They told me of necrophilia, beastiality and pedophilia in their culture. How true was it? It was propaganda to dehumanize the enemy but I still think there may have been some truth to it. I mean to say such things may be more prevalent there than in other cultures. Although such things are probably even greater crimes there than here, if that's possible... Well maybe not beastiality of that they were many stories... Anecdotes from people not a part of the propaganda machine...

The extreme sexual repression did lead to the men being hypersexual. That which is hidden becomes an all consuming interest; the sight of an ankle being some huge turn on. And without any reality the imagination is free to run wild.

So what are the results of sexual repression on a society? We can't learn so much maybe based on real world examples... but sociological studies would be nice. For the real world there are other factors confusing the issue, not to mention genetics are real.

What was the point in the first place of sexual repression? There is the christian ideal of concentrating solely on the afterlife and having no interest in fun today. But I don't think that's really it so much, probably was based primarily on men owning women and making sure that other men simply wouldn't be allowed to even see them at all. Not even an ankle. I think this is what is basically still going on in the ME. With FGM in a few places to ensure further that women won't want to cheat. The men who made their women cover up and forced FGM on them perhaps were slightly more likely to spread their genes...? Or at least that kind of thinking in general led them also to other measures which did.

The same would work for men keeping covered too. To ensure a women wouldn't covet a man, thus make him cover up at least some...

So we hide how much we make. We hide what we really think. We hide our bodies...

Bad results of this repression? The marionette/isolation. Excessive preoccupation. Rape, etc? Bad matches... Seems so obvious to just look at naked tribes in the forest. But too many variables. Mostly... simply genetics.

The perfect study never to be done again:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=15629096
Results locked away till 2066. Of course it's way more than 50% genetics. Short of routine beatings and/or malnutrition...

The PC thing to do is pretend we're all the same genetically and all our differences can be explained by our environment. .... There is a horrifying example of evolution which has happened in the last few hundred years which is so obvious. But we must not mention it. Keep that curtain closed!

http://www.vdare.com/Sailer/pioneer.htm
"Remarkably, separated identical twins were more similar than fraternal twins raised in the same home."
Of course.

"One scientist [presumably the great Arthur Jensen] had to be accompanied by an armed guard on his own campus, as well as guarded in his own home. Another scientist was required by his university to teach his classes by closed circuit television, supposedly in order to prevent a riot breaking out in his class. Several scientists had university and other speaking engagements canceled or interrupted by gangs of students or outside toughs. … Two scientists who had speaking engagements in Australia needed 50 policemen to rescue them from a mob. At one major university a professor invaded the class of another professor, led a raucous demonstration there, and had to be removed by campus police. The son of one of Pioneer's directors agreed to succeed his father on the Pioneer board, but then withdrew when the son's wife objected, citing social ostracism and physical danger.

Other examples of the intimidation of Pioneer-funded scientists include the 1973 beating of Britain's best-known psychologist Hans J. Eysenck as he attempted to lecture at the London School of Economics. In 1990, the Dean of the Institute of Psychiatry in London, where Eysenck had been for 44 years, prohibited him from receiving any further support from the Pioneer Fund. Yet that was the same year that a survey of leading American psychologists and historians named Eysenck among the top ten most influential psychologists in the world."
Of course.

Anyway I recognize it's not very useful to try to understand the effects of cultural differences by comparing very large groups.