[tropo]

Females did select, in multiple ways.

First, they sometimes cheated.

Second, arranged marriage is normally set up by people who largely share DNA with those getting married. (the parents negotiate) Since the DNA is pretty much the same, genetically it's as if the bride herself got to choose.

Third, opinion of the bride was not universally ignored.

[munk-a]

1. Both partners cheated, I don't know enough historically to say if one gender cheated more, but I'd guess it's pretty even in monogamous cultures and in non-monogamous cultures there usually was a dominant gender that was permitted to be non-monogamous and the vast majority of these allowed non-monogamous activity on the part of males (I'm including having multiple wives here once dedicated relationships entered society, not just non-binding relationships, that last category was actually, to my understanding, dominated by female choice, but it's a very tiny sliver)

2. I don't see how this favors either gender in particular, outside of the general trend of a society to be more matriarchal or patriarchal (and most people have lived in societies that have skewed towards the patriarchal end)

3. I agree but given the skew of societies I'd say that the opinion of the bride was ignored more often than the opinion of the husband.

There are comments all over the place so I'd clarify my overall point, it appears that male-driven choice and female-driven choice have both contributed, neither gender was entirely sidelined or even close to that state, but from what I've seen male choice has traditionally had a larger voice in terms of reproduction. So females did select in multiple ways, (anyone who says it's all males is being silly) but their selection power was below the selection power held by males.