I wonder if these teachings are so anti-femininst today or if they are actually pragmatic in a way that is supportive of real decisions that individuals (mostly women) take in what is inherently an unequal economic structure with much inequality tied to gender expectations and socialization as well as the economic history of caretaking. I think a lot of discussion around trade-offs in personal and professional priorities takes this into account. Many individuals act as unpaid caretakers in addition to their professional roles (e.g., parents, or children of older parents requiring care, individuals with special needs, etc.) Many of these caretakers are female. Pragmatism within the current economic system does dictate a certain tit-for-tat as one individual in a more formal romantic relationship may have to prioritize caretaking over professional income, and this may impact individual freedom. Meanwhile the other partner may be forced to prioritize income stability to ensure that the caretaking can happen. This isn't to advocate any model of relationship, but to note the no one builds a relationship in a vacuum; we build it each day in relation (ha-ha) to our social, cultural, legal, and economic systems. Some nice work on this area: https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6839008/, https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3674134/, https://www.aeaweb.org/articles?id=10.1257/jep.10.4.139, https://www.jstor.org/stable/23599641, and a thoughtful interview here: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=o5z8-9Op2nM