I am clearly biased as I am a wife and mother who subordinated my career for my husband’s, but there are clear costs such as I incurred for women, and they have such a lifelong effect that issues such as a wife ending sex with husband or gaining weight (if that’s what you meant by “maintain that level of commitment and focus on their man for decades”) are very small in comparison (IMLO in my lived opinion). However in my own marriage there is a clear counterpoint to Johnstone’s thesis: my husband got a family and children without sacrificing his career, as I felt I (since not him) had to do to have that family and children, BUT he did not want children! So the sacrifices I made, are ones he did not request/ want at the start of the marriage, only those he signed off on as we went along and I chose to live as I did in the way I felt was best for all of us. (And in fact he made the sacrifice of agreeing to try to have children to keep me.)
I like the book The Price of Motherhood by Ann Crittenden. She points out that I traded (we’re both MDs) the chance for a million$ medical practice possibly in my hometown so my husband could have a military career and gain a military pension while having a family well raised and run by me. So would I argue (unsuccessfully I’m sure) in divorce court if he left me.
More concretely and recently, yesterday he ate a homemade roast turkey dinner and then refused to help me clean up the turkey carcass, since he had wanted me to make a turkey breast to save trouble. It’s hard to sort out what I do for myself only and what benefits he gains (and truly appreciates) despite refusing to take on work/projects himself… I have not yet opted to forbid him a share of the benefits, except in scarcity instances like only one plate of asparagus or handful of nuts harvested from the garden (and he always asks before he eats the last cookie).