I think there are a lot of valid things there. There is definitely sexism. And I am all for better and more available childcare for all, in any field. The MIT example is striking, and rings true.
For all of Dr. Barres' reliance on data, though, he breaks down ("just a guess") on a central point:
Q. Are men more careerist?
A. I think people do what they are rewarded for doing, and I think women realize, whether it's conscious or unconscious, they are not going to get the rewards. So they put the hours into their families or whatever. That's just a guess.
Science is like art, it's just something you have to do. It's a passion. When I go into a lab, I'll go without sleep, I'll go hours and hours, day after day. And I think women would do that if they weren't given so much negative feedback.
I very much agree with the italicized section -- but what I think (and what the data shows) is that women tend to choose
not to go without sleep and go for hours and hours, day after day, because women tend to place a higher emphasis on a balanced life. This can be specifically about child-rearing -- going home and spending time with the children rather than going without sleep, hours and hours, etc. -- but it can also just be about hanging out with friends, or playing a sport, or traveling for pleasure, or whatever.
Elite scientists have no lives. And research has shown that men are generally more willing than women to have no life, to focus exclusively on their careers at the expense of all else.