Your presuppositions are showing.

No, women did not write that, nor did mere men. You're quoting the Word of God, and doing it through the anachronistic lens of postmodernist and neo-Marxist power dynamic analysis.

I have a lot of respect for what you write and share freely with us in your realm of expertise. I have benefitted personally and am grateful. But this is clearly an area that you are still parroting the normie takes of faithless so-called academics

In economics, most of academia is Keynesian, but (as a fellow bitcoiner, I assume) we know that the 'Austrians' really have the signal. There is an analgous situation in theology. Most of the seminaries today abandoned the supernatural for the modernist a hundred years ago (look into the modernist-fundamentalist controversy).

Entertain, for the sake of argument, the idea that there is a God, and that what you quoted really is his word. What would be the logical conclusions of that presupposition? What would have to happen to the Foucauldian, "I want to destroy logocentrism in all its forms" way of reading a text (or even a culture)? 

What would it mean for your life if this is true? What would you gain? What woul it cost? Would you have a vested interest in this being true or not true that may prevent your willingness to accept it as true? 

With respect.