Hmm interesting thread.
I don't understand those who clearly ARE working albeit in a non-paid role defending the sahms-without-kids-at-home who just do hobbies, though.
Chickenshavenoeyebrows I do not understand, either. She writes articles and novels. Surely that is a job, Chickens? You're working at your own pace but you're still working, aren't you?
Work is work and it does not have to be paid. It, does, however, have to be work so riveninabingle as a carer is working. As indeed is any other carer. Caring is work. Being a carer for a disabled person is work.
Horse-riding, going to cafes, catching up with friends is not work.
I also do not understand the sniggering at those who are in low-paid work, I was 'low-paid' as a student of my profession, I married a man who did not want me to work and could afford to keep us both, like a fool, I went with it for a while- a couple of months. But I just had to -had to -get a job after that. No dc's at time, and, luckily, I managed to get a job in the profession for which I had trained. It wouldn't have mattered if it had been the lowest-paid job in the world, though, I'd have done it because it would have given me pride and there is more pride to be had working in a low-paid job than there is sponging off a husband. Of course, I do recognise that some women are independently wealthy. I see that before I get slapped down for that one.
Still even if money is no issue and the sahm-with-kids-at-school has plenty of it, where is their psychological relief of finishing work if all your time is leisure? You need play and work in order to appreciate both, surely?
All this stuff about partnerships supporting each other as they can. 
Very dodgy, that one. What happens if that 'partner' decides to leave the relationship? And literally having a 'partner' not a dh is even worse because there will be no financial compensation from a failed cohabiting relationship (as there might be in divorce) so the woman will be even more up sh*t creek.