Mimi Swartz mentions the "unmarried, childless martyrs" and Berman mentions that they aren't really a thing of the past. Apparently the only way for a career woman to avoid falling into this pathetic category is to start a family.

Starting a family is a choice. Some choose it; others don't. More power to both of them. Perhaps Rice and Sotomayor sacrificed family for career; perhaps they simply chose another path. Let's not reinforce the sad old spinster stereotype by implying in any way that a decision not to marry or have children is a failure.

These women are an inspiration to all of us who want to have it all, but realize that it is impossible to have it all at the same time.

Womanhattan is right. Having kids is a choice. Before I got married and had a kid, I worked those hours and with that level of single-minded focus. To do so now strikes me as inappropriate and in conflict with my current priorities. It is my fervent hope that when my kid is in college, I'll be able to return to focusing on my work more.

"But isn't it also upsetting that these women -- most of them baby boomers, who married and began to have kids at the height of second-wave feminism -- bore so much more of the responsibility for child-rearing than their male colleagues?"

Only in the feminist echo chamber.

"Is it not sad that female staffers have to reach menopause before they can put on a stylish outfit and still be treated like professionals?"

Disagree with the premise, but it does make for good feminist rhetoric.

"Does the generation of women that is just beginning to have children have a prayer of raising a family without making major career sacrifices?"

A small percentage...maybe 10% of the new generation of women will have a father that is willing to equally share the child rearing ....of course with the number of single mothers exploding, that number is probably dropping.

"And will their male peers finally share this work-life balance dilemma?"

In a word, No. Vast majorities of fathers (and mothers) still believe that women should be the primary caregivers for children.... I'm not sure what is going to change this worldwide view. As feminists continue to tear down marriage and the nuclear family, look for this number to continue to shrink. And with the growth of MRA's, legislation that attempts to make government a daddy replacement will no longer pass unnoticed... and will mostly rollback to actually give fathers equal rights.

But isn't it also upsetting that these women -- most of them baby boomers, who married and began to have kids at the height of second-wave feminism -- bore so much more of the responsibility for child-rearing than their male colleagues?

No, it's not. Choices -- we all make them.

Is it not sad that female staffers have to reach menopause before they can put on a stylish outfit and still be treated like professionals?

By whom? Knuckle-dragging morons who judge someone's character by how conservatively they dress? Who cares what they think? Is it sad? No. Cowardly? Yes.

Does the generation of women that is just beginning to have children have a prayer of raising a family without making major career sacrifices?

Gee, I'm not sure. Why not ask every previous generation that has ever existed -- both men and women. They all made major sacrifices to raise their families. It's just that most of them didn't whine about it like someone had just canceled Christmas.

Desiree Rogers is not frumpy. She's hot; and I also doubt that she's reached menopause yet.