It isn't about getting a 50/50 balance of male/female competitors. It is about women who say they want to compete but are put off by the attitude of other competitors towards them due to their gender.
Except that's *not* what the articles say - one is just rehashing the other, which is simply a "hey, we threw a survey and this is what we got back". Which not only is self-reporting bias, but it's not even talking to the same question. All it says is that on this *one* event from this *one* site, they had a 90/10 split. Which doesn't check for such things as "what's the usual demographic for your site", "what's the demographics on other comparable sites", or "what's the demographics on sites that have more than 200 people", or "how many women checked the 'male' box because they didn't trust the survey-takers"
That's before we get to the elephant - are we talking about skewed numbers in viewership (which is what TFA is), or skewed numbers in participation? It's entirely possible for the participation to be skewed one direction while the audience is skewed in another.
But most importantly, that article makes a bigger case for racial discrimination, simply by which interviews they picked. And I'd love to hear how anyone is going to fix that, short of requiring token minorities in all groups so that interested parties have someone who look like them in the room. (Which frankly strikes me as far more insulting that simply being the first one through the door.)