No they don't. GC starts with a metaphor ("different wiring"), gives an example (autism and math), cautions against turning statistical probability into prediction, and then ends with another metaphor that suggests that men and women are "for the most part" different (while saving his argument from counter-anecdotal evidence by making room for exceptions). That is quite different from the article in question. The neuroscientists - or most of them - discuss how male and female brains differ, but the article then cites another study that concluded, "However, these average differences do not make it possible to type individual brains: A 2015 study in the same journal found it was impossible to categorize most brains as stereotypically male or female based on gray matter in several brain regions." And then the article goes on to query what functional differences result from neurological differences. And that's the problem: when people make the jump from brain structure to behavior.