Let me quote the title of the link above: "Number of people SHOT TO DEATH BY THE POLICE in the United States in 2017-2018, as of June, by race".
Exposure to "toxic substances"? I don't think so.
Also, tech industry != "the internet".
If you're really interested in having a debate, go ahead and read Emily's book. Seriously.
While you're at it, "The Innovators" [1] is also a good read, and it'll be helpful to understand that the roots of our "tech industry" really started 100+ years ago, with a disproportional growth starting several decades before Larry and Sergey even got admitted to kindergarten...
The gender disparity we're seeing today is the consequence of several decades of systemic and widespread conscious and unconscious biases, that have shaped the perception of an entire generation.
Once you refine your understanding and start paying attention, you can see it everywhere. And unfortunately it'll take decades to fix.
[1] https://www.amazon.com/Innovators-Hackers-Geniuses-Created-R...
Your point is obviously that the percentage is higher for black people. But the percentage is higher for black people for a wide variety of causes of death, like exposure to toxic substances (due to living in high risk areas), which actually kill more people. So why is this one in particular the subject of a national campaign?
> ignoring 50+ years of biases and stereotypes
The "tech industry" (meaning the likes of Google) wasn't possible before the internet was a thing used by the majority of the population. It hasn't even existed for 50+ years.
And the predecessor industries you would have to include to get back that far had a much less skewed gender balance.
Whatever this is, it doesn't have a 50+ year history.
> on top of open sexual and moral harassment that created a toxic environment for women
Studies have shown that the degree of sexual harassment in gender balanced industries like medicine is atrocious -- significantly worse than it is in tech. Attempting to use that as an explanation for the gender balance fails because the relative difference is in the opposite direction.
> then you're helping to increase the gender divide.
...unless you're wrong about the causes, in which case we need to understand the real ones in order to do something about it. And for that we need to be able to talk about them without slamming the door in the face of anyone who questions the prevailing narrative.
And Damore was clearly wrong about some things. But if you don't allow people to speak at the risk of being wrong then they'll say nothing even when they're right. When someone is wrong you don't eject them from the community, you explain why and have the debate.