So I guess my interpretation wasn't that far off then. You actually were suggesting that girls had more potential.
Well, since you also make clear that you believe such a thing only because you choose to and without evidence, I guess there's really no point in discussing it. All I can say is that I disagree, entirely, and this article (and many others with similar findings) are more than enough reason why.
I don't see how you could read that from my reply. I don't think girls we can know if girls have more potential "independently of the world around them".
It is true girls currently, on average, do significantly better at exams at many levels, in particular to get into University (at least, in the UK). Why is open to debate.
Tests are not run for fun - they are ultimately there to measure the potential for achievement in workplaces/academic research, and to prioritize scarce university spots (and eventually jobs) based on this imputed expected potential.
Well, since you also make clear that you believe such a thing only because you choose to and without evidence, I guess there's really no point in discussing it. All I can say is that I disagree, entirely, and this article (and many others with similar findings) are more than enough reason why.