I really appreciate this response, Ayya.
One of the grave dangers is, of course, foreclosing women like Mae Chee Kaew from being able to reach fruition as practitioners, teachers, and potentially, Arahants. I had a little time yesterday and following your OP here, I began to do a little informal research on the status of Sayalays / Thilashin in Burma. Eventually, I found this article, https://snfwrenms.wordpress.com/2015/03/09/thailand-maechee-kaew/, discussing the life of a Thai nun, Mae Chee Kaew.
The point of my post is that, with the subordination of women in Thailand and Myanmar, for example, the Buddhist world loses, potentially, Arahants. For male monastics to play a role in denigrating and subordinating women is not only misogynist, aversive, and unskillful, but highly foolish. LP Mun recognized Mae Chee Kaew’s potential early on " Ajahn Mun could see that she possessed uncommon psychic abilities and had great spiritual potential. Even as a beginner, her mind easily went into deep absorption for many hours." Later, LP Maha Bua recognized her attainments:
Ajahn Maha Boowa, at her eulogy, declared that there was no need for any funeral chanting because as an Arahant, there was nothing more they could add for her. He also said that whether we were man or woman, we were equally capable of attaining enlightenment, no matter what lineage or tradition we were practising, so do it well. He had a stupa erected in her memory.
So, with the thought in mind that women and men stand equally with the potential for Arahantship, it is in the nature of a crime, an act against the Buddha, to forestall the full and complete training and development of a woman in this Path and Practice. Knowing this, as so many of the male Bhikkhus must know from their studies and training, how do they then, ethically and intellectually, see fit to act otherwise, or to defy the example set by LP Mun or LP Maha Bua?