This bit:

The standard narrative of human sexual evolution ignores or manipulates the findings of forager anthropology to support its claims, and this is no doubt responsible for much of its confused support.

... kinda turned me off from reading the rest, because it made me expect partisan arguments rather than well-presented information. Your post would probably be better by just presenting whatever interesting information you found in that book without any reference to a "standard narrative".

And I don't even know whether I agree or not with what you call the "standard narrative"! I just have a low opinion of opinion writing that spends too much effort explaining why it's position is unjustly oppressed, why the other side cheats and misreprents data, why everyone is biased against the truth, how those who disagree have an axe to grind about another related topic, are politically motivated, etc.

You're probably just transmitting positions taken in the book against the standard narrative, but that may be something they accentuated just to add conterversy - the same way the "controversy" between logical and connectionist AI is overblown.