Men and women in hunter gatherer societies had very defined roles. Men hunted for protein, namely meat. Women sought tubers and berries for long term family sustenance. Some scientists are saying that male and females were more equal in prehistory. This not really the case.
Women, for example, could not go on the hunt with men. Males would not remain home with the women unless sickness prevented the hardships of seeking wild game. A women who did not find a mate had to remain home, unwanted, with her birth family. Indeed close breeding was frowned upon. Mates were invariably found in an unrelated group.
Scientists have mistakenly confused female independence in decision making, which supposedly pushes them to choose an outside mate, with women knowing that it is the wise thing to do, while males are dumb and stupid about this. The attraction between cousins is well known - thus the term "kissing cousins". Why would women have superior ideals than men. They wouldn't. No, it is something genetically inherent in Man that drives individuals to find unrelated mates, loose liaisons with cousins not withstanding.
If males saw nothing wrong with interbreeding they would clearly have forced their will on females. Since the beginning, males have always dominated in mammals. Women could not have forced their will on men, apart from persistent verbal onslaught. It is known that females do dominate the verbal sphere.
The scientists have it wrong. Women are persuasive over males in one-to-one negotiations, but in groups matters men would govern and set the rules. Men clearly felt that pairing with outside parties was a "natural" thing to do.
✴ Society by Ty Buchanan ✴