It's very likely biological.

Here's the thing - the variability of males on average isn't a socially constructed thing. What is socially constructed is what society values generally speaking - or what it values over other things. We value smart people and for good reason. But it's a social construct that we hold Nobel Prize winners over James Beard Award winners, for example.

Progressives should stop fighting science and play on subjective grounds (like what society values and why) where they can actually win.

It's probably biological.

A sizeable majority of our ancestors are women. Only a few men get to have kids. This creates a selective pressure for males to have higher variance traits. If it's winner take all, higher variance strategies pay off better.

I believe the evidence that's used in support of the biological viewpoint is that we see similar distributions patterns in other species - aka - sexual dimorphism.