This is such an obnoxious and slimy article and casts stay-at-home moms as slugs living off their husband’s money:

According to a newly published British-based economics study, the trophy wife – that controversial symbol of success and prowess for men with money, also known as the domestic goddess – could soon become a thing of the past.

David Blackaby, a professor of economics at Swansea University in South Wales, United Kingdom, told ABC News: “What we are seeing now is assorted mating, which is ‘like’ marrying ‘like.’ For example, get-up-and-go men are more inclined these days to marry get-up-and-go women. People are also marrying people from the same skill groups.”

That means more and more men are marrying women with whom they have something basic, something postmodern, in common. They both earn salaries. So, according to the study, the gender pay gap is closing.

[…]

Watching Soaps, Eating Bonbons

Enter the toxic wife. It’s a term used by Tara Winter Wilson, a freelance writer for the Daily Telegraph in London, who sides with men on an issue tailor-made to stir up emotions, righteousness and indignation on both sides.

Winter Wilson summed up her hypothesis: “Rich men … have finally cottoned on to the sinister side of the stay-at-home wife. Unless you marry an equal who’s going to pay her own way, you will end up with a lazy, indulgent, overpampered slug, for the transition from trophy wife to toxic wife is as fast as the end result is furious.”

Winter Wilson said she knew “many men of my age and acquaintance [who] have become deeply bitter and disappointed about how their wives have changed since they hung up their work clothes.

Since when have stay-at-home moms been considered “trophy wives?” I’m insulted by the term. And I know that society has this view of stay-at-home moms as being lazy women who sit in front of the TV all day watching soaps and eating bonbons. But let me break the news to you, many aren’t. Who can watch the soaps when Barney is on? And if you eat bonbons the kids will want them and then they won’t eat dinner.
But what about the many women who sacrificed their career to raise their kids at the request of their husband (like me)? Those who were their husband’s equal until he asked them to have a baby and to leave their career because he wanted his children raised the way he was with a full-time stay-at-home mom. Shouldn’t that sacrifice mean something? And since when is it being a “slug” to take care of your kids 24/7? What about the women who work day and night because the husband couldn’t be bothered to take care of the kids when he gets home, are they slugs? What about the women who do volunteer work?
And if you think everything is going to be great having a working wife and that this will minimize the war of the sexes (as the article implies), then you are living in a dream world. Who takes care of the sick kid? Who leaves work early to pick up the kid? Who cooks and cleans when you both come home from work? Sorry but married life is not going to improve just because the wife works. BTW, this isn’t an indictment against women who work, I just think that we should all face the reality that two income homes come with their own set of problems.
I understand that society doesn’t see the benefit of women leaving work to raise their kids but is it necessary to make us into “slugs” who are parasites living off the hard work of our husbands? This type of thinking leads to men expecting their wives to continue working after they have had a baby even when the mom would like to stay-at-home. I’ve met many women who wanted to stay at home but their husband insisted they return to work because he didn’t want the responsibility of being the sole provider but still expected the wife to take care of the kids and keep up with the house cleaning.
It’s really amazing to me that we have come so far in 60 years that moms would be vilified for deciding to leave work to raise our kids.
Update: There is some discussion as to what the author means by “trophy wives.” There is no distinction between those women who have children and those who don’t in the article, so what is said applies to all of us who stay-at-home.