gordon mohr gojomousanet robert harley writes ok consider population 1000000 500000 men pair 500000 women 1 man lets call wilt also sex 499999 women never happened relevance nil extreme contrived example glosded point earlier 3person example ok mr math let n men women n2 pair number h nh0 men sex n1 women hasnt yet sex pick n h might interesting choice values results meaningful differences sexes promiscuity commonly understood obvious extreme choices numbers also true choice n h unrealistic totals distract hoping would clear without saying outright model actually approximates cliche common wisdom pergender sexual behavior reverse male female roles stereotypes men women seek multiple partners men promiscuous women surplus male interest satisfied smaller number hyperpromiscuous women often derisively labelled sluts chose type average explicitly post since fork one tends assume people clue disagreement us except interested typical behaviour extreme nope youve amended meaning initial statement make defensible objected robert harley assumption females species tend less promiscuous males simply fit facts hrdy contended well duh perfectly obvious heterosexual promiscuity exactly precisely identical males females course shapes distributions may differ assumed people fork clue would needed jump patronizing duh talking fuzzy typical behavior would huffed puffed words perfectly obvious exactly precisely identical concern typical didnt adopt typical definition promiscuous rather strawman definition allowed interject duh mock anthrolopology professors conclusions actually probably bad day felt like jumping throat hell welcome theory heres alternate theory jump patronizing overblown pronouncement eg duh perfectly obvious exactly precisely identical pronouncement sloppy erroneous others may get kick popping balloon gordon tue 10 sep 2002 134517 0700 promiscuity word choice selling wedded bliss