Women as a class in OT Israel did experience a degree of exclusion from maximum participation in the religious life of the nation. This in practice led (probably too often) to a lesser regard of them than was warranted, when they shared--then as now--with men as full image-bearers. Yet, they and little children were no less covenant-citizens in Israel than adult men, and had as their due a right to the privileges of such membership. The treatment of the Levite's concubine in Judges 19, and how shocking it was to the sensibilities of those who heard about it, is proof both of the exceptionally bad treatment shown her (otherwise, why would news of the incident appall the hearers?) and of how easily those with any privilege in any age are quick to lord it over others and push others down for fear of losing their advantage.
Women were unclean ceremonially more often than men in the nature of the case. Barring pregnancy, a typical mature woman was unavoidably unclean for as much as half of every month (for as long as her period lasted, plus a few days extra). Unlike a man, who might deliberately avoid causes of uncleanness in order to fully participate in the altar and feasts of Israel when summoned to the duty, a woman was at the mercy of her cycle, bound to nature's ordinance and the Law's prohibition on account of it. She should not have been so little regarded as she was in certain eras, as if God did not delight in Abraham's daughters; but we know how culture can be. Society sometimes took the limitations placed religiously (or covenantally) on women, and turned those into excuses for making them second-class citizens.
By the NC removal of the OC ceremonial system, almost all the restrictions that affected women more than men (and sometimes men also) fell away. There are still a handful of rules regarding worship and discipline of the church that have a sex-specific designation. But it is clear that women as well as men were marked by baptism in the same manner, proving that many old lines were erased for the kingdom of heaven; and this meant women were also summoned to participate in the Lord's Supper. We reason to this conclusion, not because there are any examples in the NT of women joining the covenant meal, but because the same rules surely apply to either sex. OC participation and service was organized around the expectations of cleanness, which setup benefited the males who consequently bore the brunt of covenant duties (to accompany the rights and privileges).
In the OT, only adult, circumcised males were summoned 3X a year to the feasts (doubtless, women came along when encouraged to do so, e.g. travel of both Hannah and Mary mentioned in the text). Curiously, the ordinance of memorial Passover (and that feast alone) can be read to exclude women on the basis that it is for ONLY the circumcised person, Ex.12:48, meaning men. There are no unambiguous examples of women fully participating in the Passover, and even the Last Supper which could have easily demonstrated female participation also happens to have none such present. It is recorded (Lk.8:1-3) that Jesus had women-devotees including wealthy ones who believed in him and were close to him, supporting his ministry; some of his disciples were married men, but the upper room did not contain any female contingent. Still, never in the history of the church, apart from a cult, have women been denied their right to eat of the Lord's body and blood, and that without any special approval. They are baptized, professing Christians, and as such if under no other bar are fully entitled as a man to partake under like circumstances. The whole church of men and women are summoned equally to the Lord's Table.
The NT teaches us to value the removal of the sex-specific burdens of outward cleanliness, and to recognize there is no more male and female distinguished in covenant-law, any more than Jew versus Greek, Gal.3:28. Paul does not write this, after to dispense with all differences between the sexes or teach the end of all sex-specific rules or limits. But women have been elevated, or restored in Christ to their honored place in the church. Christians, of all people, should be determined to show absence of prideful discrimination among us. Nor should we submit by default to a socially constructed definition of offensive discrimination, which would force us to deny the Bible's authority to propound God's limits wherever it may. Sex-specific limit set by divine authority does not count as sinful discrimination. Even with that, an outsider observing Christians at worship and in fellowship should be impressed by the evident dignity of every member regardless of sex (and station).
I like your bringing the kingly and prophetic roles into the discussion.
