Massively successful dead female novelist still wasn’t good enough because she wasn’t a mother

This really is pretty low. The woman’s not even cold yet! Will those patronising, smug female ‘journalists’ never shut up about their superiority complex? The picture caption in particular just about finished me off.

“No matter what your experience of adult love, there is nothing as strong as the bond between a mother and a child.”

Is anyone else as bored of this cliche as I am? Even if it’s true for her, why should this matter to the rest of the world? It’s like an American politician’s relationship with Jesus: not relevant to my life.

“I make no moral claims for motherhood ­— which can bring out the worst in a person, in the form of vicarious rivalry, bitchiness, envy and even mental illness — but going through the ring of fire does change you and bring about a deeper understanding of human nature.”

Yes, I’m sure Rosemary West is a right little philosopher, deep down.

“Binchy, whose first novel was about a 20-year friendship between two women, didn’t need the experience of motherhood to write about love and friendship in a way that charmed millions. But she might have dug deeper, charming less but enlightening more, had she done so.”

You know what lady? Right now, you’re doing neither. Oh noes! All that dedicated breeding was wasted after all!

Having now read some of the wonderfully scathing comments at the bottom of the page, it turns out Maeve Binchy couldn’t have children for medical reasons – which makes Ms Craig even more despicable than I previously thought. What kind of person tries to rub a dead woman’s nose in her misfortune? Certainly not someone with a deeper understanding of human nature!