[arcticfox]

> Evolution only requires that you get to reproduction, however that happens. It doesn't require that you're happy, sad, whatever, just that you reproduce.

It requires that your offspring actually survive as well. Humans are, at least historically, exceptionally well-equipped to influence the survival of their offspring.

[vacri]

Humans also take figuratively forever to be self-sufficient. Herd animals are born with the ability to walk, for example. Humans take about 10 years before they can be taught to be even somewhat self-sufficient, which is a ridiculously long time in comparison to others.

So, given that humans are sexually mature before they're fully self-sufficient, that enhanced ability to support their offspring is not all advantage - it's actually required for the propagation of the species. If older folks weren't taking care of the younger ones, none of them would reach reproductive age.

[devoply]

A 7 or 8 year old can hunt if you were to teach them to do so. An 8 year olds has conceived. So it's possible to do it at a much younger age if you have no choice.

[vacri]

While it may sound callous, if that 8-year-old did not produce viable offspring that could mature to reproductive age themselves, she is irrelevant to evolution. Conception is not synonymous with viable offspring.

As for the 8-year-old hunter, just how self-sufficient can they be? Procuring their own weapons, transporting their own carcasses, preparing healthy meals multiple times per day on an ongoing basis... the idea that you could just loose a 7-8 year old into the woods with a weapon and they'd survive in an ongoing sense is a bit far-fetched. Teaching someone to sneak, track, and point a gun is not the same as them being self-sufficient.