The biology of cheating

The recent revelations on Tiger's "transgressions" have juiced up the conversation again on whether men cheat more, and if so, if they're more prone to cheating. This debate I find to be irrelevant on one hand - in societies such as ours that have an "unspoken" agreement honoring monogamy or at least honesty, cheating is simply wrong, and even if one gender were more prone to a particular behavior, we cannot treat or punish the offenses differently (or else violence amongst men would certainly be a lesser crime. But on the other hand, I do understand that this might have implications for understanding our very own "hardwiring" or some of the impulses we as humans or as men and women might have.
What bothers me is the reliance on "biology" or pseudo-biology, I should say, to explain these sorts of behaviors. Our own biology and psychology are far too complex to be understood metaphysically. Comparisons to other animal species (e.g. polygamous bulls vs. polyandrous birds) is ludicrous because we as humans have been and continue to "determine" our own mating patterns. We have evolved the tremendous capacity or at least strong desire to be monogamous for a good reason - it is, under stable and favorable conditions, the most effective and secure method for raising healthy and happy children. But we are more complex than that. Our latent desire to seek other partners is, from a biological perspective, most likely a way to keep looking for the most suitable partner possible, for each particular point in time, and from a psychological perspective, a way to seek variety and interest. Some would argue that only males derive any advantage from wandering - sowing their seed, etc. But while the evolutionary advantages for a woman to stray may not necessarily be as easily defined (they do exist - backup plans, getting more desirable genes but having the better husband to help raise the child, or simply satisfying our inborn thirst for lust and love), the drive is clearly there as judged by the roughly equal percentages of men & women who cheat. (While these numbers are certainly unattractive, differences thereof are certainly of concern - it is almost always indicative of some form of repression of women, and not just sexually.) So whatever rationale we can dream up from a quasi-evolutionary point of view to excuse or to at least explain men's transgressions is grossly incomplete at best and tremendously damaging to societal dynamics and gender relations at worst. We all have a very wide range of behaviors that we can choose to engage in, and depending on whether surrounding circumstances are stable or not, one type might be more favorable in evolutionary terms than another.
Another point worth noting is that, not only are we each capable of a very wide range of behaviors when it comes to our choice of sexual partners, within our population there is an even wider range. People's number of lifetime partners range from 0 to thousands, and this is not just a reflection of desire or desirability - conscious choices are often also at play.
Which brings me to my final point, which is that, no matter what, we CAN always "help ourselves," and we can make better choices, and whatever influences have somehow corrupted an admired golf legend to go pursuing women for years at a stretch, he is 100% responsible for his actions, and so are all those who choose not to abide by commitments or agreements that they have very clearly and explicitly made.