Except that this never was actually the case - it's a made up story. And in a Paleolithic tribe where everyone takes care of everyone else, including food sharing, and where gatherers typically provide more food than hunters, women mated with whomever they wanted to. It's only with patriarchy, something that arose only in the past few thousand years that a woman needs to demand a connection before having sex.
In truth, promiscuous women is a lot more historically and evolutionarily correct and adaptive. Maybe clueing the Andrew Tates of the world into actual science rather than pop evolutionary psychology would make a difference?
"If women were biologically geared towards monogamy, it would not have been necessary to institute laws and customs to keep them away from other potential mating opportunities once there was a greater focus on having heirs to pass property along to.
'When Darwin observed that females of many species were naturally coy and choosy and reticent, sexually speaking, and males were naturally competitive and randy, he set us on a course by distorting the lens through which we view behavior. What we know today thanks to mostly female primatologists, anthropologists, and sex researchers is that when the context is right, female sexuality is assertive, adventurous, and what we call “promiscuous.”
The great anthropologist and comparativist Sarah Hrdy tells us that, across species, including among humans, the best mother for many eons was the one who was, under particular and far-from-rare ecological circumstances, promiscuous. By being so, she could hedge against male infertility, up her odds of a healthy pregnancy and robust offspring, and create a wider network of support by lining up two or three males who figured the offspring might be theirs.' (5)"
