Sexual arousal evokes sexual disinhibition (increased self-reported likelihood to engage in uncommon, risky, and coercive sexual activities); among disinhibition indicators: "Can you imagine having sex with a 50-year-old woman/man?"

Sexual Disinhibition Under Sexual Arousal: Evidence for Domain Specificity in Men and Women. Roland Imhoff & Alexander F. Schmidt. Archives of Sexual Behavior volume 43, pages1123–1136, Aug 5 2021. https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s10508-014-0329-8

Abstract: Men have been shown to estimate their likelihood of engaging in sexually coercive behaviors and also uncommon and unprotected sexual behaviors as higher when they are in an acute state of sexual arousal. The present research sought to test (1) whether sexual arousal effects could be replicated under more controlled laboratory settings, (2) whether women showed the same pattern of results, and (3) whether this effect was specific to sexual disinhibition or would generalize to non-sexual disinhibited behavior. In two experimental studies, male and female participants (Study 1: N = 84; Study 2: N = 86) were either sexually aroused by acoustically presented erotic narratives or listened to sexually non-arousing neutral narratives. Afterwards, they self-estimated their likelihood of engaging in a variety of behaviors that could be characterized as sexual or non-sexual disinhibited behavior. Results replicated the previously established effect of sexual disinhibition under sexual arousal for men and provided the first evidence for a similar effect in women. No arousal effects were observed for non-sexual behavior, rendering alternative explanations based on mere indifferent responding unlikely. The discussion focused on a plausible explanation for this effect.

---

It is important to note here that we propose the term disinhibition as a characterization of the commonality of the three domains: Engaging in uncommon, morally questionable, and unsafe sexual behavior. Importantly, disinhibition here refers to the outcome of reporting greater likelihood of engaging in this behavior (i.e., an outcome that is less constrained by social norms and expectations of what might constitute socially desirable responses), not to the process. In terms of underlying processes, such an outcome may results from either reduced inhibitory processes or stronger approach motivation (see Toates, 2009; for a dual control model of inhibition and excitation, see also Bancroft & Janssen, 2000). Although Ariely and Loewenstein seemed to favor the latter explanation of an increase in the appetitive sexual system, we argue that alternative explanations are conceivable.