I'm not at all sure that this would work.
How about changing it to "how'd we explain bitcoin to the subset of women who are genuinely useful, numerate, sensible with money ..."
The Angela Merkels of the female world could probably be fine with bitcoin.  Let's not waste time trying to make a KimKoin suitable for ones like Kim Kardashian, whose perception of money is that it is something to give to her to spend, and when it runs out give her some more.  Those ones can stay in the $ world thank-you.

Note that I define "genuinely useful" a little differently to how a gdp counting economist would.  I'd rate a hardworking wife engaged in childcare and household duties and who took the pill once she got to two as much more genuinely useful than a merc driving estate agent lady with four buy-to-lets and an offshore trust fund.  So lets leave those ones behind in the $ world too and consider only the needs of the genuinely productive sensible ones.  

In this postulation, what we need to make BTC appealing to sensible women is for sensible purchases; food ingredients, utility bills, washing machines, mainstream unilever products, to be available for a bitcoin price.  And for that to happen upstream at the manufacturer, we'd need oil, fertilizer and industrial minerals to have a bitcoin price without having to exchange back to $ for everything, because exchange is more lossy than a genuinely productive organization would tolerate.  I don't see that big a change going through overnight.  End-user purchase payment can go through a payment clearing place.  Paypal seem to have international multicurrency payment sorted for Amazon, Ebay and Ocado.  Why not have a Paypal for bitcoin too ?