I always did think that Liz Jones was a grade-A bitch as well as a complete idiot, but this really takes the biscuit for pointless nastiness...

[frogs]

Let's be foul to Ruth Kelly and take the piss out of her kids while we're at it.

not only bitchy, but spectacularly missing the point - as to how far other factors may have influenced Ruth Kelly's decision.

She is truly foul.

"With her ill-timed actions she has, in one fell swoop, made it OK for men to continue to treat female politicians and co-workers and bedmates as the hormone-driven hysterics they always suspected they were."

????!???
Well if that were the case, we could equally say of Liz Jones that with her ditzy, immature, trivial, fashion-obsessed columns she has made it ok for men to continue to treat women as the ditzy, immature, trivial, fashion-obsessed idiots they always suspected..... etc etc.

the bit about leavin the office at 6 on the dot leaving the men and the childless to pick up the slack - FFS what a stupid bitch - she does feminism more damage than ruth kelly ever could.

she hasn't got a glimmer of understanding about parenting. why should she? she's not a mother.
but staggering she didn't have the professional sense, never mind sensitivity, to keep her ignorance and mean-spirited thoughts well and truly to herself.
first rule of writing: write what you know

The bit about 'her bawling infants' and 'tucking her children into their over-appliquéd bed linen' was particularly foul.

I think she suffers from Lionel Shriver syndrome -- she's chosen, or her life circumstances have chosen for her, not to have any children, and so refuses to get her head around the idea that kids might not be some kind of evil force-field designed to suck out women's brains and ambitions.

What a sad piece. Very bitter. I don't buy the 'well, of course it shouldn't be this way but that's how the world works so I have to go along with it' argument either.

Agree she has missed the point... perhaps on what life is actually all about.

(Don't particularly like Ruth Kelly, but deciding to spend more time with her children,, and wanting to put them to bed each night, doesn't make her a villain in my eyes)

yes, agree she's consumed by bitterness.
almost more to be pitied than hated, eh?....
i said almost...

she's awful
and wtf would she know, she has cats, not children

Totally agree with Kathy - not to mention the endless bleatings about that repulsive man she enslaved herself to!

She really is a astoundingly vicious idiot.

is she the columnist who witters on about her boyf/ husband/ ex husband who played around and sponged off her?

She's jealous.

horrible piece imo feminism is about being able to say now I need to spend time with my family it's called choice
I'm not a big fan of Ruth Kelly either but Liz Jones makes me want to boak her and her husband parading their marriage break up in the columns how demeaning is that?

Interesting that it's in the Mail though - not usually in favour of working women. Although it does reek of Mail misogyny so presumably that's how it got past.

Suspect Jones is jealous because she doesn't have children. I wouldn't normally say that about another woman, but she did share all the horrible, tawdry, self-centred details of her marriage and divorce with us, so tough.

She's a nasty piece of work, but such a profoundly sad and ridiculous case that I can't believe anyone takes her seriously.

what a cow

I think she's got a point, actually. It does seem very odd to me that Ruth Kelly should suddenly discover she needs to spend time with her family right now, but that's beside the point. I agree her statement will fuel the predudices of all chauvinist employers against women with children, and I agree it's not exactly a blow for feminism.

It always amazes me that so many people on here slate the DM and have nothing good to say about anything written in it, yet so many seem to continue to read it.

I do think RK went because there was due to be a reshuffle shortly so she jumped before she was pushed. However, for her to dress it up as wanting to be with her family does give certain elements of the press a field day re the feminist cause. If she had really wanted to be with her family, she would have waited for the reshuffle and simply stood down at that stage. To announce it a week or two ahead of that was a calculated dig at GB.

According to her many TMI columns, she did want babies IIRC but unfortunately misogynist wideboy wouldn't go along with it and she clung to him till it was too late. Her jealousy and resentment is plain for all to see in that article.

Interestingly several male politicians have also stepped down because the want to spend more time with their family (or at least they say they do, which may be what Kelly's doing here anyway). I haven't heard them being vilified for wanting to focus on fatherhood. It's a parent's choice, not just a woman's choice.

I have always understood that "leaving to spend more time with the family" was code for "I've been told to resign or I will be fired"

Ah good old Liz. She saves all her compassion for those over pampered moggies she dribbles on about

What a foul piece if writing. I am certainly a feminist but have recently taken a step back in my career to allow more time for my children. Feminism is about choice, free choice.