I won't dispute this as a premise. However, girls are capable of mastering at least standard arithmetic (the disparaged long division, multiplication tables, etc.) geometry, and algebra, and should be required to do so. There is no reason to invent a dummied-down fuzzy intuitive math to enhance their self-esteem or supposed access to power. Similarly, boys should take Engligh, foreign language, and read the classics . . . Everyone needs the basics. Math is also important in the development of logical thinking. If women (and men!) want to vote, they need to learn how to think logically, IMHO.
The feminists tho don't seem to realize that it is not a problem that people have different strengths; let's cooperate using everyone's strengths, not level-down to everyone's weaknesses.
Personally, I think everyone also should take logic, calculus, and probability/statistics. ;)
Hell yes! Heck--boys AND girls can master FAR more than they are required to today. I once saw on-line a seventh grade test dating from the early 1900's that today's high school graduates would have failed.
My wife is actually better at math than I am (we're both PhD chemists), but I managed to learn enough higher math to "make the grade". It just took a little more "skull sweat" to do so.
My point with the "cave man/woman" analogy is that the center for the Gaussian distribution is just a few points higher for males (for math) and a few points higher for females (for language), but obviously, MOST folks of both sexes CAN learn sufficient of both to do well.
The problem isn't the learning ability of humans--it is lousy teaching theories and methods.