If she loses this should have a tragedy tag.
Seriously some messed up male dominance bullshit right here, if she loses she loses everything, if he loses he can just go home as if nothing happened. It's not even a wager it's just author being dumb and not allowing the characters to think in lines that a human would. If he suggested the wager maybe this plot would make sense, but she suggesting it is just "hey please enslave me because male big and best and I have no brains to make a fair wager".
From the start she was against it completely, but from the bets conditions it looks like she already accepted it as being decided and that she is trying to divorce rather than annul something yet to be decided. For no reason, she on her own made a bet that from just existing as a bet put her in a worse position than before, is she ment to look stupid or is the author the stupid one?
And nobody bring up how his "status" is higher, thats a null argument since she going against it is already opposing the higher status, when opposing something you don't do it "half way" and put yourself in a worse position just to make your opponent feel better, thats something you do when negotiating. There are no variables to negotiate here, it's do or don't, therefor putting youself down for "status" is the same as giving your opponent an advantage for no gain, yet again, something only an idiot would do.