Like I said, and I meant it seriously, it does at least propose a non-silly mechanism that makes sense. But it A: proposes a sweeping result which, if taken seriously, ought to invalidate a lot of other experiments and B: pushes a moderately political button with the gender issue.

Neither of those is a disqualifier, but A in particular at least somewhat gets into the realm of "an extraordinary claim that will require extraordinary confirmation".

The proposed mechanism would also seem to imply that female hunters don't exist. I would have preferred a proposal that you're inclined to hide your weaknesses around a male in general (lest he either take your woman or harass you in other ways), and the mechanism is likely keyed off of testosterone in general rather than mouse smells in particular, which seems reasonable.

My head isn't going to explode if this is established by further experiment. But it's suspicious to me.

To siyer's point, impeccably-done research can still come up with coincidental results, unfortunately.