Wow, great point! Thanks for sharing.

Thanks for a great podcast! Just want to raise a discussion point. Around 37:47 or so, Ryan mentions that being in a non-monogamous relationship may challenge a male’s evolutionary drive to ensure the child he is raising is his own. However, in Sex at Dawn, Dr. Chris Ryan argues that hunter-gatherers did not have an evolutionary advantage in ensuring paternity, but rather had an advantage in bonding with one another through sex in a non-monogamous setting, and raising the children in a communal fashion. Sharing resources and responsibilities ensured their survival as a group. Because sharing was the norm (and sexual partners abounded, presumably) paternity was not so important. Paternity only became important with the onset of agriculture, when men began dilineating the land, and claiming possession over both livestock and their women. The agricultural period of our human history absolutely dwarfs in comparison to our long history as hunter-gatherers, so in modern times, perhaps it is our culture and social norms, not our biological drives, that cause us to care about monogamy and paternity. Of course, I suppose this is only a theory (albeit a well-supported and very persuasive theory.from Dr. Ryan), but I thought it was worth bringing up :)

Apologies to Dr. Ryan if I got any of the above info incorrect—I must admit I did not go back to reference the book before writing this. But I think I got it mostly right! ;)

Very insightful.