Ugh, you were so close to making the right point.
1. It became a subject of tinkering.
2. Boys are socialized to be tinkerers.
3. Girls are not socialized to be tinkerers.
4. It became male dominated.
The fundamental, underlying problem is with the way girls are socialized in the home to be pretty caregivers instead of intelligent problem solvers.
"We offer the hypothesis that toy preferences reflect hormonally influenced behavioral and cognitive biases which are sculpted by social processes into the sex differences seen in monkeys and humans."
So yes, there may be some biological/neurological biases, but that they are then socially reinforced, which is exactly my point.
And last I checked, one of the things that makes humans humans is our ability to grow beyond our basic wired-in instincts. So I fail to see how that article can be seen as a pass for what is clearly a cultured gender bias.
Your 4-point history is also off because it implies there was a gender neutral computer science that was then taken out of balance by socialization. The only thing you seem intersted in addressing is that girls aren't encouraged to tinker with things - that in and of itself is a fair point. You don't need to create a false history and a false biology to address it.
Focusing purely on socialization, while it will make you friends, will also prevent you from seeing the other reasons STEM fields are predominantly male.
Which is exactly the case.
During the 60s and 70s, computing programs were far more gender balanced (still biased, but nowhere near as askew as today), in part because coming out of World War 2, women were far more likely to have been in the field, for the same reason they were included in manufacturing and other previously male-dominated professions: the men were at war.
The extreme male gender bias you see in computing today is a result of a regressive trend whose seeds were sown in the 80s and 90s, corresponding with the PC revolution.