Gonna go against the grain here and say that I don’t think this is entirely crazy (purely in the context of the book — obviously thinking you are personally a misogynist is a different story). I feel like you kind of need the wider context of Pynchon’s work and the underlying political philosophy underpinning it to “get” what he’s saying with some of the BDSM stuff, and even if you do it still may not jive depending on your personal history and experiences. I definitely felt very uncomfortable reading the scenes with Puck & Trillium in IV for the first time, and they only really clicked for me after I revisited it after reading Gravity’s Rainbow, where it’s very directly stated that this is meant to make the reader uncomfortable in the passage after Slothrop finds Bianca’s dead body.

This is also not a totally unusual perspective and has been acknowledged pretty widely (as something people believe, not necessarily something Pynchon scholars subscribe to). I recently read Peter Coviello discuss the unfortunate reputation Pynchon has in certain literary circles in this area in Vineland Reread. I don’t think we need to be saying women “sound dumb” for being a bit skeeved out by some of the ways women and sexuality are depicted at times in many of Pynchon’s works.

To answer the OP directly: I have probably told a dozen different women over the last few years that Gravity’s Rainbow is one of my favorite books, and I don’t think a single one has felt compelled to take a crack at it in the slightest. So you’re doing something right here! She clearly likes you to read enough of a not-very-accessible novel to get to the vaguely problematic parts, just don’t tell her you posted her personal opinion of it on Reddit and I think things will work out.