I still find it fascinating that some guy can write an article complaining about wacko feminist theory, pointing out obvious empirical facts such as that the best scientists in general tend to be mend, and get jumped on for being a "misogynist".
Meanwhile, in some of the responses, such as yours, we find sweeping assertions seemingly pulled out of the clear blue sky such as the idea that "more women are better than the average man". (At what? At everything?)
Dare I even ask what the statement "more women are better than the average man" is based on? Is it based on anything besides wishful thinking, a sincere desire on your part to appear non-misogynist, a bit of a patronizing attitude towards the sensibilities of women, and that sort of thing?
I was thinking of IQ tests.
The point that I must not have made clearly, is that no statement about men in general or women in general holds for all men or all women. Generalizing statements are made (as I did) about averages or (as the author did) about outliers. The author is a bit guilty of the same "madness" he accuses the "womenists" of.