Good article that expresses the sides well.
The question is: is the law they’re applying from man or from the Trinity?
In the first century AD, none would’ve questioned this. 1000 yrs later, seems like almost every Catholic accepts that the Church and its most critical laws are man-made.
Women deacons were different in the first cedntury from what male deacons are today. Male deacons are ordained, like priests. Women deacons in the first century were not, as they had totally different duties, none of which were like those of today's male deacons.
She excommunicated herself when she tried to be ordained like a man.
Women called "deaconesses" in the early Church era were not clergy, which is to say, they had not received Holy Orders. They functioned mainly in catechizing and baptizing women and children, since in many social contexts it was unacceptable for an unrelated male to visit women in their homes, nor to baptize them, since baptism was done naked, by immersion.
So today's pseudo-deaconesses are not interested in involvement on the model of the deaconesses of late Roman Christian antiquity. They could serve as sisters or nuns or monastics or women religious in active apostolates. but they are not interested in that. either.
That's because they are not interested in serving, per se. They are interested in acquiring status: the status of clerics. What attracts them, what they demand, is precisely the worst aspect of clericalism: title, prestige and power.