Practically everyone would agree that the status quo is not just YC's fault. For example, the STEM gender gap plays a big role, and that's not something YC is directly responsible for. So it's easy to conclude that YC shouldn't just go right for a 50:50 ratio because the burden shouldn't rest entirely on their shoulders.
But here's another way to look at it: Accepting more women applicants -- even if they don't fit YC's acceptance heuristic (which is, by definition, already an approximation for actual success) as well -- is not necessarily a bad idea. Sexism and other irrational biases are strongly fueled by bad intuitions, and people learn these bad intuitions by not seeing enough diversity in tech and/or founders. This is a situation that YC can improve.
This wouldn't be about lowering the bar. It's more like accounting for the "home field advantage" that males have long benefited from, and eventually eliminating the advantage by letting everyone play on a neutral field starting with their first game. (First person to come up with a better metaphor gets an upvote...)
(edit: and yes, I know @sama says YCombinator won't do that. But it's still worth considering!)
But here's another way to look at it: Accepting more women applicants -- even if they don't fit YC's acceptance heuristic (which is, by definition, already an approximation for actual success) as well -- is not necessarily a bad idea. Sexism and other irrational biases are strongly fueled by bad intuitions, and people learn these bad intuitions by not seeing enough diversity in tech and/or founders. This is a situation that YC can improve.
This wouldn't be about lowering the bar. It's more like accounting for the "home field advantage" that males have long benefited from, and eventually eliminating the advantage by letting everyone play on a neutral field starting with their first game. (First person to come up with a better metaphor gets an upvote...)
(edit: and yes, I know @sama says YCombinator won't do that. But it's still worth considering!)