Some claim I'm not aware of "evolutionary biology" and I apparently don't know that femaels are by nature "designed" to be less promiscuous than males. So then my model for how pedestrian a high body count is for a woman is wrong because I didn't know this great secret. False:
First of all you're wrong that "evolutionary biology" has revealed such a nature for women. The studies--which I and my frends probably posted on forums in 2010-11, and which you probably didn't read--are contradictory and based on unreliable evidence like self-reported surveys.
It's true that femael biology is constrained by the fact of pregnancy, and that the formula "sperm are cheap, eggs are expensive" makes some basic sense. But it's not a given that women's desires are optimized to work in this rational economic calculation
[...]
It was in fact HARSH human law and not evolution that led to the coming of monogamy, and that law was directed as much to the women as the men, or sometimes more so. Monogamy is relatively rare among mankind. It may well be the best system, but it's not guaranteed by "evolution"
Second you are wrong on men's desires. Men don't want sex once or less than once a month, or even every two weeks. When they can they would like it every day or at least a few times a week. In fact one wife isn't enough for a vigorous, healthy man.
The fact that one wife isn't enough to satisfy a virile and healthy man is also why monogamous societies have always allowed themselves the hypocrisy of prostitution. As Schopenhauer says in these passages, polygamy always exists anyway, whether you like it or no