In fact, when I teach about evolutionary psychology in college courses, I make sure to cover these alternative explanations and viewpoints (e.g., Alice Eagly’s Social Role Theory).I also spend time discussing what many see as shortcomings of the theory (e.g., How does it account for the phenomenon of homosexuality? Like all theories, evolutionary psychology has its weaker points and, as I mentioned above, I do not believe it is the only way to explain gender differences in partner selection and I never meant to imply that by focusing on it in my article.Yes, it might increase the chances of her becoming pregnant, but keep in mind that having a child requires a significant investment on the mother’s part, not only in terms of the 9 month pregnancy, but also in terms of the resources required to ensure that child’s health and survival after birth.Women who keep getting impregnated by guys who fail to stick around and help out with the kids may find themselves at an evolutionary disadvantage because they have to provide for themselves and their children entirely on their own (which probably proved exceptionally challenging in the days of hunter-gathers).
Others might be driven by narcissism, sexual compulsion, or a need for validation.
But again, forgetting how modern conventions have impacted this, have you ever heard of something called birth control?
It puts men and women on an equal playing field when it comes to the burden of raising non-existent children after a steamy night out.
I mentioned several possibilities, but spent quite a bit of time discussing the evolutionary perspective because there has been a lot of research in this area and because it was an issue raised by the reader who submitted the question.
To address the specific points you made in your post, I should first say that my statement “research from around the world…” was not an exaggeration.