One problem with evolutionary psychology is that it starts from actual differences between the sexes, and then suddenly extrapolates wildly without any good reasons or evidence. For example:

We start from the recognition that reproduction places more physical demands on women than it does on men. Pregnancy lasts more than nine months, and concludes with a dangerous labour, which is followed by many more years of breastfeeding and childcare. Men, however, only really need to expend the amount of effort it takes to orgasm in order to reproduce.

This is a true statement about bodies. So far so good. But then:

Our female ancestors had to bring up their children in a dangerous environment, which usually meant keeping a male partner around, both for material support and for protection from other men.

This does not follow. In fact we have some pretty good evidence that women used to raise their children in kin groups comprised of post-menopausal grandmother, adult sisters and maybe brothers, and juveniles. Most animals don't experience menopause; we take it for granted, but there must be an evolutionary benefit to it, or it would have disappeared from the gene pool in favor of having more offspring. According to the Grandmother Hypothesis, a woman who goes through menopause and stops having children, and then has some years or decades to help raise her grandchildren, has more descendants/is more evolutionarily successful than a woman who just has babies every few years until she dies. We have cross-cultural observations indicating that children around the world raised by a mother and grandmother receive more calories and are kept safer than children with a mother and mother's male sexual partner, regardless of if that partner is the children's biological father.

Another thing we have good evidence for is that cross-culturally, when men do take part in child rearing, it's really more likely to be their sisters' kids that they take care of, rather than their biological offspring.

Evolutionary psychologists take the obvious fact that a mother needs help to raise her kids and they pile on their own assumptions and decide that that means heterosexual pair-bonding. If they followed the evidence, they would come to no such conclusion. In fact, while the Grandmother Hypothesis seems better supported than the patriarchal hypothesis, neither is or can ever actually be proven, so anyone who cares the least bit about the scientific method would refuse to come to any conclusion at all.