I can't see any reason why everybody must be good at something. There's nothing about genetics which says that random genes will combine in such a way as to give them at least one useful skill.
How would we go about testing your hypothesis?
The hypothesis I proposed is too broad to prove easily. Maybe, we can start with a narrower premise. We can disprove "if you suck in English class, you are no good for college". A friend of mine, a maths genius, got a D in History class in college (without deliberately trying to fail) He had straight A's in all technical courses (CS, maths etc).
Not only that, in math (and programming, etc), you just "get it" and thereafter practice it to get the straight A's. In History, even if you understand everything, you'll always have to memorize dates, names, people, places, etc.
This why smart students do well in school without having to study too hard, but maybe get worse (or even better) grades than the not-so-smart students who study their ass off and memorize everything.
Hah. That women may very well be average at a lot of things, and bad at the rest.
This idea that "everyone has a special gift!" is just pixie-dust dreaming. Most people simply aren't special, in any sense of the word.
Fight Club: "We've all been raised on television to believe that one day we'd all be millionaires, and movie gods, and rock stars. But we won't. And we're slowly learning that fact."
The sooner people learn that, the sooner they can get on with their lives of mediocrity.
The fact is that people have differing levels of ability. but with everybody screaming for 'equality,' everyone has to have some 'special gift.' I'm not saying that some lives are worth more than others (although there's an interesting philosophical argument against this), but the idea that 'you can do anything you set your mind to' is false.
It follows even on through to the wall street ibanks. "Ivyleague type with above 3.7 GPA."
look at the mess they are in now.