It's difficult to fathom how the authors interpret the data on page 14 as not supporting the hypothesis that there is a male/female variance ratio of circa 1.1.

It's difficult to fathom how the authors interpret the data on page 14 as not supporting the hypothesis that there is a male/female variance ratio of circa 1.1. Figure 1A is a generally bell-shaped curve centered around 1.1. In Figure 1B, almost all of the points are below the 1:1 line, whereas if you plot a 1.1:1 line, its a perfect fit. In Figure 1C, the x value where the regression line intersects a zero gender gap (i.e. no evidence of cultural bias), is at a variance ratio of about 1.1. All of the evidence the authors present points to an underlying variance ratio near 1.1, yet somehow they conclude the opposite.