Should you modify Olympic sports to enable women to compete?

It seems fairly well known that female athletes appear far more vulnerable than their male counterparts to certain injuries and something similar seems to be playing out at the Sochi Olympics this year. Per the New York Times:

Through Monday night, a review of the events at the [Rosa Khutor] Extreme Park counted at least 22 accidents that forced athletes out of the competition or, if on their final run, required medical attention. Of those, 16 involved women. The proportion of injuries to women is greater than it appears given that the men’s fields are generally larger.
... unlike some of the time-honored sports of risk, including Alpine skiing, luge and ski jumping, there are few concessions made for women. ... “Most of the courses are built for the big show, for the men,” said Kim Lamarre of Canada, the bronze medalist in slopestyle skiing, where the competition was delayed a few times by spectacular falls. “I think they could do more to make it safer for women.”
Compare the sports with downhill skiing, in which women have their own course, one that is shorter and less difficult to navigate. Or luge, in which female sliders start lower on the track than the men. Or ski jump, in which women were finally allowed to participate this year, but only on the smaller of the two hills. The Olympics have a history — sexist, perhaps — of trying to protect women from the perils of some sports.
But equality reigns at the Extreme Park, even to the possible detriment of the female participants.

I tend to concur with a National Review article by Heather McDonald that whatever you choose to do in this situation someone will be offended by it. Should you opt for maintaining equality in these sports - and thereby more female injuries - or begin to handicap the sports such that the courses will be less likely to injure women?