You’re welcome! Glad I could provide some insight. This isn’t my specific expertise, so unfortunately I can’t really rattle off a bunch of good sources for you, but I gave this one a cursory glance and it seems to cover a lot of it, including those early “man the hunter” parts. Hawkes 2003

We already did. There’s plastic everywhere and a layer of nuclear fallout surrounding the entire globe. Those will be around long after we are gone.

To your first question: probably not. We travel all over the world sharing our genome, so there isn’t really a bottleneck or split that would cause selection for a specific trait to appear.

To your second question: that’s tricky and depends on how scientifically literate they are.

I’m an archaeologist so I’m best suited to give you a succinct definition for feminist archaeology, but it essentially is looking at the any people who were previously overlooked when examining past human behavior. Doesn’t necessarily have to be women, it can be how children appear in the record, or any other group that was typically not cared about by early archaeologists who were very focused on “Man the Hunter” and chalked everything else up to “oh and women gathered things, but have you seen these men?!?”

I think overall, both men and women did a lot of overlap on tasks. Age probably has to do more with role separation than sex. I think that the “Grandmother Hypothesis” for example could be considered feminist anthropology. It’s hard to take young children hunting, they’re loud. It’s hard for elderly people to hunt, it’s very taxing. That leaves the prime aged men and women available for that task. But meemaw and pawpaw can watch junior while mom and dad hunt. They get something protein rich, and while they’re out doing that, everyone else does some local gathering. Boom, balanced diet for the whole family. The Grandmother Hypothesis is great at explaining why humans, unlike other mammals, live far past their main reproductive years, in my opinion.