Uh, it was actually old fashioned
classism
against the
man
in this relationship since Stew, with his working-class ways, wasn't good enough for Ann. She married him with every intention of "fixing" him.

I agree! Stewie uses his refusal to wear garters to hold up his socks as the symbol of his freedom and independencehis personhood. And as soon as they were married, Ann forces him to wear those garters. All the guys in the newsroom are seen examining this sign that he was so quickly changed by his rich new wife. He let her change him because he loved her so much. But she is soon talking about all the other changes she plans on making to her new husband. That's pretty awful and disrespectful of her, not him.
This film has a man and woman as best friends and colleaguesa very modern story line. Stewie does not leave his wife until he's accused of immoral behavior for daring to work on his play with his friend. And he's ready to pay HER alimony. LOL
Yes, it's sexist to require the woman to fix breakfast. But 15 years later the entire country forced every woman out of her job to go home and be barefoot and pregnant. So seeing it in 1931 isn't that unexpected. At least they loved each other deeply and honestly.

I understood that the storyline revolved around the wealthy heiress 'reforming' the
husband
.
Also, haven't you just described the plot of 'The Taming of the Shrew', written by the greatest playwriters of all time.

I don't see the sexism in this film, and I didn't see the "treating her like crap and demanding her to be obedient" stuff that you mentioned. You must have accidentally posted on the wrong board.

Yes, for the 1931 audience it does.