I'm going to go out on a limb here and suggest that many of these types--not all--are indeed sx-first.
Guys, I need to be honest here. Being sx-first isn't about sex per se, but it does involve issues of sexuality. Moreover, dominant instincts can be...extremely neurotic and damaged. They're survival-based, your ego is totally hung on it, AND IT'S ALWAYS INSECURE. It's where your grasping, ugly, irrational animal behaviours will surface. Like, with sx-first, individuals can be paranoid about fulfilling their gender role, paranoid about their sexuality, how attractive they are, their desirability, can they attract anyone and if they do can you keep them, etc. Who's attractive and who's not and how that relates to your own survival. Jealous, competitive, obsessive, insecure.
It's much more like this than "I want a deep intense partnership". I am speaking as an avowed sx-first who has done a lot of research and soul-searching on this matter.
I've read some of these PUA sites, as well as those of the Red Pill. And, well, I know the neurosis when I see it. I would say a goodly number of these people are indeed sx-first. Not all. There are some social-firsts (who tend to see sexuality in terms of this totally warped "wolf pack" hierarchy where the Alphas take all...lol it's fucked up). There are undoubtedly sp-firsts as well, but I tend to see this as a sx-first phenomenon with some social.
These are a generation of young men who are insecure--no one's ever told them they are attractive, and it's obvious that everyone around them is having sex with beautiful women, all the time. They're the only ones who aren't getting any. (Side note, from what I've seen, pretty much no one is getting any, but there are those who would exploit these young mens' insecurities for profit.) This infringes upon their self-esteem (for sx-firsts, this is based on being attractive at some level), their sense of themselves as males (gender roles being part of sx as well as soc). They feel (on a very unconscious level) that their survival is at stake, so they're learning the "tricks of the trade" and discharging their frustrations, often times against women themselves. Putting others down to elevate themselves.
I see it there. I see the subtle vindication when they tell me (as they have in the past) that as a woman in her 30s, I'm no longer attractive. That no one will want me anymore, that I'm a haggard old crone, that I deserve this for making mens' life miserable in my 20s. They way they think women past 30 become increasingly neurotic about the lines forming on their face and the glee they take in this, that their powers of attraction will outlast mine. I mean, guys, do you not see that this is a fixation and neurosis? This is ego lashing out--even if they were unsuccessful mates and not considered attractive, at least they're not women who lose their looks entirely the moment they turn 30. At least, as men, THEY can be attractive into old age.
I'm sorry, but this is EXACTLY what a fucked up, lashing out dominant instinct does. The things they say and do can be really hurtful and destructive. And, our destructive behaviors are often found in the area of our dominant instinct.
I'm not saying all sx-firsts do this...there are sx-firsts out there who honestly feel attractive and desirable. There are sx-firsts who don't, but know how to mask this and seduce others. There are sx-firsts who don't and give up and bear it regally, rather than abuse women for their own perceived short comings. Yes.
But I've been there, which is how I recognize it. This is these young men's focus--sexuality--and they, unfortunately, lack the age, maturity and experience to get past superficial understandings of attractiveness. One imagines that in another 10-20 years, these same people will be going on about how women always break up relationships and never affirm them, that women don't know how to be properly intimate, don't understand True Partnership, don't give them enough, you get the picture.
So, yes, I DO see the dominant narrative here as one manifestation of the sexual instinct. Yes, sx-subtypes can be promiscuous. Some authors even use that as a by-word...saying this subtype shows tendencies to be both promiscuous and celibate (affirming their attractiveness). What we're looking at is the dark and destructive side of the promiscuous end.
Yep, there are undoubtedly some socials--imo, the ones that tend to fixate more on how social roles influence mating behaviour. Probably self-pres types, too, though I can't tell you what to look for with those. But the dominant narrative on these sites? The neuroses of angry, lonely young sx-firsts.
I don't think I am wrong about this.