The enmity I feel for Ruth Madoff has nothing to do with gender. Everyone I know seems to agree -- if our spouses were committing crimes of this level for such a long time, we would know. And we just don't find it believable that Ruth Madoff is a victim here. She had to have known that something was wrong, but she lived in the lap of luxury anyway.

Even now, it's not like she's a pauper. That's inexcusable. She should be left with nothing, since every penny she has was stolen. If my husband gave me a stolen car for my birthday, you can bet that the police would take that car back. So why does Ruth Madoff still have a home? That home should be in the hands of the people it was stolen from.

for resisting the temptation to ascribe the public revulsion to Ms. Madoff's behavior as determined by her being a woman. Gloria Steinem was really, really reaching for this one, and such positions damage the credibility of feminism by their exaggeration. The "little people," - as characterized by another privileged snot now deceased - are simply pissed off at such egregiously selfish, avaricious and mendacious behavior. It has little or nothing to do with her being a woman and everything to do with her being the typical elite greedhead.

Couldn't agree more. Currently live on less than $20K a year, which is probably higher than my lifetime average, in spite of nearly twenty years of education, three degrees, a series of responsible positions, and eight published books in sixteen editions (most with major publishers, thank you).

When I read about someone who has benefited from a crooked system being "allowed" to live on the severely reduced amount of $10 million, my first response is not "there go those damn women again." As valuable a service as Steinem has rendered, her assertion in this case is just plain silly.

A wealthy acquaintance of mine once was near tears for poor Milliken (does anyone remember his name any more?), who had been "punished enough." Seems the poor fellow had to live on a mere one million a year. My heart was full of pity.

I agree with your assessment Tracy. Ruth Madoff is reviled not because of what she IS, but what she DID. The sons have remained silent and have yet to make a public grab for the spoils --no doubt upon the good advice of legal counsel. Ruth, not so much.

I look forward to the day when Steinem and some other major voices in the feminist movement will give women true credit and respect by acknowledging that sometimes women happen to succeed AND FAIL as a result of their own actions.

I am a woman, and yes, I find myself absolutely hating Ruth Madoff. Why? Because we hold women to a higher standard of ethics/morals with respect to illegal behavior? NO!!! - it's because she was one of her husband's bookkeepers for the past 20 years! She definately knew that something "not right" was going on, and yet she still reaped the filthy benefits of his actions. Money, yachts, vacation homes, etc. The thing that burns me up inside is that she refuses to just come out and apologize for her negligence. Material wealth is more important to this woman than upholding ethical and legal standards. In my opinion, Ruth Madoff is disgraceful to women especially because we are normally the ones to call foul, to speak up against the 'good ole boys'. My point is, without going into gender debates, that Ruth Madoff knew what was going on, and did nothing to stop it, and her inaction actually encouraged Bernie's behavior. It's like watching a crime happen in the street; we despise the perpetrator, but we also judge and come to despise the person on the other side of the street that watched the crime and did absolutely nothing about it. Willful indifference, I believe it's called. Disgraceful.

I agree with an earlier poster that Gloria Steinem is reaching awfully long and hard here to blame the hate on Ruth Madoff just because she's a woman. I hope she doesn't push for Ruth to be a new face that represents all women (oh please God no)because I can see that whole thing doing a major backlash and not a good kind either. Sorry, Ruth Madoff doesn't represent me. She is hated because of the choices and activities she has made along with her disgusting husband. It is still very hard to believe that she is completely ignorant of what her beloved Bernie did (oh yeah, blame it on his kids, Ruth). I know I'm not the only one who thinks that just based on the press she has been getting. No surprise that when authorities went to evict her, she has already gone into hiding. I really couldn't care less about the woman.

Ruth's behavior has been to stand by her husband regardless, which may be noble on some level but puts her squarely on the side of one of the most reviled figures of our time. It's her prerogative, of course, but she needs to expect that everyone will not see this as particularly noble or a good character recommendation. The other significant difference was, as stated in the article, Ruth ran to the bank, the sons called a lawyer and then the SEC. They have distanced themselves from their father and the entire scheme, and she hasn't.

Furthermore, I see no evidence that Ruth is hated any more than Bernie himself, despite having "less power" and being female. I think what people find was how, in the wake of the revelations of financial fraud, her efforts have been selfishly focused on securing as much money as she can, regardless of it's potential taint. This creates the image of a woman who, even if she wasn't aware of the scheme--a dubious possibility but conceivable--she was indifferent to its effects either way and displayed a self-centered reaction of the matter that was second only to that of her husband.

To paraphrase Freud, sometimes disgust at another's behavior is just disgust at another's behavior.