Writer soul
“…Women have no equivalent title which they can don so easily. Allowing ANY man to use it would be an innovation, and one which is, indeed, unfair…”
All three of these sentences are mistaken.
But first lets backtrack.
There are three categories of people reffered to as Rabbis. (of course there is overlap eg many fall in both a and b)
a Talmidei Chachamim even without formal semicha
b people with formal semicha even if they may not be talmidei chachamim
c people in a posisition of “leadership” eg Grade school rebeim, kashrus mashgichim, kiruv people, motivational speakers, camp directors etc (of course some of these may be more valid than others).
The OP doesn’t like catgeroy c.
This is where you come in.
You want a new innovation that women should be called “Rabbi” too (ie women in category c) The reason for this that you gave initally is to avoid “double standards “and “fairness” however neither of thsoe are real reasons.
If all you seek is a title of respect for Women in category C. I dont get the problem, Grade school teachers are called “Morahs” motivational speaers have the tietle “Rebbetzin” (E.G. Rebbetzin Esther Jungreis) What is the problem?
So to sum up:
“.Women have no equivalent title which they can don so easily….”
False Morah, and Rebbetzin bot come to mind.
” Allowing ANY man to use it would be an innovation,”
False this is the way it has been for a while now (ie “Rabbis” only applying to men even when unearned in a formal sense)
“…and one which is, indeed, unfair…”
Perhaps True but irrelevant as has been repeatedly pointed out (why do you keep making the same mistake?)