I don't want to do contract work or start a business (again). That would make the problem worse, not better, because I'd have to spend more of my time on my job in order to make a living, and the additional time would be spent on tasks I enjoy less and am not as good at as the work I do which is the focus of my career. The point is that I have a wide variety of interests and to me a good life is one where I get to pursue them. Focusing exclusively on a single activity (coding!) might be better in terms of making money, but what am I making that money
for if I can't use it to live a good life in the other ways I want to live it?
Your response illustrates the problem I was describing: why, when I suggest that the standard packages don't suit me, do you think it is helpful to suggest that I just pick one of them and deal with it? Why shouldn't we accept, as an industry, that different people have different needs and different motivations, and consider it normal to work out whatever mix of time, responsibility, and compensation suits each person?
The paradox of the salaried job is that you can either have money to spend or time to spend it in, but you can't have both, because nobody will let you trade some of one for some of the other. Well, why not? If we adopted a flexible attitude about work hours, as a culture, it would not just make things better for women who are stuck with traditional family-care tasks, but for everyone - whether they want to use that flexibility to raise a family or for something else important to their life happiness.