1) his level of faith/doubt assuming he is a Christian (i.e. she ought not to be expecting somebody with no doubts at all)
2) his empathy
3) his intelligence
I'm not interested in women who are looking for a superhero in his faith, or a brute or a non-thinker of a man. Though many might lie, all men have insecurities and women who are looking for such a man can only be disappointed in this world.
You are actually well within reason to raise such an issue. By challenging one passage as needing context sensitivity, I challenge them all from a philosophical standpoint. However if we look at Jesus' sermons, we see him doing the exact same thing with old Jewish laws (the woman who committed adultery is great example). Jesus himself was constantly infuriated by the misuse of ancient laws in order for some to take advantage of others. More often than not, it was the most religious (but arguably least spiritual) who made these mistakes.
I feel that simply following a set of rules is insufficient and will always be. We need to strive after the spirit of God, not just the words given to us. Why does the Author (commonly attributed to Paul I believe) say what he does here? What prompts such a statement?
Considering that many of these New Testament letters were written for specific Christian communities, it would not surprise me if some of the more controversial segments of the bible might be less applicable in modern societies than in biblical ones. Does this mean that we can just cherry pick passages that we don't like? No, it doesn't. But it's worthwhile trying to get a deeper understanding of what the passage is addressing. I simply reject the idea that the spirit of the passage is that men should always be in authority over women. I think the passage was trying to improve the stability of families and the treatment of women. Since strictly adhering to this 'law' would actually go against the spirit of the law, I find this to be obsolete.
This is simply my views on the matter, and for what it's worth I don't think you were being particularly unreasonable. You just don't have the most popular views with women!
Not that this is a strictly theological argument, but it's worth being aware of the time and place that this passage was written in. It was written when women were practically property of their husbands, when they couldn't freely divorce (while men could) and when they basically had zero rights. In this context, these passages are actually liberating to women, they deny a man's right to do with his wife as he pleases, and they command him to be to her as Christ is to the church. Considering the times, that was certainly a huge step forward for women.
Though I believe the Bible is written for all ages, it requires interpretation and context sensitivity for some passages. In an age when women were not educated and men may have been, it was probably better for women to submit to their husband's larger knowledge base. However, in modern western societies where there is little to no educational discrimination based on gender, this discrepancy is all but negligible. There is no practical reason for men to always be the head of the household. As evidenced by our society, there are numerous effective business women who are fiercely practical, efficient and intelligent. There are many men who are intensely artistic and unconcerned with making household decisions. In such a union, should the more practical and logical wife submit to the more emotional and unconcerned husband for no reason other than him having a 'Y' chromosome?
At this point, I simply feel that the 'better' leader ought to lead. If that's the man, great! If that's the woman, outstanding! We are all one in Christ anyway. There's nothing wrong with adhering to traditional gender roles, I just don't think the spirit of the Bible really dictates the enforcement of them. The vast, vast majority of everything in scripture applies to both genders, I seriously question the conception of the two genders having a mandate to behave so differently from each other. For both, the virtues and sins apply equally.
