> I don't know where you got that idea from, but your impression of the entire female gender is flawed, stereotypical, and yes, wrong.

OP is maybe exaggerating to make a point but there's a Seinfeld episode which I remember from many years ago, where Jerry says something like how a man can be really interested in what a woman does at her work, even though that woman might be a janitor, while the reverse is not true, no woman is interested in a man who's a janitor (I mean, she's not interested in his work).

And the statistics seem to support that, as more men are willing to marry women who are "beneath" them from a societal point of view (career and education) compared to women (i.e. women are less likely than man to marry members of the opposite sex who are placed "bellow" them).

> My competitive streak and desire for material goods is in direct conflict with my wife's desires.

I find it hard to believe that your wife would prefer you to be a materially/economically poor individual who doesn't strive vs your peers. To each her own, of course.

(I take no position on the GP's controversial theory. Just calling out that the implications of the parent's comment strike me as unintuitive.)

> I find it hard to believe that your wife would prefer you to be a materially/economically poor individual who doesn't strive vs your peers.

Really? You've never heard of somebody who'd rather their spouse work shorter hours and spend more time with them at home? Or spend more time with their family? Or travel more with them?

My hunch: His wife likely still wants him to be capable of material success and competition. She just doesn't want him to prioritize those endeavors past some particular threshold.

Said another way, one's spouse probably finds it attractive that one can get a new job if one loses the current one.

Marriages often go to hell when the husband is out of work and it becomes obvious that he either cannot or will not return to the workforce. That is, when a husband becomes a materially poor individual who does not strive vs his peers.

This is a nasty generalization at best, and terrible sexism at worst. Why do you think you know my wife better than me?

What's sexist? I appreciate that my wife is employable and tries to do her best in competitions. That's why I said "spouse".

The divorce thing is true for men specifically: https://journals.sagepub.com/doi/abs/10.1177/000312241665534...

What's nasty? Expecting that people generally value economic capability and competitive ambition in their life partners?

And, true, I don't know your wife. That's why I said to each her own. Still, as a thought experiment, quit your job and watch TV for 24 months solid then tell me how it's going.

Note I said material goods, not material wealth. She values stability and safety, not the acquisition of stuff.