"Easy: Look at the gender balance in engineering, and you'll find that there are not many women."
True but irrelevant. It's the "just" in "most girls just don't like technology" I object to, like it's an innate aversion against technology that can't be overcome.
"Another issue is, and this is a highly non-pc one, that the female IQ distribution doesn't reach the same highs (and lows) as male IQ distribution."
Irrespective of being true or not, engineers, for example, would mostly be placed in the higher ranges. If any difference in the distribution of intelligence could account for the gender imbalance in technical occupations, the difference would be markedly less than would be expected from a potentially deviating IQ distribution.
Regarding "brain differences: it's called spatio-relational reasoning."
Seeing how there are, in absolute numbers, even if not in relative numbers, many women who excel in highly technical occupations and environments, this does not account for any differences, unless it could be shown that this particular subset of women have a different "male spatio-relational reasoning" part of the brain, as opposed to other women.
I do not agree or disagree that biology might have part in a difference in interest in technology in men and women. The point is to identify which part if any.
And even if it is ultimately shown that there are biological limits to technology adoption by women in the high ranges of (say) 75%, that still means there are 25% who might be persuaded to become involved in technology by a change in societal behaviour instead of being "sucked into" what at this time is a stereotypical profession for a gender.