Wowzers, I think you'd only ever say something like that if you wanted a lot of attention to rain down on you. It's going to be interpreted as pretty insulting.
It sounds like the sort of remark an extreme radfem would make because some of them hold the belief that all sex between women and men is rape. They argue this on the grounds that women struggle to say no, or are coerced into sex by their husbands.
I read the link you provided and I see that my interpretation of her comment is correct, however she is claiming that housework is exchanged for sex. I disagree with the way she expresses the sentiment because to suggest that prostitutes can CHOOSE it as a career is beyond naive! Prostitutes are more often than not, victims of human trafficking - because once a pimp becomes involved, it comes under the banner of trafficking, they are not free agents, they belong to the pimp. So ….. really REALLY poor form on that front.
Furthermore to liken housewives to prostitutes is bizarre. If she had said that women are the largest unpaid workforce in the world and the most unappreciated as well, she'd have been spot on. Likening home duties to prostitution can only be taken one way, firstly is highlights her opinion of prostitutes as lesser value humans, secondly it assumes that men are making some kind of exchange for sex when I know FAR too many women (the ones who are genuinely pressured into sex using guilt and coercion) whose husbands take no notice of the housework their wives do, they don't appreciate it, they demand more, and often those women are WORKING OUTSIDE OF THE HOME AS WELL.
With remarks like this you have to consider your audience. I think she put very little consideration into the way her audience would receive this comment, and she didn't have enough feminist knowledge to explain what she meant anyway.
Although it was a festival of dangerous ideas, there just isn't going to be enough time to defend and thoroughly explore / explain that remark against the outrage it will stir up in an hour long show. It's a shame she chose to express herself using such a poorly thought out analogy, because I suspect that the IDEA behind it is actually not too far off the money.
I deem her a GOOSE!
Are rad/fems the sort of women who, on becoming pregnant, make statements like "he should be at the birth, then he can understand what a trauma it is to have a baby". Like because women are so stupid they just "let it happen to themselves" because they had no knowledge of what it was like to have a baby, like the pregnancy was really a result of rape".
When did anybody say anything like that, Fran? I can't even follow the last couple of sentences there.
A lot of women like to have their husbands there when they give birth to provide support, or to share in seeing their child come into the world. I've never heard anybody say they wanted them there to "understand the trauma". And no, that's not a radfem idea.