I've been thinking about saying this. I think it will fall on deaf ears. But I'll give it a go, I've got time.
On the nature vs nurture / "nature should be allowed to run it's course" debate:
I will concede, Brightside, that you are correct about nurture being personality-based, and not brain-based - that was my mistake. But (and I know you'll get upset that I'm using another extreme criminal analogy) a pedophile's brain gets stimulated by certain things. That's the brain. That's nature. But allowing that behaviour to be acted upon is detrimental to a certain group in society (children). So it isn't sustainable, for a healthy and well-functioning society, to allow images and viewpoints that support that "stimulation" to exist.
If you'll allow me (unlikely, but I'll try) the comparison, viewing women as objects, as some of the men in the study do, is a feeling as a result of a stimulus - that it's ok to objectify women and dehumanise them to fuckable objects. That's a trait of "nature" that, in my opinion, shouldn't be allowed to be celebrated.
But you'll disagree with that, because it's oppressing men. You don't seem to have the same issue with oppressing women (because you don't believe they are).
The study, if it was expanded and retested, might prove to be false. It might not. But it seems pretty plausible to me, given how men have a history of behaving, which is documented daily all over the world, regardless of culture, language, race or religion.