Interesting theory, but may I suggest another. I think it is probably wrong that the farming life was preferable to the nomadic hunter gatherer. Certainly the life of a medieval peasant farmer was truly dire. The problem with the hunter gatherer lifestyle is that it requires a great deal of land. I propose that it was the shortage of land that led to the demise of that lifestyle. Imagine an area of mixed farmers and hunter gatherers. The latter would see no reason why they should not hunt the farmers cattle and gather his crops. Much warfare and killing would follow. Warfare is a predominantly male activity, for good reason, one baby to one woman in more than one year. One baby to one man per night, men are disposable, they matter less (some would argue that that has been the male fear behind much subjugation of women). Even after this period it is no coincidence that fort building started in the bronze age. Bronze is highly nick-able and has to be defended. I don't think our ancestors built Maiden Castle just for the fun of it or for the cracking view (it is truly cracking, come and see). Defending the shared wealth was a serious business involving warfare and male deaths (OK, so Maiden Castle was built mainly during the Iron Age). Maiden Castle was a shared effort from the whole community, not the chief with the most bling. The Iron Age brought more efficient killing tools, which required yet more fort building, warfare and more male deaths. I don't thing even stone age women were so stupid as to think that the man with the bigger stone axe would be so much better a hunter as to be able to support multiple children rather the hunter with only one. The statistic is mainly due to warfare and male death rate.