Dorkycrass said "That is if you choose to be a full-time homemaker, but of course you can always hire a nanny"
Ok, let's see. Faithful witless witness sister marries faithful witless witness brother. He, being so faithful, has a job as a janitor (wouldn't want to waste time on secular education, would we?). They live in a dinky apartment, one step away from moving back in with the parents. The faithful sister may choose to be a full time homemaker, but wait, shouldn't she be pioneering with all her free time?? And of course, if they were a truly faithful couple, they would not have children, but let's just say there was a little goof up and along comes junior. Now, this fiscally responsible husband who brings in the most household money has even more debt, but his wife can "choose to be a full time homemaker"? Oh, sorry, that's right, she can always "hire a nanny" with the extravagant wealth her husband has accumulated scrubbing toilets.
I don't know if you live in an unusually wealthy area, but where I live over 90% of the women work, and they don't have much of a choice. Sure, they could give up living in a fairly safe neighborhood, and wear clothes from a decade ago, and not have money to give any extras to their children, not have savings for a rainy day, etc., but who in their right mind wants to live like that?
I was a dub for over 20 years, and I can count on one hand the number of them who could have afforded to "hired a nanny". I don't know if this was your attempt at sarcasm, but it's so far beyond reality that it's ridiculous.
That book was written by a bunch of old men with little or no recent experience in the real world, and can easily be used as fire kindling.
Happyout