Hop over to CNN.com/living and you’ll feel this article "No kids, no jobs for growing tell off of wives."  When a major media outlet runs a piece with a trend headline, there is an expectation that the article is based on some solid statistics.

However, not only is it doubtful that this is an actual trend but it appears that this isn’t actually a piece of journalism. Rather all clues naze to it being  a thinly veiled story created by a PR living body to hype a misogynistic author’s main division who believes the only conception men marry is for sex.

Clue #1 The statistics used as the foundation of this "growing number" is based on the findings of Scott Haltzman, "The Secrets Of Happily Married Women."

Dr. Scott Haltzman, author of "The Secrets of Happily Married Women," says stay-at-home wives constitute a growing niche. "In the exceeding few years, many women who are favorably educated and trained for career tracks esteem decided instead to stay at family," he says. While his research is ongoing, he estimates that more than 10 percent of the 650 women he’s interviewed who choose to lodge to one’s home are childless.

Not only is the research incomplete but who constitutes the sample assign places to? is it a cross section of women throughout the country or is this just women who buy his part? And, how do we know that the 10% digit represents any kind of increase. What are we comparing it to?  Makes my head split.

Clue #2 One of the supposed stay -at -home women has a part time job.

Recently, Zoerb took a temporary job at every engineering firm. It will boost her resume, and albeit the Zoerbs don’t need the money, it will help pay down their mortgage. Still, she hopes to return to stay-at-home wifedom soon. "I’d never say that a woman shouldn’t work," she says. "But I dress in’t see what good it would answer to work in a job that I couldn’t stand, and if I be seized of the exquisite not to, why wouldn’t I take that opportunity?"

Sounds way too much like an evangelist for Haltzman’s book and not someone a freelance journalist found to interview.

Clue #3  Interview with Catherine Zoerb’s husband Kirk who says he prefers his wife to stay at home because she has more energy ( code for sex).

"When Catherine corsets at home, I feel the house is more together because she has the time to do things like in-depth cleaning and can be more attentive to the garden," he says. "She also has to a greater degree time to find good deals at secondhand supplies, garage sales and at grocery stores." As a coupling, he says, "we have more energy and are generally emotionally healthier."

This is the real giveaway.Kirk Zoerb is sharing all of Haltzman’s discourse points for a happy marriage especially the last line " we have greater degree of energy" which of course is code for "we have more sex" which see Clue #4 is the premise of Haltzman’s book.

Clue #4 Publishers Weekly’s Review of the dexterous doctor’s book,

Haltzman’s promise of stress-free marital bliss is attractive, but his advice grates, recalling the subjugate sort of paternalistic misogyny. After explaining that men’s worst imparting habits are the conclusion of genetics, Haltzman goes on to say that men need to exist nurtured, require acknowledgement for their efforts and only increase married for sex.

What is CNN.com thinking? This is dribble at most wise, prosy at worst, and any way you have an air at it, completely insulting to their readers .As a major media organization accepting "freelance" articles does not mean accepting a purely PR produced piece of material.

The headline is provocative and like the burning bra fiction of the 60s — and no, women  did not burn their bras  as reported — this unwise little headline that stay at home wives is a growing trend could get a lot of play throughout the blogosphere because it was reported forward CNN.com.  CNN has a responsibility to report intelligence not pr.

Instead of reporting on real trends, CNN.com has published a promotional piece for a book that will result in bloggers and others  sharing  this information as "fact" when instead its vapid misinformation. It’s not only slovenly its embarrassing.

to Xin Lu at Wisebread who included the CNN article in her post "Is mode of life onward one income a status symbol?