It is a site for/about women founders. The fact that they made a list of successful women isn't really evidence of anything. If it was a site about founders from the east coast we could just as likely see such a list without assuming people from the east coast are not accepted into entrepreneurial enterprises.

I think he means the fact that we don't go around making lists of "Male founder successes," but we do for female founders is indicative of the imbalance between male and female startup founders, because of the emphasis it places on females.

Perhaps the list itself isn't indicative of anything, but the site and the list combined might be. There has to be a reason why it's a site for women, especially since we don't have sites for startups explicitly for men. That reason is probably because of our patriarchal society more than anything, but his implication that perhaps it indicates that the male to female founder ratio is a little lopsided is not invalid.

I don't think it necessarily means women are not accepted into entrepreneurial enterprises, because it could also mean that women simply are less interested.