to the poster Billy: Are all homosexuals so sarcastic? I was unaware that homosexuals were known to be more mentally stable than heterosexuals. Billy, would you kindly direct me to the literature that supports this view?

to Hank:
I agree that social factors are key here, but it seems a stretch to say that the evolutionary view is bizarre. It does seem to make sense that a man would feel more threatened by a rival that could mate with his partner.

I think they are assuming that the innate desire to reproduce is present even in college men, despite the social pressure to not reproduce.

We see the innate desire to copulate (because it feels good), they (the evol psychologists) see the innate desire to reproduce (because it is biologically necessary for the perpetuation of the species).

Yet I cannot disagree that evolutionary psychologists are often full of it. I have not seen the study itself and do not know if it has been published in a peer reviewed journal. Many of the social sciences have supposedly scientific studies that are anything but....

"Lead author Jaime Confer, doctoral candidate in evolutionary psychology, and Professor Mark Cloud, of Lock Haven University bizarrely try to make a biology case that men are more distressed by infidelity that could threaten their paternity of offspring. College age men. Offspring. Yeah, instead of the obvious "it's a porn movie" thing that has nothing at all to do with evolution, no matter who much evolutionary psychologists want everything about sex to be biology."

Am I missing some incredibly subtle sarcasm? If not, your entire article is one big fallacy. To be precise: you are confusing proximate cause with ultimate cause.

No one, least of all evolutionary biologists, is suggesting that college age men consciously consider paternity of offspring before they decide whether or not to break up with their girlfriends. ("Hmm, what are the chances I'm raising another man's son? Let's get out the statistics textbooks.") Obviously, they do not choose to feel or not feel sexual jealousy.

What the scientists are suggesting is that, over the many millions of years of human evolution, there was a reproductive advantage to getting mad about your girlfriend cheating with a man—because you might have to raise his offspring, not yours; but there was no reproductive advantage when it's girl-on-girl, because . . . well, duh. No babies to raise.

It's quite reasonable to conclude that men have probably evolved (again, not by choice) to feel sexual jealousy toward other men, but not nearly as much toward other women. The actual response is completely instinctual. They don't look at their evolutionary past and make decisions based on differential reproduction rates, which is the straw-man argument you've set up to in order to take cheap shots at evolutionary psychology/biology.

As for the "porn movie" explanation: well, yes, that's why men like it, or at least like the thought of it (as opposed to merely being neutral). In the absence of strong sexual jealousy toward women, there's not much reason for men not to like it. It's sex, right?

Let's consider the most obvious reason why a man would not mind his girlfriend having an affair with another woman: it increases the probability of his getting into a threesome with girlfriend and other woman.

This is so easy to understand...but you have to be FAIR and not try to pigeon-hole all men by referring to only immature men. It would be a long story to explain but I think for starters we could say that for whatever fantasies that female homosexuality might offer men of being able to plant more seeds and have more offspring, male homosexuality surely kills the fantasy of immature women desiring a prince charming to blood-suck and feed her offspring... even it its through a divorce settlement. Gay sex between men isn´t ¨productive¨...not even for fantasies. Hard-working men though, now that is attractive! This is just a biased feminist article attempting on one hand to demonize men, but also not really understanding why men are turning out not to be demons. Instead of looking in the mirror, feminism pawns it off on more immature male seed dispersal as if all they are good for is as baby farmers. Maybe they should look to who is eating the produce. Feminism and equality speak the same language but are really saying opposite things.

Yeah, instead of the obvious "it's a porn movie" thing that has nothing at all to do with evolution, no matter who much evolutionary psychologists want everything about sex to be biology.

This is interesting. I know nothing about evolutionary psychology but you are creating a definite impression that it is stuck in a reductionist paradigm where every social phenomenon has an immediate relevance to Darwinian survival. Psychology went through a similar oversimplification phase with behaviourism. 
 
Porn has fairly obvious explanations in terms of evolution, since evolution is not in the least bit interested or concerned with what side effects it produces. Assuming that our ancestors were turned on visually rather than simply ignoring potential mates who drift into view - and this does seem glaringly obvious -  evolution would definitely account for porn as a side-effect which may even be counter-productive.  I assume you are saying that evolutionary psychology would have a different approach and seek to explain it as adaptive in its own right. 

Is this pretty well what you think of it, Hank?

Never underestimate the power of Darwinian evolution to create survival mechanisms that really suck.