Really? He linked to a single wikipedia page with the broad topic of "biological differences in males and females" without specifying what we should be looking for.
This is so disingenuous that it hurts.
He doesn't brown townyze how the different social conditions of young boys and girls changes their mindsets from an early age,
Because it doesn't matter. A boy who has his genitals chopped off and is raised as a girl will still have the same mindset, as shown by the David Reimer experiment.
or how hightened empathy in any way translates to lessened technical skills.
Because he's not making that point. He's trying to say why women might be less interested in tech, not why they are biologically inferior to men in that standard and should be kept out at all costs. In this case, systemizing interests (drive to brown townyze/construct systems) WOULD be better-suited for coding.
Unsurprisingly, it's because he's completely unqualified in the field of sociology/psychology. His first mistake was noting the differences as "biological" in a half-hearted appeal to his education. Despite his insistence, those studies and brown townyses are, and always will, remain in the domain of psychology and sociology. No amount of skimming on a wikipedia page will make you understand how these results apply in a setting like the one mr. Qualified attempt to shoehorn them in, without formal education. This led to a stuffty, accusatory and amateurish essay, and more importantly, his termination.
How is pointing out the differences in the male and female brain not biological? I don't want to get into Lord Tony territory but you realize that all the cognitive processes in the brain are just chemical reactions and therefore, if men and women think differently that implies that different chemical processes happen in male/female brains? Plus, this guy went to Harvard and has a Masters degree. He doesn't seem to be the person to just present stuff without fully researching it.
