I agree with you, but I think we are using different semantics.

He technically did the cleaning. He screwed up because he didn't consider what the point of cleaning was (like you say, giving her wife a day off) and he just did something that he thought was approximately equivalent to what she literally asked.

I call that "not really caring". If he cared, he would have realized he should have cleaned the day before and given "a clean bathroom on Mother's Day" as a present instead of "the act of cleaning the bathroom on Mother's Day".

> "I call that "not really caring"."

I call it "not really understanding". The cleaning was most likely more work than a few more phone calls to cleaners for quotes would've been. If it was about not caring then why wouldn't the husband put in the minimum effort and get in someone else to do the cleaning?

Because it was expensive and it goes against his pride to pay so much money for something he can do himself. Maybe he cared a lot about his self-image as a self-sufficient most-definitely-not-a-spoiled-rich person.

"He told me the high dollar amount of completing the cleaning services I requested (since I control the budget) and asked incredulously if I still wanted him to book it."

In the article she mentions that she controls the budget, so it was probably over the budget he had to work with.

I'd suggest that's a massive stretch considering the lack of details about the husband's attitude towards money in the article. The only relevant information was him finding one particular quote too high. I don't think you can extrapolate a pattern of behaviour from that single data point.

Throughout the whole article, the author gives the impression that her husband is a stereotypical man. According to stereotypes, typical men don't want to call "the guy" to repair things when they break, especially when it costs a lot of money.

To be honest, the author's culture is alien to me and I only have stereotypes (TV and movies, mostly) to go on.