The main complaint about headship usually is tyranny, and the main complaint about submission is usually that it can be abused as almost having no limits. A modernist answer is to question the actual meaning of authority and question the meaning of submission. It seems to go hand in hand with misinterpreting the passage in Eph. 5:21 on “submitting to one another”.
A better solution to those complaints is what Matthew Henry said on headship:
“God would have a resemblance of Christ’s authority over the church held forth in the husband’s over the wife. Christ is the head of the church, to protect and save it, to supply it with all good, and secure or deliver it from evil; and so the husband over the wife, to keep her from injuries, and to provide comfortably for her, according to his ability. “
So leadership in the home is protecting, providing, sacrificing, and loving. It’s much more than servant leadership, which can sometimes be used as an all encompassing phrase.
and Matthew Henry on submission:
“Therefore, as the church is subject unto Christ, so let the wives be unto their own husbands, as is fit in the Lord (Col. 3:18 ), as comports with the law of Christ, and is for his and the Father’s glory. It is not then an absolute, or unlimited, nor a slavish subjection that is required; but a loving subordination, to prevent disorder or confusion, and to further all the ends of the relation. Thus, in reference to the husbands, wives must be instructed in their duties of love and subjection to them.”
So submission must be only in things the wife can do to God’s glory and not in sin; therefore, it is not absolute and unlimited (like our submission to Christ). Probably Acts 5 is the proof-text for that. Positively it is for the good order of the home, which makes sense since it is God’s design.
God’s design for the home and marriage, with the husband being the head of the wife and the wife being submissive is a good and godly thing.