Here's a thought experiment:

There are two people, Person 1 (P1) and Person 2 (P2). P1 and P2 are completely alien to each other. P1 wants to dig a hole for a business venture. P2 has no interest in creating this hole and will not benefit from the construction of the hole.

P1 forces P2 to dig the hole. P1 tells P2 that they will share the work exactly 50/50, P1 will dig 5 hours and P2 will dig 5 hours. After this is over, P1 has his hole and benefits from it. P2 helped dig the hole, but gets no benefit from it, his work was for P2's benefit only.

Although the work was divided equally, the only profiteer was P1, an equal division of labor resulted in an exploitative relationship. An equal distribution of work is not fair if mainly only one party benefits from this work.

It's the same in relationships. Even if both parties do the same amount of paid work, it does not automatically mean that both parties should do the same amount of housework.

If one party has a higher standard of cleanliness or tidiness and their partner does not wish to meet this standard, the party with the higher standard would exploit the person with the lower standard by forcing the other person to rise to their standard. Just like in the thought experiment. This would constitute a exploitative relationship assuming the person with the lower standards does not create additional work for the person with the higher standards.

Childless single men do much less housework than single childless women. This shows that men simply value their free time over the benefits of extended housework. If one understands these different preferences, it would be unreasonable to expect that men share housework equally with women. This would privilege female interests and preferences similar to the thought experiment between P1 and P2. See also:

https://nymag.com/intelligencer/2015/05/social-science-men-dont-want-housework-done.html