That's pretty funny because historically, a lot of men in the 1950s were not at all happy about their role, and neither were a lot of women. Telling a fairy story about how strict gender roles actually made everyone content belies the actual history. That time not only spawned Playboy magazine as a direct rejection of expected roles for men, it also spawned the women's movements of the 1960s and 70s. If everyone was so happy, why did they all drink so much and take so many "mother's little helpers" just trying to cope?
"The 1950s is often viewed as a period of conformity, when both men and women observed strict gender roles and complied with society’s expectations. After the devastation of the Great Depression and World War II, many Americans sought to build a peaceful and prosperous society. However, even though certain gender roles and norms were socially enforced, the 1950s was not as conformist as is sometimes portrayed, and discontent with the status quo bubbled just beneath the surface of the placid peacetime society. Although women were expected to identify primarily as wives and mothers and to eschew work outside of the home, women continued to make up a significant proportion of the postwar labor force." — Women In the 1950s
Aside from the demonstrably wrong assertions about women no longer working "the second shift" and men actually doing their fair share of home and child care - something that is verifiably false - jumping to the conclusion that it's actually greater equality that is making women less happy is frankly absurd. Women around the world are shunning dating, marriage, and having children in increasingly large numbers because of not remotely enough gender equality.
Women initiate 69% of divorces, primarily for reasons related to inequality in their relationships.
"Women often feel less satisfied in marriages due to unmet emotional needs, poor communication, and lack of independence. The unequal division of domestic chores and childcare responsibilities, even when both partners work full-time, contributes to marital dissatisfaction among women."
As a social scientist, I've got to say that it's vital to look at the larger dynamic of something beyond just one study (that appeals to your bias), to see what the preponderance of evidence indicates - and it sure doesn't support what you've asserted here. Aside from the fact that the dynamic you are glorifying only really existed for upper middle class and rich white folks from about 1950-until the end of the 1970s, it's silly to try to tell anyone that having limited options and a whole bunch of "shoulds" invented by other people will make them happy. It’s not like women reading this are going to run out and grab their aprons in response — because they don’t need a study to tell them what makes them happy and how they want to live.
