Xref: utzoo sci.bio:779 soc.men:2355 soc.women:8764 sci.misc:704
Path: utzoo!utgpu!water!watmath!clyde!rutgers!gatech!bloom-beacon!husc6!ut-sally!turpin
From: turpin@ut-sally.UUCP (Russell Turpin)
Newsgroups: sci.bio,soc.men,soc.women,sci.misc
Subject: Re: Rape a reproductive advantage?
Summary: Number of men and women.
Message-ID: <10071@ut-sally.UUCP>
Date: 13 Jan 88 16:53:28 GMT
References: <517@gtx.com> <5129@cit-vax.Caltech.Edu> <2201@bloom-beacon.MIT.EDU> <1422@quad1.quad.com>
Distribution: na
Organization: U. Texas CS Dept., Austin, Texas
Lines: 21

In article <1422@quad1.quad.com>, oleg@quad1.quad.com (Oleg Kiselev) writes:
> In article <616@PT.CS.CMU.EDU> lindsay@K.GP.CS.CMU.EDU (Donald Lindsay) writes:
> >Monogamy ... implies the existence of bachelors, who will not
> >reproduce at all, unless ...
> 
> Hmmm...  That presumes that males outnumber females -- which certainly is not
> true in either human societies, or in most mammals.  Unless, that is, you 
> mean "polygeny" when you speak of "monogamy".

In fact, women outnumber men, despite the fact that more men are
born than women. But this does not mean that the total number of
single women looking for a sexual partner equals the total number
of men looking for same. Despite the so-called "man shortage",
bars, singles clubs, and personal classifieds all show a heavy
male bias.  Of course, some of these men may not be single, and
others may not be "marriageable", and there are a variety of
other explanations. But the point is that issues about marriage
and partnership demographics are more complicated than simply
tallying two head counts. 

Russell