If I were to consider Buddhism a little too patriarchal, I wouldn't use words like "unmodern", "medieval", or anything like that. I would attribute it more to the simple fact that Buddhism contains many non-Dravidian Vedic elements. Of course Buddhist Tantra does have many Dravidian elements (many Tantric deities, particularly Women Deities, are originally Dravidian), and so I wonder if Buddha Shakyamuni was using Skillful Means to communicate in his time and place and saw that there wouldn't be as much benefit in publicly teaching Tantra, which the Dravidians had already been practicing for some time. Perhaps there were Dravidian Tantric Mother-Goddess venerating Buddhas—who are unknown to the public—who existed long before the time of Buddha Shakyamuni, such as the ancient depictions of Ethiopic or "Negro" Buddhas that H.P. Blavatsky (in the book The Caves and Jungles of Hindoostan, I believe) and the 19th century British Master Mason Godfrey Higgins makes reference to. So even though Tibetan Buddhism is partly Dravidian, it apparently developed perhaps a bit more on the Vedic side.
As for the sexual harassment issue, it's a fine line. Women aren't always the sexually-sensitive people that they are made out to be. They like sex just as much as men, however they often act like they're "good wholesome girls" in order to avoid getting labelled with double-standard terms like "slut", "tramp", etc. terms which are a product of a contrived, hypocritical "civilization". On the one hand, us men shouldn't get emasculated by getting discouraged from expressing our sexual interest in women, yet on the other hand men should treat women right, and go out of our way to understand the difference between a woman who clearly is not interested, and a woman who is putting up a socially-conditioned facade and/or is 'testing' the man who is expressing sexual interest (believe it or not women sometimes test men to see if they'll give up easily or not).
In an ideal world, we would all remain celibate and chaste with Yoga practices and Pranayama, etc. until we are shown in Meditation Visions, Clairvoyance, or Dream Yoga who we should seek out as sexual partners. But since that is not the case for most people, even many Yogins, the next best thing is that men and women be honest about our sexuality, and have a lot of sex with each other which sure beats the hell out of (no pun intended) resorting to things like masturbation, homosexuality, bestiality, pedophilia, etc. (even if a couple of these latter-listed sexual behaviours are not considered immoral by some people, I'm willing to bet that they're all harmful to the Nadi channels).
Regarding Siddhis, I think that they are a product of those who know how to work with dependent-origination on levels that are undreamed of by ordinary people. As far as I know, Siddhis don't
actually defy dependent-origination altogether. But it looks like this has already been well covered in this thread.