"She has become perhaps the most vilified spouse of a financial rogue in history," The New York Times announced.

Americans love to loathe Ruth Madoff, wife of convicted fraudster Bernard Madoff.

One typical ABC News headline was hopefully titled: "Homeless? Ruth Madoff to Lose Penthouse, Other Homes." When she refused to comment to an ABC News reporter who accosted her after a prison visit, ABC News spun that into another hateful headline: "No Apology from Ruth Madoff."

The New York Times' official ethicist pontificated about her sins:

"Marriage is a partnership. If you reap its rewards, you bear some responsibility for the way they accrue. ... Perhaps one evening, aloft in the private plane, while polishing her $2.6 million worth of jewels, she might have asked him, 'Why is it, darling, that for 20 years your company has attracted few institutional investors, people with the savvy to probe your methods?'"

Even commercial establishments are shunning her. Beth Eckhardt, a Long Island florist, was asked if she would serve Ruth Madoff ever again: "Are you kidding? No way! No way! No way! I mean, really."

This March, in the ultimate insult, even her hairdresser told her not to come back. Now that's pariah status. If Ruth were merely, say, married to a mass murderer, I'm pretty sure she could still get her roots dyed in Manhattan.

The feds have cleared her of criminal liability, but critics still insist Ruth had to know.

Because, I mean, a guy like Bernie who legitimately rose to be president of Nasdaq and then makes lots and lots of money in the stock market -- his wife has got to suspect he's running a Ponzi scheme, right? Bernie Madoff fooled a who's-who list of savvy New Yorkers -- but his wife, she has to know?

In the Middle Ages, whole families were punished for the crimes of any family member. It was once considered a sign of moral progress that Western legal codes demanded individual and not clan accountability.

Watching the treatment of Ruth reminds you how fragile and precious such civilizational achievements are in the face of the raw human need to tear limb from limb an enemy who has hurt you.

Bernie is safely tucked away in prison out of our reach. Ruth is still here, walking the streets, trying to eat pizza and get her hair done. We vent our fury on the object closest at hand, and then we make up reasons why our fury is justified.

Ruth Madoff's sons hired a crisis management firm to hone their public image. Ruth has simply stoically gutted this thing out. What she has to bear, she will bear in silence, not on the public stage for our primal satisfaction.

I remember the precise moment I first realized that I admire Ruth Madoff.

It was the moment I realized that Ruth could -- with one decision -- make this all go away. All she'd have to do is divorce Bernie. Go on "Oprah" and emote about the victims. Share her raw emotions. Express meaningless sympathy. Publicly condemn her ex. Write a tell-all book about how women need to stay on top of the family finances. She'd be a modern-day heroine.

Hero or the scapegoat? Hero or the scapegoat?

Ruth Madoff's path is much harder and requires a different, distinctly unmodern kind of integrity.

When she and Bernie married they had nothing. All she has now is what her parents left her, plus Social Security. Bernie is in prison for the rest of her life. But Ruth Madoff is not going to abandon her core commitment: This is my husband. Bone of my bone, flesh of my flesh. For better or for worse. "Until death do us part."

How many of those who get married really mean it that way?

How many of us can even still admire -- or at least not revile -- that kind of vow?