I believe women who are supported by men are prostitutes, that is that." On the website It was distressing to see a woman claiming to be a feminist turn all heterosexual relationships in which a woman does not earn a salary at least close to that of her partner into a simple sex-for-cash transaction, one in which a man has the reasonable quid pro quo expectation of sex.
Anger has been proven to temporarily lower ones IQ -- Angry people say stupid things. Wutzel's analysis never has any application in modern marriage is unfortunate and untrue. Mencken observed, when people say it isn't about the money, you can be sure it's about the money.
Elizabeth Wurtzel is one of those perpetually angry people who can't stop making absurd statements. I'd like to see Wurtzel say that to my wife's face. That said, it does not uniformly apply any more than the idylic arrangments described by her critics here. Under our femi-communist system, all men are bums (just ask women), and all women are whores (just ask men).
When raising our children, my wife stayed home with them. So Wurtzel is wrong about restricting it to just some women.
In a typical family economist's understanding, that would be household services, including childrearing.
No matter what the wife is presumed to "give back" to the husband, the mistake is the same: thinking of a relationship between husband and wife (or generally, between partners of any gender or marital status) in terms of exchange, a set of that must balance out in the ledger in order to be proclaimed "equal" by those who would presume to judge such things.