Yeah, he's lazy. But that's for him to fix - not the male gender.
Also - It's not his responsibility to shoulder the burden of her emotions. It is his responsibility to get the things done that were agreed upon between the two of them. If she is not happy with the arrangement, they need to come to a new agreement.
The only direct failing I see is the main example she gave, he should have just picked a damn cleaning service. Everything else is a sexist, emotion fueled diatribe about how men are emotional vacuums and don't help out enough around the house.
> In his mind, he was doing the thing I had most wanted—giving me sparkling bathrooms without having to do it myself. Which is why he was frustrated when I ungratefully passed by, not looking at his handiwork as I put away his shoes, shirt and socks that had been left on the floor.
It's not about taking an equal share in the "emotional labor". It's about her not communicating proper intent, treating effort "ungratefully" and ultimately being disappointed for not receiving what was wanted.
She wanted:
> The gift, for me, was not so much in the cleaning itself but the fact that for once I would not be in charge of the household office work. I would not have to make the calls, get multiple quotes, research and vet each service, arrange payment and schedule the appointment.
but she asked for:
> one thing: a house cleaning service.
That's the stereotypical "women don't say what they think".
I hate gifts and would rather receive cash for a present, but if I were the sort of person who wanted a specific gift I would find it annoying to have to justify it, explain what the gift really means to me on a deep level, and so on.
That sort of "emotional labor" might in fact be the reason I dislike gifts, now that I think about it.
That's fine if you don't give a shit whether or not you receive the expected gift. But throwing a tantrum after the fact and writing an entire blog post about it is unreasonable. She (they) clearly has deeper problems than not receiving what she wanted. Those problems can't be resolved without communication.
However, I think it is not fair to criticize the author for trying to do the right thing. She was wrong at the time to expect her husband to understand without communicating, but then she had a serious talk with him, and now she literally wrote an essay explaining her thoughts.
It's like when a boy cleans his room, praising him is the right thing to do, even if you feel a little sexist doing it (because you did not praise his sister for the same thing). You have to tailor the praise and criticism to the individual. Don't be harsh at the kid for not cleaning as well and as often as his sister, and don't be harsh at the author for not communicating early enough.
Sexism is tricky because it's sometimes unrelated to the problem. I recently saw a small boy in a shop yelling at his sister not to touch him because she played with a dog and her hands were dirty. I'm pretty sure his room is cleaner than hers, and their parents praise her for cleaning her room and not him. Personality traits are sometimes mistook for gender stereotypes and people feel shame for being sexist. Actions should definitely be tailored to the individual, which is not sexist if individuals have different sexes. But it's easier to follow rules and guides (such as ethics and politically correctness) and even easier to mock and shame people who appear to break them.
This individual author has trouble communicating. As an individual, she wrote an article talking about her feelings. Even though the article is kind of unnecessarily mean, it is progress compared to what she was doing before, which is nothing. That deserves praise.
Also, in two comments, you've failed to address the central point of the OP: What if the guy has lower standards for cleanliness? What if he doesn't mind the odd gift box not kept away for two days? The OP is saying that the woman seems not to have paused to wonder about whether they agree on the fundamental standards for "how much effort is worth putting into our living spaces"
Mind you, I lean towards your side of the argument. I grew up witnessing what the woman perfectly described: there are millions of tasks that women quietly do that men demand that they be applauded for. My parents are definitely in that mould.
To argue against things, you need to do more than call the thing disgusting.
Where did this "emotional labor" term even come from? Talking to people on the phone, doing household work -- why does this qualify as "emotional behavior", and not actual, you know, labor? Considering that plenty of people do both of these things as part of their dayjob.
When I hear that term, I think of having to walk on eggshells around someone who is an emotionally abusive partner.