That sounds reasonable, but I'm not sure whether there are countervailing factors when we're talking about lineages. When I say I'm not sure, I mean that I'm just not visualizing the logic clearly enough to have an opinion.
Also, if we're tracking male chromosomes to find out whether men have had children, do we lose track of their daughters?
How much does it matter in ordinary life that descendants presumably follow a power law distribution (lots at the top) rather than a bell curve?
How much of cuckoldry is break-even? That is, a man might be raising another man's child, but some other man might be raising his child.
Does people becoming less violent make a difference to the chances of male reproduction?
Onwards to hypothetical land: How much do men care about having descendants that they will never see? There are occasional scandals in which men who own sperm banks substitute their own sperm, which is interesting because no sex is involved. It also leads me to wonder whether male staff at sperm banks can be trusted.
Onwards to hypothetical land: How much do men care about having descendants that they will never see?
That depends a lot of the particular men. There are man who do care about it but I think the majority doesn't. Sperm banks pay donors instead of the donor paying for the sperm bank accepting it's sperm.
There's an idea I've seen a number of times that 80% of women have had descendants, but only 40% of men. A little research tracked it back to this, but the speech doesn't have a cite and I haven't found a source.
The reproduction rates for men and women (possibly for the whole history of the species) seems like the sort of thing which could be found out, but I'd like more solid information.