Suppose a prospective husband, serious about Christian commitment, were choosing a partner and he was committed to the hierarchical model, would he be on the lookout for:
a) A gentile, very soft and feminine woman who would readily expect and accept his male leadership? or ... would he
b) Not be too concerned until after the marriage and then gradually dominate the wife into submission? or ...
c) Have a loving partnership and mutual consideration in courtship, then switch to hierarchy once married?
It would seem to me that one or all of the above would be the desired options or outcomes that a person schooled in that particular line of thinking would be encouraged to adopt.
Whereas, on the other hand, if the prospective husband was equally as serious about Christian commitment but had a more egalitarian approach he could be coming at it from an entirely different direction. He would be on the lookout for:
a) A woman committed to the same passion for Christ as himself, regardless of temperament.
b) A woman at ease with her femininity but not afraid to voice an opinion in mixed company.
c) A woman so secure in Christ that she does not need a man to make her life decisions for her.
In this situation you would expect the prospective husband to not be threatened by a capable and gifted woman but rather to be excited about the prospect of a lively partnership where each would submit to the other to discover God's will together.
It bears thinking about.