Article seems a little sexist to me, says that pleasure may have existed for male fish but not females and that it would have taken the development of fingers

Article seems a little sexist to me, says that pleasure may have existed for male fish but not females and that it would have taken the development of fingers for females to experience pleasure. Then takes a swipe at male anthropologists. Would like to know if other hominids that have sex for pleasure can co satisfy of if further stimulation is required for females of other species. Edit: Seem to have struck a nerve with someone, here is what I see as sexist. 'So it’s the manual work, not the manhood’s, that’s topping off the pleasure in the female half of the species. I’ve never heard a paleontologist, most of whom are men, describe an ancient fossil finger as evidence for the dawn of pleasurable sex. Why do you suppose that is?' That is being supported by the previous paragraph that talks about how “human female orgasm during sexual intercourse is uncommon, in particular without additional clitoral stimulation; the orgasm is in fact more common during female masturbation or homosexual intercourse, than during actual heterosexual intercourse.” Which is fine but she uses the fact the human females don't experience pleasure and projects it back on fish with no support. 'Now, what about pleasure? In human terms, could Long’s model of ancient fish sex be the dawn of sex for fun? Sure. Why not? Well, at least for the male. In order for us to be more confident about the female, our ancient fishes would need to have (magically) evolved dexterous fingers—which didn’t actually evolve on Earth until many millions of years after these protopenises.'