Re: No it didn't. It's garbage and you know it.
What does the part about maths have to do with the memo? I don't recall it claiming anything about female mathematical abilities. Seems like a crude strawman to me, although you can correct me if I'm wrong.
Dr Debra Soh says:
"As mentioned in the memo, gendered interests are predicted by exposure to prenatal testosterone – higher levels are associated with a preference for mechanically interesting things and occupations in adulthood. Lower levels are associated with a preference for people-oriented activities and occupations. This is why STEM (science, technology, engineering and mathematics) fields tend to be dominated by men.
We see evidence for this in girls with a genetic condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia, who are exposed to unusually high levels of testosterone in the womb. When they are born, these girls prefer male-typical, wheeled toys, such as trucks, even if their parents offer more positive feedback when they play with female-typical toys, such as dolls. Similarly, men who are interested in female-typical activities were likely exposed to lower levels of testosterone."
Now I am in no way in a position to vouch for the validity of this statement, but it does back up what the memo says, what Prof Jordan Peterson said and seems to be fairly in-line with other scientific and anecdotal evidence I've seen, so I'm inclined to believe it.
This is all really an irrelevant sideshow to the real issue. The thing is, we can debate the facts forever, that's what academic rigour is about. However, certain ideologues seem intent on shutting down this debate by silencing anyone that holds views contrary to the prevailing feminist narrative. This article, an article written purely to spread hatred against others, is a prime example of how not to conduct a discussion. All it does is radicalise the moderates and move the centre away from your cause.