The fact is that the Crown Prince title has traditionally been reserved (if used at all) for the eldest son of a king. Until 1980, when Sweden became the first country to adopt fully cognatic primogeniture for her succession law, such a person would have always been heir-apparent to the throne (at least in Europe, whatever might be said about other continents, where some kings with sons have been known to be succeeded by brothers).
And the Crown Princess title would have applied to his wife (assuming that the marriage was dynastic). It has been explained that this was precisely why Queen Margrethe II of Denmark, from 1953 (when the constitution was amended to permit female succession, under the male-preferred primogeniture law) until 1972 (her accession to the throne), was called "Throne Follower", not Crown Princess.
Which made sense, in light of tradition. And in light of the fact that all three Dutch queens regnant were likewise only heirs-presumptive to the throne, not heirs-apparent, one would think that some title other than Crown Princess would have applied to each.
Certainly in today's world, there are no complications with styling Victoria of Sweden, Catharine-Amalia of the Netherlands, and Elisabeth of Belgium thus. Ingrid Alexandra of Norway should also, in due time, receive such a title.
But what of the Dutch heiresses who came before?