Or like a mommy.

Boom.

Also, studies show that the household duties are only *equal* when the woman is the sole breadwinner. Meaning she’s still doing half even when she’s the only one working for money! Otherwise very likely she’s working hard at a paid job outside the home and doing way more than her share of the housework and childcare. And a lot of men are like another kid to take care of. Seriously.

This is not my situation. I don’t have kids. I make more money than my husband and my job primarily funds our retirement and provides benefits. He has a job that 1) has the most job security I’ve ever heard of, 2) pays well, and 3) allows him a very high degree of flexibility. He does more than half of the shit around the house, including all the car stuff, majority of dog care, fair amount of cooking, pays for half the housecleaning, and doesn’t make a mess I have to pick up after. Does his laundry and will fold mine if it’s there (same). He mails my packages (clothing returns etc). He takes care of everything like parking permits, home maintenance, dealing with people, booking travel, etc etc etc. I’m very happy and we have regular sex. Not daily but regularly.

I know enough to know this is absolutely not the norm, and most women are doing way more. I’d be so exhausted. Can’t even imagine.

It’s more important to you to be right than to be happy, and that’s okay. Go back to all your hairy friends complaining about being hairy but refusing to go to a barbershop. You’ve literally shown all of us how you argue with your spouse, by starting with snide digs, moving up the passive aggressive scale until she snaps and responds, you get to feel righteous, and then you just keep going and going to wear her down until she’ll say anything to shut you up. Possibly even give you the duty sex you so disdain. Golfer.gal had your number way up thread, and there is no middle ground to be reached. Just keep up the comments; it’s like watching a toddler throwing toys out of his pen.

I have no idea how you drew that far reaching conclusion from the article. I think you interpreted exactly what you wanted to hear.

Here’s a few quotes that led me to my conclusion that the author is viewing sexuality purely from an economic perspective without any regard to how relationships actually function.

“Therefore, sex for men is a no-risk/high-profit investment. For woman, the equation is reversed. Thus, the supply of female interest in sex is reduced, and since male demand is high, the price rises.”

“Man’s heightened motivation for sex puts them at a disadvantage because, according to the well-known “principle of least interest,” the one less invested (or motivated) in a relationship, controls it.

“For example, if you love your partner more than he loves you and you are more invested in the relationship than he is, then control of the relationship rests with him. The one who’s in love will do everything to save the relationship, even if it costs them big concessions. According to this principle, the fact that women are less sexually needy and motivated for sex puts them in a position of power in sexual negotiations.”

“Another reason why female sex has become a valued resource is related in all likelihood to human social history, in which, without exception, men have controlled most of society’s resources-–money, status and power positions. In such a situation, sex has been one of the few assets that women could leverage for obtaining other valuable social goods such as power, status, and money.”

“Baumeister’s analysis of the sexual marketplace, then, assumes that sex is not just a private matter but a part of the socio-economic system, just as buying a house is not just a private act but part of a system.”

“…for example in societies where women outnumber men, the price of sex is bound to drop because supply (feminine sex) exceeds demand (men looking for sex).”

“If we view sexy dress as advertising and public relations of a property owner who wishes to sell, we understand that such an owner would want to stimulate interest in as many potential buyers as possible, not because she aims to ‘sell’ to all of them but because she seeks to find the one optimal ‘buyer.’ Thus viewed, an attractively dressed woman conveys an interest in finding a suitable partner, not in finding many partners.”

“I think the point is”. This exemplifies the amount of learning you are prepared to do, after all the exchanges. You’re clearly very angry with not just your wife, but women in general. Again, that’s okay. Your idea of the point doesn’t have any room for women who want more sex, for men who want less sex (who would probably not even BE men in your estimation), or for a very basic view of what men and women in committed relationships have to offer each other. It’s frankly very sad. (PS If Psychology Today is a scientific journal, then Cosmopolitan is an anthropological publication).