Dear Amused,
Sometimes, in trying to discover the hidden message that might be lurking in a sentence, it is useful to stare at it until it begins to look like something else. I have a feeling this is what poets do sometimes, and perhaps also psychoanalysts.
I have been staring at this sentence for a while, watching how it changes shape and meaning: "I suggested that if my wife took the trouble to dress up more then perhaps gay men would not hit on her husband."
I recognize in this rather impossible formulation the trickster, or rather the mind working as the trickster, inverting meaning in order to serve desire's purposes of subterfuge. I certainly don't think it's anything as simple as just "You're obviously a latent homosexual." Rather, I imagine that in your world, certain kinds of play provide an outlet for socially unacceptable notions as well as for the erotic in a larger sense -- not the homoerotic particularly but more generally the love of style, color, fashion, appearance, theatricality, fine things: the sensual realm.
The sentence itself, being so absurd, reflects a reality that is utterly unrecognizable, like an inkblot. It has no clear meaning of its own; it is, rather, a conundrum, a shadow, a mystery.
In staring at it, it's hard to know what to focus on at first. But I focus on "gay men would not hit on her husband." It sounds like a trope for something gone awry. "Gay guys hitting on me" is a metaphor for something, a displacement of desire perhaps, an erotic frustration, something.
It might be restated thusly: "I suggested to her that if she took the trouble to dress up more, then perhaps X might happen," X being some positive and desired outcome. But what would that be?
... It could be very frustrating for someone else to figure all this out. So I suggest, for your wife's sake, that at the expense of being so amusing, you try to be a little more direct.

-Cary Tennis, Salon: If my wife dressed better, would gay guys stop hitting on me? - 11 hours ago