With only the single sentence to go by, I (wrongly) assumed that this was written by an anti-feminist man. Instead, it turns out that it was written by a housewife.
Here's the final paragraph of the article for context (emphasis mine):
I feel resentful, especially as it's the men who bring in the money; and even if Bill were a head teacher, he wouldn't come close. When out with the girls I hear Susan moan about John's business trips and I have to pinch myself to keep from shouting that his £250,000 salary must make up for some of his absences. Or Trisha: she inherited a house from her parents, which means that though her husband is on a normal salary, she needn't work, and spends her time at the gym. Bill tells our girls that they can achieve anything and I agree, but when they start dating, I'll try to guide them (behind his back) towards men who can give them the sort of life I've never had. Feminism's fine, but there's a lot to be said for having your bills paid.
The short interpretation of the sentence is that she's saying you can have feminist ideals and, as a woman, support yourself—but that if you do that you won't make as much money as you would if you married a rich man. (And let him do all the work.)
It's difficult to not take this in a cynical way. The author's rant—which starts several paragraphs before this—isn't so much against feminism per se (that seems to be more of a final throwaway sentiment), but more about moaning about not having as much money as her friends.