Ley has very predictable, liberal, prevailing ideas about female sexuality (a lot I don't agree with), and I expected that. However, I found the chapters containing historical examples of perceptions and incidences of female hypersexuality in contrast with strict sexual suppression quite interesting. Plus, the history of marriage and monogamy is something that's in general quite fascinating. 

This is an ethnographic work of sorts because he interviews couples, so the theoretical elements had an added personal touch to them. No metaphysical aspects of sex are explored (expected). The tone and presentation were very positive, which made me quite sceptical also. But it's alright for what it is. It's interesting to know how some people choose to live.

Addition: Ley frames this teeming female sexuality as suppressed by society in order to prevent chaos, which I don't necessarily think is wrong. But historically, it's been the same for men, too. For most of human history, we have imposed strict sexual restrictions on both sexes, starting with the incest taboo, etc. But with men, it is to a lesser degree because men are far less likely to get raped and not likely at all to get pregnant. I don't know why so many academics get this so wrong.

There was so much suspect about Insatiable Wives. First, it was wildly annoying that the research was uncited. Ley provided authors’ names, but there were too few proper footnotes for his “facts” or “history.” There was no point in taking notes since I couldn’t verify pretty much anything he said. Second, despite a handful of claims that this text is not premised on the claims of evolutionary psychology, the book reads a lot like an advocate for evolutionary psychology—an entire chapter on animals, huge sections on the competitive nature of sperm, rationales for sexual desires based on evolution rather than personal choice or social influence, an overabundance of references to David Buss. Third, the whole hot wife phenomenon seems farfetched. I don’t know if this I because I’m black and black slaves were forced to share their wives with white masters, but I don’t know any black men that desire to be a cuckhold. None. And since all his samples were white, I can’t disprove my theory. Fifth, since the book is mostly a man speaking to men about what it means to be a man and since no wives got to speak for themselves by themselves (a handful are quoted in convo with their husbands), I finished Insatiable Wives knowing very little about how the hotwives really feel about sleeping with multiple men with their husbands’ permission. Granted, I am certain the phenomenon exists. I am also certain that a husband watching his wife be pleasured by other men can be a turnon for both the husband and the wife, I just wish I could have read about it unfiltered via the lens of a rather awkward psychologist who randomly quoted his wife and friends and admitted to including his picture in his Craiglist ads for subjects. I also didn’t like how he described the wives he did meet. It sounded so objectifying the way he mentioned their breasts or other beauteous assets. It made me uncomfortable. This guy sounds like a creep who stumbled upon something sexy and got a book contract to write about it even though he’s clearly not the most qualified.
That said, I learned a lot about and I have new respect for people who choose nonmonogamy. It’s not for everyone. I really enjoyed reading about the women throughout history who got it in on their own terms with some of the great minds of our time. Those historical and literary chapters made me wish he had spent more time with contemporary women. I was also pleased that Ley argued for the myth of sexual addiction and urged society not to use mental disorder labels as the moral police for sexual behaviors the masses disapprove of.