I'm not sure what the point of all this blather is. Many people argue that the differences between the genders are largely irrelevant in a lot of situations, and that distinct differences between gender or race are only really relevant when talking about large groups on a statistical basis. Studying these differences doesn't produce anything profound or meaningful, either, just data that irritates people because it promotes thinking in generalities.
Whatever differences there are when dealing with averages are usually irrelevant in human-scale interactions between a handful of people that are, in many cases, randomly distributed across various criteria.
If group X was found to be on average 5% higher in some particular measurement than another, what does that mean on a person-to-person basis? All it will do is bias people in their thinking. It's only when that percentage is quite extreme that it's actually significant.
Whatever differences there are when dealing with averages are usually irrelevant in human-scale interactions between a handful of people that are, in many cases, randomly distributed across various criteria.
If group X was found to be on average 5% higher in some particular measurement than another, what does that mean on a person-to-person basis? All it will do is bias people in their thinking. It's only when that percentage is quite extreme that it's actually significant.