>>12637214>strengthening of female choice>implying that all females will choose to have sex with more than one maleYou're forgetting to take into account how intergenerational female hierarchies would operate in an ecosystem that allows the choice of females to hold more weight.
As a female population with "stronger choice" progresses into later phases of life, there will likely develop also a strengthened grip on the decisions of females in the younger generations, manifested in potentially diverse ways.
The lifestyle of females who chose to live polyamorously infertile will likely metastisize into a life of lonely uneventful stagnation at best, and existentialist self-destruction at the worst; and in the middle, habits of pontification to younger females. These females will naturally die off quicker, having little (organic) sway over the decisions of younger females; same scenario would be for investors who never made any gains trying to tell other investors how to invest.
On the other hand, females who choose to live monogamously fertile typically will live much longer; on top of that, because they will be more inclined to raising higher amounts of offspring, they'll have far more eugenic leverage over the formation of female decisionmaking of future generations.
Also, the nature of the most secure model for fertile monogamy is fully represented in traditional marriage, where women ideally never experience the penis of another man until they are married with said man.
All that to say, "strengthened female choice," as far as I'm understanding what you mean by the term, will in the long run have at most little bearing on the development of the gene pool in regards to penis size; however, I would hypothesize that it may still have a significant eugenic/dysgenic bearing on the the development of the male gene pool in regards to the quality of males as a whole, potentially creating a larger gap between higher quality and lower quality males.
