Your uninformed bias is showing, madam.
Well then, tell me more. Who am I biased for or against?
Far as I'm concerned, I'm biased in favor of the facts. The data that we have right now are fairly consistent in showing that men with high spatial ability have testosterone levels that fall toward the *low* end of what is normal for a male. Musical talent is not nearly as well studied, but I believe there is at least one study with a similar finding. There is also a study of more than 3000 Vietnam vets showing a significant difference in education, pay grade, and test scores by hormone levels; the lowest testosterone group always outperformed the highest.
Did you think my comment was some kind of bash against males? It wasn't. I have defended Larry Summers here (despite his liberal leanings) since this controversy broke out. All I was saying is that the mechanism of male superiority in math, science, and probably other intellectual endeavors is unlikely to be excessive levels of testosterone. The amount of testosterone associated with optimal spatial ability is more than most women have, but less than very muscular men have.