Yup, pc article that's gonna be posted on femcentric sites to push a delusional narrative.

Women had far fewer periods? Why? And why do you think they wouldn’t have been as focused on fertility as modern society? It’s literally their biological purpose, as it is for men.

The woman went out hunting with the only source of food for the children attached to her chest... [of course not]

As long as you don't have any shitlings running around, it makes sense for every capable person to be involved.

It’s pretty easy to research your way out of obvious truths. Even if there is just a marginal advantage for male hunters over female, it’s common sense that you wouldn't want women to come because it would lead to people flirting and being distracted. I also don’t think there is a linear relationship where if you add more hunters it increases your success rate, if anything you will reach diminishing returns, so there is no benefit to bringing the whole tribe along

My wife was raised by her grandfather who was born in an igloo in winter 1920. She's Inuit and men being the hunters and women being the gatherers/home keepers (tending children, making and mending clothing, everything not related to hunting) is part of living memory from a stone age culture. Sure women were capable of hunting, fishing and trapping but it was primarily a male responsibility. Again, this is in living memory from a stone age culture not guesswork from anthropologists.

Some of these are not full comments, just the funny parts in those comments.