That data is ridiculously over-interpreted.

The article should have said: poorly done studies leaped to ill-founded conclusions about the differences between male and female brains.

We showed that those ideas were dumb.

We don't really understand the differences between male and female brains, because the things we can measure like sizes of fiber tracts don't correlate all that highly with cognitive features.

But if you were thinking that male and female brains were proven different because of those old dumb studies, you need to take a step back. Cause we looked more carefully, and the differences we thought we saw aren't nearly so obvious as we thought.

(It is absolutely positively 100% not a proof that "there's no such thing as a 'male' or 'female' brain"! We've gone back from mistakenly thinking we know the difference to not being sure whether there is a substantial systematic difference because we're not entirely sure what to look at.)