> I think there's a rather big difference between myths and things we don't know with absolute certainty. Except when we have a preponderance of evidence indic

> I think there's a rather big difference between myths and things we don't know with absolute certainty. Except when we have a preponderance of evidence indicating otherwise. Your claim is akin to someone claiming that the pinky was evolved to pick your ear and your index finger to pick your nose. We have preponderance of evidence indicating otherwise, but it's nearly impossible to prove it with absolute certainty. If your myth was true, then there is no benefit to the penis shape. The only benefit is have sex last in orgies. That's not how human mating happens. Ever. > Assuming that is true then there isn't really any downside to scooping out your own old semen if you only do it in situations where you're just going to make a fresh deposit 30 seconds later. It's a bit of a downside. There certainly isn't any upside. > By polygamy I think you specifically mean polygyny? Obviously because polyandry hardly exists. > Because polyandry sounds like the kind of situation where the sperm scooping would be pretty effective. Except polyandry is practically nonexistent and in a few fringe communities it exists, the woman isn't engaging in orgies. The dominant form of mating is monogamy with a small bit of polygamy. > So it sounds to me that although women in their late twenties are slightly less likely to get pregnant on any given menstrual cycle than women in their early twenties, the effect does not seem to significantly affect their odds of procreating. I didn't say women in their thirties couldn't procreate. I said it was more difficult. > But since we're linking studies, I would like to refer to some research by the CDC [1] that shows that infant mortality is lowest for mothers between the ages of 30 and 34 (inclusive), And? Infant mortality is lower for wealthier fathers and mothers too. What does that matter in biological terms? > Regardless, based on the data I don't think it's self-evident that the best time for women to procreate is between the ages of 19 and 26. It isn't a matter of debate. It's a matter of science. Biologically that's a woman's prime reproductive years. Societally, things might be different. > I suspect a 30 year old women may have the advantage over one 10 years her junior in that particular department. Which has nothing to do with biology. And this is also why historically, women married established men 10 to 20 years older with the means to provide. But my point was, biologically, women's prime birthing years are 19-26 or around that time range. It's science and biology. You are arguing about society. Which I wasn't.