The Guardian's inconsistent comments policy (21 feb 15)
It allows commenters to challenge neo-Lysenkoism using evolutionary psychology - up to a point. But when I tried to correct my own comment - from "it is adaptive for a man to be attracted to her" to "it is adaptive for her for him to be attracted to her, because he is more likely to believe his children are his" (if she appears uninterested in sex, thus appears less likely to be unfaithful), a moderator deleted it. Let's see what happens to my response to a reasoned leftist response to my first comment:
"Whereas large male mammals can have lots of children, large female mammals can only have a few. That's the basic difference. Promiscuity is highly adaptive in the male, less so in the female. He doesn't have to give any resources to most of his children, only to the ones he can be fairly sure are his."