I think O'Neill is trying to look at the bigger cultural picture, rather than at Page's personal journey specifically. I said on the other thread - it's not like there has ever been a time when some women weren't abused sexually, so why this now?
I do think there is something to the internal female locus vs th emale external one. It reminds me a bit of the interview Jordan Peterson did with that young detransioner, whose name escapes me. He said it's well known in psychology that women in phycological pain tend to turn it inwards on their own bodies, whereas men tend to throw it outwards - so you get young women who cut or starve themselves, where as young men pain graffiti on the walls or join a gang and shoot someone.
Apparently there is no real agreement on what the reasons for this might be, but there is some thought that it has to do with girls having a different relationship to their physicality, not only from a socially constructed POV but also internally.
The theology strikes me as ultimately a little too simplistic, as sin is always, in Christianity, fundamentally an internal issue, including for men. He's right to point out that a lot of these women weren't canonized for a long time, because the medievals were actually rather suspicious of that kind of thing - it was the early modern period that was more gung-ho - and that was certainly a bad period for women overall, but also included quite a lot of faddish enthusiasm for male mortification of the flesh as well.