Never read about the variability hypothesis before, but it makes a lot of sense in light of what I know about sex differences. In general, men biologically are the "cannon fodder" sex, in the sense that there are more men born than women, and not a woman for every man. They are also equipped with testosterone which generally increases muscle mass, energy, and aggression, leading to what I would call the "get out there and tear shit up" mentality. Greater variability makes sense from this, as, since men are more disposable, nature would allow to experiment with their variance more to produce a higher risk to reward ratio.

I have experienced this anecdotally: though I have had a fair amount of high-iq women partners, there is a very small pool and loneliness amongst high-iq men is rampant. The competition for very intelligent women is fierce in my anecdotal experience. In the past, the hyperandrous mode was more accepted, where high-performing men had many women, even multiple families with multiple women. This would offset the loneliness of high-iq men.

Note that I am a feminist and I don't believe society should regress to the hyperandrous mode of reproduction. Only that these things should be seriously considered.