I understand that people specialise in different things. Gender can certainly influence the areas in which human beings excel or find room for improvement. For example, men tend to be funnier than women (at least from the male perspective) but this doesn't mean there aren't great comediennes out there. (Women often find more intelligent ways to express comedy than men---the latter's stupidity tending to be sufficiently mirthful.) Ostensibly, there are also other areas where women seem to be better than men in general.
There are great female elocutionists who would find it unfair of men to imply that women are generically useless at public speaking. We mustn't overlook the details and should certainly refrain from conclusions based on incomplete scientific data.
For example, suppose scientists statistically discovered that, at present, there are far more male elocutionists than women. Should they assume, based on this piece of evidence alone, that gender undoubtedly dictates over whether someone is predisposed to be a great public speaker or not? No, because other factors have not been considered.
There are also other possibilities within, for instance, a social context. What if women, in general, have been repressed by male chauvinism for so long and feel oppressed or lacking confidence based on inequitable prejudgements? What if they are victims of an ignorant meme---an old wives' tale---that makes them believe they shouldn't even try that which is said to be best suited for the opposite sex?
You catch my drift?
Sadly, this is the kind of reasoning theists sometimes use to justify gender-limiting passages:http://letspleasegod.com/2015/02/the-real-reason-why-god-prohibits-women-pastors/
Malala, at least, has justifiably defied the Taliban-promoted meme that women shouldn't even get an education. And she's proved the Islamic chauvinists wrong, too, by demonstrating that, in her teenagehood, she was already capable of ratiocination of the kind many of her male counterparts couldn't even dream of.