I guess my point was that or every woman who got a career as a doctor, lawyer or accountant there are hundreds working at Wal-Mart or at fish factories.
And I'm sure a lot of men feel the same way, even if their jobs pay reasonably well.
That's because of the culture you were raised in. It wasn't considered important in the 50s. Of course EVERYONE was heterosexual in the 50s, even if they weren't.
I imagine that even in the idyllic days of yesteryear there were women who stayed in terrifying abusive relationships because they financially had no other option. Independence, for me, isn't just a little trophy I can stick on a shelf. It's being able to provide for my own security and live the life I want to.
Granted, though that was the introduction to this sort of sub-topic, ie whether the introduction of 100% more workers into an economy depressed wages. My mother's father worked as an elevator operator. On the princely salary this paid he supported a non-working wife (well, she did take in some laundry sometimes) and eight children. They were poor but no one starved. My uncle worked as a armored car guard. He supported a non-working wife and three children, bought his own house with an in-ground swimming pool, and had a fairly comfortable time. But the economics of these lower skilled jobs have vastly changed in the intervening years.
30 years ago, my dad was making money roughly comparable to what I'm making now, adjusted for inflation, and he was supporting a stay at home wife, toddlers, and had a 3 bedroom house with a yard and a garage. Today on a similar income I've got 2 plants and a 1 bedroom apartment the size of a phonebooth, and I'm still strapped for cash.
The economics have definitely changed, and these "when I was your age..." anecdotes tend to reinforce the point.
-k