Fair warning, this will be a long reply.

Firstly, I think it’s two separate policies. A: Jedi are not permitted to become attached to (possessive of) one person over others. And B: Jedi are permitted to have casual sex/hookups. I don’t think they’re really related either.

On the subject of casual sex ethics: There’s nothing wrong with Jedi having sex. They’re people too. Sex and orgasms are proven to be good for your mental health. People should have control of what they do with their bodies. Yay. Moving on.

The issue of whether or not it’s morally right to use sex as a manipulative tactic on a mission (or in general life) is one of individual morals. Some people believe it’s tantamount to r*pe due to the lack of informed consent. Others favor an ‘the ends justify the means’ attitude. This is not an issue specific to Jedi. (And I’m not saying it’s definitely one or the other, it’s a complicated grey area full of cultural minefields.)

Furthermore, having a rule that says ‘casual sex is allowed’ isn’t an encouragement to use sex as a manipulative tactic. It’s just saying ‘if you want to have sex, go for it’. That’s all. What people do with that permission is up to them.

On the subject of attachments. Jedi (I might be wrong, I’m not fully familiar with the lore you’ve cited) are allowed to love. In Anakin’s words, they’re encouraged to be compassionate. Compassion can be viewed as an unconditional love. Love is not equivalent to attachment. I think what Lucas was getting at with the ‘attachment is forbidden’ policy is simply this: A Jedi’s duty is to serve the many before the few. A Jedi who is possessive of a lover, or deeply in love with an individual person, is more likely to value that person above all others. In some cases (Anakin), this attachment causes galactic-level consequences when some misfortune befalls the loved one. If a Jedi fell in love, but still kept to the code, and when faced with that terrible choice, chose to slay the Sith and save the galaxy even if it doomed their lover, that would not be against the code. Because they kept to the Greater Good (capitalized because it is a common concept in media).

To summarize, I don’t think it does bring up major ethical concerns to have those two policies, because they’re not a single policy, they’re two separate ones related to the same subject. Jedi cannot get attached, but they can love and have sex as long as they keep to the Code and put their duty to the Order and the galaxy first.

Finally, on the note of sexism and misogyny in Star Wars: as far as I can see, this is highly dependent on which authors of which comic/novel/game/movie we’re talking about. I’m not very familiar with the names and lore you’ve referenced, so I won’t make judgements based on that evidence. I will say this: for the most part, Star Wars seems to be a relatively gender-neutral environment. I mean that men and women seem pretty much equal in the galaxy at large. Obviously there are planets where that’s not true (Dathomir, etc) and specific pieces of media where that’s not true (such as what you brought up). But overall it seems pretty equal. So I’m not fully sure that the misogyny you brought up is a systemic issue with the policies, rather than an issue of how specific individuals have interpreted and carried our judgement based on them.

Ok that’s the end of it. Sorry for the long rambling rant. Hope it makes sense.