It's often noted that the gospels' claim that Jesus' tomb was found empty by some of his female followers is unlikely to have been fabricated. The culture of that day held the testimony of women in much lesser esteem than the testimony of men, and the male disciples are made to look bad in contrast to the women.
Notice that the reasoning here doesn't just apply to the empty tomb accounts. The women also are prominent in the accounts of the crucifixion and burial, and they're sometimes referred to as the first witnesses of the risen Jesus. The prominence of women in all four contexts (death, burial, empty tomb, and resurrection) is highly unlikely to have been made up.
But I want to focus on something else. Luke gives us our earliest church history, covering roughly the first three decades. In that church history, he gives a lot of attention to male witnesses (Peter, John, Stephen, Philip, Paul, Apollos, James, etc.). Where are the female witnesses? They're in his gospel, so why aren't they in Acts?
To see the significance of this point, think of how critics sometimes approach the issue of the lack of female witnesses of the resurrection in 1 Corinthians 15:5-8. It's sometimes suggested that Paul doesn't mention female witnesses because he doesn't know of any. I would argue that he doesn't include them for other reasons, such as how little people in Paul's day trusted the testimony of women.
Regardless of what we make of the lack of female witnesses in 1 Corinthians 15, Luke can't be accused of being ignorant of embarrassing and unusual details in the accounts of Jesus' death and resurrection. So, if he avoids those details in relevant contexts in Acts, that's significant evidence of the embarrassing and unusual nature of those details. It's evidence that the details wouldn't have been fabricated by the early Christians.
The female witnesses in Luke's gospel seem to be included among the women referred to in Acts 1:14, but they're not even named, and their role in that one passage in Acts is relatively minor. They never serve as witnesses of Jesus' death, his burial, the empty tomb, or the resurrection appearances in Acts. Instead, men like Peter, the other original disciples, and Paul have those roles. Jesus' death, his burial, the empty tomb, and the resurrection appearances come up often in Acts. Appeal is frequently made to Peter and others as eyewitnesses in those contexts (2:14, 2:32, 3:15, 4:20, 5:32, 10:39, 10:41, 13:31, 22:15, 23:11, 26:16). The women, by contrast, are never appealed to, and Luke never records any instance of their addressing the public on those issues the way men like Peter and Paul do. Even lesser men, like Philip and Apollos, are more prominent than the women.
Acts gives the impression that some of the details about Jesus' death and resurrection in Luke's gospel were difficult for the early Christians. The difficulties could easily have been avoided if the early Christians were just making up stories (have men be the earliest witnesses of the empty tomb, for example). Instead of avoiding the difficult details, they didn't mention them much and placed more of a focus on less difficult themes. It's unlikely that the difficult details were fabricated. The prominence of women in the events surrounding Jesus' death and resurrection was a matter of public fact that couldn't be ignored. But their prominence was deemphasized by giving more attention to less problematic witnesses.