There is an element of this essay that seems a bit short on the whole rights-and-responsibilities concept that should be highlighted.

On the one hand, she's right that most people would want a wife and she gives a reasonable overview of why. That is why men generally want wives. The wives bring a lot to the table.

If you do the same exercise for husbands, generally most people would also want husbands. The men also bring a lot to the table. Relationships happen when everyone benefits.

Now if she's coming at this from a place of mutual joy and satisfaction then this essay is a pretty good summary of what men are probably looking for in a wife. But I see "instant classic ... [in a] feminist magazine" get the impression that it is probably being interpreted as wives shouldn't have to bring all the things men want to a relationship.

Yeah sure. I can agree with that. They shouldn't have to. Indeed, they don't. As we've discovered in the 1970s-2025 window they can renegotiate the social contract to a large extent. But I'm not really on board with what contribution the essay is supposed to have had beyond highlighting things what men like in women.

> most people would want a wife

Are you sure about that? Maybe that was true in 1970ties or even yearly 2000, but today stats are pretty clear: most men do not want a wife!

Modern women have ethical troubles with making even simple sandwich. Tons of legal risks. 60% people today are overweight and on mental medication...

And fathers in families today are portraited as a homer simpson!

All the stuff wife brinks to the table, can be easily automated or outsourced at minimal cost!