Attraction

[wodgina]

I don't dispute that women can have affairs with other males while in a specific married relationship - after all, it's estimated that paternity fraud occurs anywhere from 10% to 30% of the time. It's just I'd only ever heard of Tibet as an example of polyandry, where a woman actually has 2 or more husbands(as opposed to having one husband and several other male lovers). The problem with polyandry is simply that while there are slightly more males than females born each generation, males are much more likely to die young due to wars/suicide/childhood diseases etc., so that the female:male ratio rises inexorably  - so there's usually a lack of supply for women who want two or more husbands - whereas, with polygyny, it becomes more feasible as an option to provide for recently widowed wives. Interesting to find out that it's more widespread than Tibet, though.

The paternity fraud thing makes a lot of evolutionary sense, mate with the male with the strongest genes (alpha male)  and live with the partner who has fatherly instincts and can provide for the offspring. The best way of doing this would be to trick the male into thinking the offspring are his!! whether it's moral or not our genes don't care because it's a great way to give the offspring the best chance of survival.   
There's a different, far more common version of this where women will get pregnant to one guy (bad boy/alpha male)  and pop out a few with him then hook up long term with a 'provider' . Now this one I see all the time...

[Satya]

I don't dispute that women can have affairs with other males while in a specific married relationship - after all, it's estimated that paternity fraud occurs anywhere from 10% to 30% of the time. It's just I'd only ever heard of Tibet as an example of polyandry, where a woman actually has 2 or more husbands(as opposed to having one husband and several other male lovers). The problem with polyandry is simply that while there are slightly more males than females born each generation, males are much more likely to die young due to wars/suicide/childhood diseases etc., so that the female:male ratio rises inexorably  - so there's usually a lack of supply for women who want two or more husbands - whereas, with polygyny, it becomes more feasible as an option to provide for recently widowed wives. Interesting to find out that it's more widespread than Tibet, though.

I am sure polygyny is the more common form in our recorded history.  In the animal kingdom at large, most polygynous species do not have a large percentage of the male population mating at all.

For humans of the Paleolithic Era, however, I do find it interesting that, according to skeletal remains:

"The data come from age estimates of skeletons from various archaeological sites representing a variety of time periods in the Mediterranean region. Paleolithic skeletons indicated a life expectancy of 35.4 years for men and 30.0 years for women, which includes a high rate of infant mortality. This is consistent with data from the Inuit that I posted a while back (life expectancy excluding infant mortality = 43.5 years). With modest fluctuations, the life expectancy of humans in this Mediterranean region remained similar from paleolithic times until the last century. I suspect the paleolithic people died most often from warfare, accidents and infectious disease, while the neolithic people died mostly from chronic disease, and infectious diseases that evolved along with the domestication of animals (zoonotic diseases). But I'm just speculating based on what I know about modern populations, so you can take that at face value."
http://wholehealthsource.blogspot.com/2008/08/life-expectancy-and-growth-of.html

This would support the sharing of men by women in paleo times.  It would be vital for the female to reproduce before her early demise, and multiple males would help ensure that.

In modern India and China, the rampant selection of male children and abortion of females has set up a really bad situation where men are having trouble finding a mate.  Of course, it's the women who end up suffering in the forced sex trade.  Polyandry might be the only solution if everyone wants a mate in Asia soon.

[Satya]

The paternity fraud thing makes a lot of evolutionary sense, mate with the male with the strongest genes (alpha male)  and live with the partner who has fatherly instincts and can provide for the offspring. The best way of doing this would be to trick the male into thinking the offspring are his!! whether it's moral or not our genes don't care because it's a great way to give the offspring the best chance of survival.   
There's a different, far more common version of this where women will get pregnant to one guy (bad boy/alpha male)  and pop out a few with him then hook up long term with a 'provider' . Now this one I see all the time...

That's right, and the female and offspring truly are, in an anthropological sense, the family unit. 

You know, the homicide rate for infant step children is really pretty high when compared to homicide of biological children.

[rawrock2]

Our paleo ancestors were most likely polygamous and pro-making-and-raising children.

100% true!  Monogamy was not maintained historically.  They were pro-making-and-raising children AND they also married kiddies as well.  I know that’s probably a sensitive subject but that IS how it was.  Not that I advocate Pedophilia but I wonder how the very mention of something that was the norm decades ago can be so dangerous.

And I will definitely not be having kids with someone who doesn't share the same views on health as I do, for the sake of my child.

I agree with you here personally but it all depends on how much the issue in question means to you.  You and your significant other won’t have the same views on everything, right?

I've learned whom not to discuss diet with. It's sort of like politics and religion with some people.

I can not agree with you more.  Diet should most definitely be included as one of the things that you don’t discuss with people.  People get very sensitive when diet is discussed.

sex does matter in my book

Amen

we should be careful not to adopt a 'them and us" approach to those on cooked-food diets

that’s right.  there can be  times when food does need to be cooked.  If you find yourself in a foreign land where disease-ridden meat is rampant or the quality is unknown then cooking your meat IS the way to go.  Eating raw meat then may be like playing roulette.

Polyandry might be the only solution if everyone wants a mate in Asia soon.

The tide is turning in parts of Asia.  In Korea, males used to be the preferred offspring but more and more couples (females AND males) desire a baby girl rather than a son.

However, when species become less sexually dimorphic, (ie. male and females are closer in size) monogamy is the general trend, and this is the case for humans.

I don’t know about that one…  But hey I’m not history expert or anything, just thinking out loud

[reyyzl]

Notice how men like polygyny and women polyandry?  Has anyone ever practiced this?

Ha ha!  Why do they practice polygyny anyway?  Is it because they are so few in number? 

In that case, you referring to the Mormons and child-brides, I hear they chase off many of the teenage sons, to narrow the pool.  There's a cable show called "Big Love" that I think is starting a new season tomorrow night.  It's supposed to show polygyny.

[Dan]

Not new, but it relates to men not raising their own kids.

http://www.medicalnewstoday.com/articles/54934.php

[miles]

Oh, and the older I get, the less looks matter and the more personality does. So, diet wouldn't be too much of a factor in most cases either.

So.. someone's diet isn't a part of their personality? uhh..