> The book argues that humans are not “naturally” monogamous. That might be true. But Sex at Dawn doesn’t prove it. The data are ambiguous. Exactly. I still fo

> The book argues that humans are not “naturally” monogamous. That might be true. But Sex at Dawn doesn’t prove it. The data are ambiguous. Exactly. I still found it a stimulating read, but my "the evidence they present isn't justified" senses were going off from chapter 1.