Highlights
Quality
It was clear enough to listen to but the wide areas of subjects covered might have been easier to follow with the eye and regular headings
Competitiveness
Wonderful nonfiction look at how sexuality has been treated over the decades with lots of debunking of popular myths especially... Read More
Overview
- How are reviewers describing this item?
human, many, written, modern and good. - Our engine has profiled the reviewer patterns and has determined that there is minimal deception involved.
- Our engine has determined that the review content quality is high and informative.
- Our engine has discovered that over 90% high quality reviews are present.
- This product had a total of 2,096 reviews as of our last analysis date on Oct 22 2021.
Helpful InsightsBETA
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
While seeming to almost idolise some of the free sex ancestral practises observed in foragers they stop short of calling for any specific method for us to implement it now
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
My own take on this is that in the same way that money mediates the supply and sharing of food and shelter resources in the modern economy that used to be free amongst foragers so too money is probably the most suitable way to mediate sexual exchange in the modern economy
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
In other words people pay for sexual variety
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
But wives should do so too and be freed from the stereotype that they dont like this
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
Dont read this if you are happily married
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
Christopher ryan promotes a valid argument against the popular ideology of human monogamous relationships and how they came to being
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
There was far less of the promised dawn era of human relationships as of course we have no written evidence from this time and lots of clues or physical pointers that can give ideas and hypotheses so really the title is not as accurate as you might wish for
Posted by a reviewer on Amazon
Sometimes authors took just too much time discussing and preparing for some statements as it seems but probably this is ok