
  • The link between female sexuality and gender inequality
The only consistent thing about human sexual strategies is the inconsistency.- Wednesday Martin, Ph.D.

The conversation is riveting and includes a nod to the work of our previous guest, Sexologist and anthropologist, Helen Fisher, Ph.D. Buckle up, you’re in for a spicy conversation.

Related Links: 

Website: http://wednesdaymartin.com/
Book: Untrue
Book: Primates of Park Avenue
Book: Stepmonster
Book: Boyfriends of Dorothy
Book: The Button

recommended episodes


  • BH
    At risk of triggering, which I am not intending to do in the slightest, I wanted to get more information on the following topics mentioned at the end of the podcast. Let me start by saying I an not against abortion. If I had to give an opinion, I would probably be against late term, drawing the line somewhere early in the second trimester or late in the first, but seek further objective, possibly some subjective information on the topic. What information do you have on the modern abortion pushback stemming from religious groups main motivation being "controlling feminine sexuality?" Again, I want to know more from both sides, as I hate seeing the constant fighting in this country and would like to fully understand each argument, in hopes to peacefully resolve the issue in the future. Simply stating that the modern abortion pushback has "verbatim arguments" to the sixties of "rights of the sacred unborn," therefore it must actually be about "controlling feminine sexuality" doesn't seem objective. Maybe it is, I just haven't seen modern proof of this, so if anyone has information on this I will gladly read. From the arguments on the MODERN pro-life side, I simply don't see the reasoning and motivation being to limit female sexual autonomy or rights. People I know that are against abortion, most of which are women, believe that life starts at conception, and from what they tell me really do see abortion as no different that killing a newborn child. I know that sounds crazy to many people, and I'm not saying I subscribe to that opinion. But what I am saying is that having that opinion for those moral reasons doesn’t seem nefarious or controlling in their intent, and I don't believe they are lying to me. Maybe these people are playing mental gymnastics to come to that conclusion, or maybe the other side is in their own way, I'm not sure. But I really wish we could all come together and at the very least agree to disagree, which seems far better than the constant fighting and dividing. I have friends on both sides of the issue, and we agree to disagree and move on. I wish the country could do the same in some form or fashion. I don't see this happening, but bringing the right to abortion down to voters on the county level would solve the transportation issue, as most people are within reasonable distance to more liberal leaning cities/counties where they can get an abortion if the so choose. I know that doesn't suffice to many on the pro-choose side, I am only trying to brainstorm a potential compromise and find some agreeance to end the constant yelling and fighting. Furthermore, to touch on another hot topic: Regarding the NRA comment, I find when you mention "learn your history," it's much like the mainstream media portraying their cringy intellectual moral high ground and saying "we are the science," or the failed war on drugs that for so long banned psychedelics, claiming "drugs are bad", end of discussion." Could you provide any information on your point of the NRA drumming up first amendment rights? I'd assume they would be interested in the second amendment. Just because something started as a club, at time when second amendment rights were not at stake, but now has grown and is focused on the issue, doesn't necessary make it bad. Sure there are ignorant members in the NRA, I've seen it. And yes, they are part of political lobbying that happens on both sides, but I'm not able to follow your argument of understanding your history to discredit the majority of that the NRA stands for. Anyone that responds do not take this as an attack, please try not to respond reactive and emotionally, as I am only trying to have a discussion on these highly sensitive issues, and figured here on Neurohacker I could get an objective view, rather than trying to have this discussion on social media. I've been a long time consumer of your supplements and podcast, keep up the amazing work!
  • BH
    I'm not sure why the indentions between paragraphs didn't go through, so I apologize for that.
Sign in or Register to Comment