The burden of proof is on the claimant, especially when the claimant is making outlandish statements without a shred of evidence, let alone extraordinary.
Secondly, whoever they may be, the writings of the biblical authors were a reflection of the times, were slavery and the subjugation of women were the norm, so it's not surprising that they would espouse this way of life. Now someone like you might be ashamed of such scripture, so you try to creatively apply other meanings, dig deep and bend their interpretation like a yoga stretch. With you it's so extreme that you've resorted to inventing a new personalized pseudo-philosophy just to avoid admitting the vile truth of such scripture. This is the ultimate weakness of theists, they get entrenched in their indoctrination out of fear of seeing their entire belief system collapse. It's really not all that bad living without the belief in guardian angels and fairytales.
1 Peter 3:1
Likewise, ye wives, be in subjection to your own husbands; that, if any obey not the word, they also may without the word be won by the conversation of the wives;
1 Peter 3:5-6
For after this manner in the old time the holy women also, who trusted in God, adorned themselves, being in subjection unto their own husbands:
Even as Sara obeyed Abraham, calling him lord: whose daughters ye are, as long as ye do well, and are not afraid with any amazement.
1 Timothy 6:1
All slaves should show full respect for their masters so they will not bring shame on the name of God and his teaching.
And a servant who knows what the master wants, but isn’t prepared and doesn’t carry out those instructions, will be severely punished. But someone who does not know, and then does something wrong, will be punished only lightly. When someone has been given much, much will be required in return; and when someone has been entrusted with much, even more will be required.
You're still not acknowledging let alone going by the universal academic and objective principles I pointed to earlier which are required to be followed against fallacious reasoning such as quote-mining other kinds of errors. Shall we wonder why. Dismissing them by merely claiming they are invalid or pseudo-philosophical etc, invented by myself for xyz reasons, is insufficient, unless you go by the 'burden of proof' maxim you're proclaiming to endorse and demonstrate how they fail the purpose they're proclaimed to be followed for, and/or are not followed and applied by every scholar and student of academia, in principle, as a matter of basic requirement in their respective academic fields that include textual criticism covering all sorts of textual material including the Biblical.
Moreover, Christians usually subscribe to an existing official/mainstream interpretation involving the very verses you keep quoting, among other ones too, you cannot thus reasonably believe yourself to be invalidating/countering a given existing interpretation by simply listing some of the verses that said interpretation already addresses and use. Here too you are failing the burden of proof maxim you proclaim to endorse, among other fallacies (such as quote mining; invalidly quoting or nit picking verses to drive a certain preheld point)