It is culture. Actually science on violence and aggression tend to show a bit different picture, and also why such statistics is of such a low value. Good research tend to explore the null hypothesis and alternative explanation for statistical results.
A common used data point is that men commit most violent crimes. Using the same data from Sweden one can also say that today Muslim are 20 times more likely per person to commit rape than Christians, and about similar likely per person to commit murder. Same numbers can also be used to replace Muslims and Christians with immigrants and natives, or Arab and Germanics. For social scientists that data wouldn't be hugely interesting, as they would look towards social economic status and war refugee status (i.e. things related to PTSD injuries). The conclusions would more likely be that there are a bigger tendency for anti-social behavior by people with minimal social connections and economical destitute, especially if they experience severe emotional trauma.
One fairly interesting statistics to me is that households with either man-woman, man-man, and woman-woman all have equal rate of violent behavior. Statistically that is to me much more interesting. If men inherently had more violent behavior and women less violent behavior, man-man and woman-woman household should show a difference in violence. It also a rather strange statistical phenomenon that if a bisexual woman go from a heterosexual relation into a homosexual relation, her statistical data for violent behavior increases by 200%. A man who does the same decrease his violent behavior by half. Why would that be if there existed a biological difference in violent behavior?