So, many RadFems make the argument that women perform unpaid labor in a marriage that is worth more than all the paid labor men do. Specifically, the claim I'm trying to combat is:

Men don't "support" their wives who stay at home to raise their children.

Women support men's careers by providing unpaid childcare, housework, meals, and overall family life management skills.

To support this argument, there are several claims they make:

studies showing the avg married woman's happiness, life expectancy and pay decrease with a husband/kids, but a man with a wife/kids increases in all those fronts?

There is a LOT of mental labor that goes into even just having a partner to plan for, cook meals for, etc (if that's how the relationship has been established)

There is a lot of stress in basically being your partner's maid/ secretary/ chef, which is why it's so important that regardless of the division of labor, your partner be self-sufficient, competent and empathetic. They should be able to and willing to contribute the same.

​

If a man were to hire a surrogate, a nanny, personal chef, laundry service, tutor, personal assistant, chauffeur, etc to do all the round the clock crap it takes to make him a family/home, it would be [equivalent to the amount of work his wife does]

(Source is an FDS post, however, we do see many similar claims in other factions of feminism.)

There are several potential counterarguments to these claims, however, I'm interested in your ideas for them. Further, I would like to understand why those life expectancy changes exist. I don't really accept the claim that "women get the short end of the stick in marriage".