Path: utzoo!attcan!uunet!cs.utexas.edu!swrinde!ucsd!ucbvax!hplabs!hpl-opus!hpspdra!tomm
From: tomm@hpspdra.HP.COM (Tom Menten)
Newsgroups: sci.bio
Subject: Re: Are Humans Naturally Monogamous?
Message-ID: <13870003@hpspdra.HP.COM>
Date: 25 Oct 90 15:21:18 GMT
References: <1990Oct24.175532.9407@pmafire.UUCP>
Organization: HP Stanford Park - Palo Alto, CA
Lines: 23


 / wp6@cunixa.cc.columbia.edu (Walter Pohl) / writes:

| This is an Orange Highlighter alert.
| 
|	When I read this article, at first I was confused as to whether you
| meant "male" or "person".  All possible ambiguity would be removed if you 
| used "person" in place of "man".
----------

     While I interpret your response to be an effort to use more
     "sexually neutral" language, you might be interested to know
     that (as I recall) human ethologists have conjectured a sex difference
     in tendency toward monogamy.  I remember an explanation postulated
     in terms of "parental investment":  only one strategy is available
     to the female to pass along her genes - she must raise her progeny,
     and will be more successful if she can acquire help in the process.
     The male has two strategies available - he can have multiple mates,
     each with a reduced chance of raising their progeny, or a single
     mate, as with the female.

     Perhaps someone can supply a more informed and up-to-date account
     of this thread.