I will accept without argument your body fat numbers.
I would question your bone numbers, but I will accept them provisionally, because...
...even using those numbers, if you re-calculate BMI using the "muscle&other" mass, you get 15.1 for women, and 14.5 for men...
...meaning that women have greater muscular hypertrophy, unless you want to argue that they have thicker skin (which is an argument that I would NEVER accept!)
Further, they exhibit that hypertrophy where it counts for sprinting--in the upper legs and butt, and to a lesser extent shoulders. The cross-sectional area of their quads, hams, glutes, delts, etc. is significantly greater than it is for male distance runners. Maximal force production potential is related to this cross-sectional area, and maximal force production is required in sprinting.
Added to that, again, I would question where you got your bone numbers from.
Further, I thought you were talking 10k/marathon runners.
Further, the weights reported for the TFN top 10 female 100m athletes vary fairly widely:
SAFP 125.7goo vs 110wiki
JET 130.1goo vs 117wiki
VCB 134goo vs 130wiki
Madison 135usatf vs 130.1goo
Felix 125usatf vs 121.3goo
KAB 127.9goo vs 120wiki
Ahoure 130wiki vs 125.7goo
Stewart goo data only
Okagbare and Tarmoh, sources equal
Using the greater figures, which I find to be more believable in all cases, then calculating BMI, and averaging those BMI's, their average is 21.74, rather than the 20.5 that you report.
Using those sources, I get essentially the same average height that you got (I got 5'5.5"), but the average weight that I get is 132.44, versus the 126.5 that you report. These numbers would produce a BMI of 21.7
Using 132.44 rather than 126.5, but still using your bone and fat numbers (subject to some verification) gives
132.44-15.89lbs(fat)-21.19lbs(bone)=95.36lbs muscle&other, which is very close to what you calculated for the 5k men...only again, the women are significantly shorter, and significantly more muscled in the sprinting muscles. In fact, if you use those muscle&other figures in BMI, you now get a whopping 15.6 for women compared with the meager 14.5 for men.
I would guess that this gap would only widen even more if one used 10k/marathon runners vs 5k athletes, but that doesn't really matter, because I don't think it is an arguable point that elite female sprinters exhibit more muscular hypertrophy, especially where it counts for sprinting, than do elite male distance runners. The proof is in the photos, it is obvious for all to see.
Hypertrophy = cross-sectional area = max force potential
Neurology and training aside, elite male distance runners don't have even the musculature required to sprint, even when compared to women sprinters.
And, REMEMBER THAT THIS IS APPLES-TO-ORANGES.
The gold standard comparison is men-to-men.
Why don't you do that one?