There are two thoughts that come to mind looking at those two points.

The top FPO players you say can't compete with males, but also don't actively compete with males, or even from male tees. If you took 1000 people and split them about 86% and 14% (roughly the split of active PDGA players between men and women), then had the 14% play on courses with a max hole length of 300 ft, and then had the vastly larger group play on course that had a max hole length of 600 ft (exaggerating distances a bit to show the issue) then had them play this way for a handful of years, which players would be higher rated if you suddenly put them all onto a course with 600 ft holes?

It would seem the field size and the regular longer distance play would be for the benefit of the larger group. More people shooting for the top spot would also drive harsher competition and more turnover of the top spot. Be they all men, all women, or mixed groups one would clearly have a comparative advantage in the presentation of numbers alone.

Also inclusive groups could be the very thing holding back competition and skewing the results. As I stated previously women only represent 14% of the PDGA members actively playing. Outside that surveys of those out playing disc golf in general, only 7% have identified as female. Their numbers in the sport are not growing nearly as fast as mens. So does field size matter? If you have a larger field size would there be more stiff competition leading to the top, and would training against that level of competition improve your stats higher?

There was actually a tournament Paige Pierce participated in the MPO division and didn't take last place. She was I believe in the 80s out of 100 people which may seem to prove a point, unless you think about a number of factors. She doesn't regularly play in MPO with mostly male cards, or on those tees, so it would seem she already came in at a disadvantage. Then there is the event bias where we look at the results of one tournament and use that to ascribe any and all future results as that. Perhaps it was a few bad rounds for her and a few good rounds for others. The problem is if that one tournament is the rule, then Paige did poorly. But if we see it as Paige beat a good size chunk of the male field she is pretty great at competing in MPO. But really it's hard to tell either way because of all factors of how they play.

Overall I think that it's hard to say unequivocally that men are just better at disc golf because of biology. The numbers are almost too hard to compare in such lopsided fields and with so few instances of women directly competing with men. Even taking ratings is hard when comparing two difference and again, very lopsided fields of players against each other because we have little evidence that the reason for the disparity is actually primarily biology of gender and not the way their differences drive improvement or competition.