pinklight

Chris is arguing that Paul does not have wiveS and husbandS, in general, in view therefore he is arguing AGAINST a plural and a general meaning.

He wants to argue against a plural meaning (wives and husbands) on one hand but on the other he wants to argue for it (women and men).

Now, if Paul had a specific woman and a specific man in mind then it doesn’t matter one way or the other if they are married, though as Chris has pointed out, ‘they’ are likely husband and wife and it doesn’t matter since the woman and man in the passage remain SPECIFIC persons rather than refer to women and men in general.