The Rāmāyana seems to be written with a male audience in mind. The language throughout doesn't lend itself very well to a female reader because the female characters are often missing depth and appear to be very secondary to the story. It feels like it is written to "give a pass" to the behavior in which high-caste males partake. There doesn't seem to be a consistent agreement to what actions are considered to be dharmic which makes it hard to follow, but also seems like it would be easy for higher-caste men to manipulate those rules to their benefit.
The concept of dharma seems like it would be easier for men to uphold in general because they have more power. It says that Rāma sacrificed everything for dharma which you could say would be easier for a man to do because he is able to make all those decisions for himself (15). It also seems that only men are attempting to uphold dharma. When it's talked about it's normal within the context of a man, for example, when King Daśaratha was considered to be an honorable man for upholding dharma (242). Was Sīta not also upholding dharma throughout the story? The narrative seems to only care about male characters and how they can influence male readers to uphold dharma.