As demonstrated by a slip in my discussion of her "The Descent of Man" (1899):
Away from the routines of his daily wife ...
I didn't mean it.
Perfectly understandable. Read this:
It must not be inferred that the Professor's domestic relations were defective: they were in fact so complete that it was almost impossible to get away from them. It is the happy husbands who are really in bondage ... Marriage had given the Professor exactly what he had sought in it; a comfortable lining to life ... He took as it were a sociological view of his case, and modestly regarded himself as a brick in that foundation on which the state is supposed to rest. Perhaps if Mrs. Linyard had cared about entomology, or had taken sides in the war over the transmission of acquired characteristics, he might have had a less impersonal notion of marriage; but he was unconscious of any deficiency in their relation, and if consulted would probably have declared that he didn't want any woman bothering with his beetles.
No need to gainsay.
No use in it.
I won't listen.
What do you mean "overcompensation"?
This conversation's over ... and completely compensated.
(Stupid Edith Wharton.)