Tl;dr an undergraduate paper last year claiming females hunt just as often as males got picked up by the media and amplified before it was discovered their analysis was deeply flawed and unreliable. Here several anthropologists present a very gracious rebuttal.
Biology preceding sociology in the first instance. Male muscle mass and female lipid oxidation, maybe. Gendered labour across different cultures. Exceptions not disproving historical trends. Etc.
That seems somewhat unrelated to this paper about foraging societies.
You’re joking, right?