Here you differ from all the virtue ethicists I can think of off the top of my head (including Aristotle, Aquinas, MacIntyre, and...especially...Ayn Rand) who believe that their system of morality applies not just to those who happen to agree with it, but also to everyone else.
If you think that moral systems are merely a matter of personal choice and disposition, you're not aligned with virtue ethics, but emotivism.
But at the heart of any brand of moral realism is the threat that members might ethically enforce their way of thinking because it is, in fact, the right way of thinking. (you quoted Norman earlier as saying that even women who are first forced eventually find fulfillment--the implication is clearly that that the ends justify the means).
No, it's more a role-playing game for you, because when you're pushed on its real-world consequences, you back off and say its only true for those who want it to be true. I think you'll find that the Taoists and most brands of Greek philosophers consider their theories to apply to everyone.
And I already asked you and you haven't answered (in case you're having trouble understanding)...are there specific women who should be forced to submit? If so, who decides who and when? The dominant male?