Men, this is how much culinary ignorance could cost you
You can count on the divorce courts for a sense of the frontiers of gender equality. Last month, Simon Entwistle found himself in the papers when he appealed the sum he'd been awarded following his split from his ex, Jenny Helliwell, on grounds of 'gender prejudice'. She is an heiress with an estimated fortune of £61.5 million. Entwistle's argument is basically that he is so useless he ought to be given lots of money.
He tried hard in the original hearing. Glossing over his career as a City trader, his lawyers argued he was a kind of innocent fledgling, plucked from the nest and sold into gilded marital servitude. Having grown used to luxury, he could hardly be expected to support himself. He claimed for all sorts of spurious concessions; he wanted £36,000 per year for flights alone.
Most outrageously, Entwistle wanted £26,000 a year for 'meal plans', as he was hopeless in the kitchen. 'I can't even cook an omelette,' he pleaded. Perhaps not, but you'd have thought he could run the numbers. Even given today's prices, £500 a week will buy a man a lot of breakfast.
I realise it was for a noble cause, but in completely denying any kitchen prowess, Entwistle has let the man side down. Jamie Oliver has been on TV for a quarter of a century. As with tax fraud, ignorance is not an excuse. Nobody is saying you need to memorise the entire Larousse Gastronomique, but in 2025 every man ought to have at least seven pairs of pants and the same number of recipes up his sleeve. A minimum of two should be midweek dinners that do not involve piling up every pan in the kitchen and kicking back to glug the claret while one's partner sets about the washing up like Hercules approaching the stables.
Speaking for myself, I have found cooking at home a good way not to feel like a spare part. This time five years ago, my wife and I had our baby daughter at home. Caring for a one-month-old in a lockdown was a good lesson in gender essentialism. Cooking was one of the few things I could do. (I am told 'making some money' would also have been popular.) And it is not hard. Put a chicken in the oven for 45 minutes*? Brownie points. Huge batch of pasta sauce? Brownie points. Bake some brownies? You guessed it – a pat on the back.
An irony for Entwistle is that if he had bothered to get his head around a couple of one-pan dishes – and even washed them up afterwards – he might have come off better in the original ruling. Traditional divorce awards were a reflection of sacrifice as well as need. Women gave up their own careers to devote themselves to their husbands and children; it was right they shared the pot. Martyred apron guy is a more persuasive vibe than entitled whinger.
Instead, the judge was having none of it, and awarded Entwistle just £325,000. It must have stung all the more given Helliwell had previously offered £800,000. Mr Justice Francis commented: '[Entwistle] said to me, 'I can't even cook an omelette.' Well, my answer to that is, 'Learn.' It is not difficult. You do not have to be a master chef to learn how to eat reasonably well.'
And then there was this zinger: 'Being married to a rich person for three years does not suddenly catapult you into a right to live like that after the relationship has ended.'
As Entwistle had spent £450,000 in legal fees, his pleading culinary ignorance left him down £125,000 net. I wonder how he likes them eggs.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Telegraph
01-04-2025
- Telegraph
Men, this is how much culinary ignorance could cost you
You can count on the divorce courts for a sense of the frontiers of gender equality. Last month, Simon Entwistle found himself in the papers when he appealed the sum he'd been awarded following his split from his ex, Jenny Helliwell, on grounds of 'gender prejudice'. She is an heiress with an estimated fortune of £61.5 million. Entwistle's argument is basically that he is so useless he ought to be given lots of money. He tried hard in the original hearing. Glossing over his career as a City trader, his lawyers argued he was a kind of innocent fledgling, plucked from the nest and sold into gilded marital servitude. Having grown used to luxury, he could hardly be expected to support himself. He claimed for all sorts of spurious concessions; he wanted £36,000 per year for flights alone. Most outrageously, Entwistle wanted £26,000 a year for 'meal plans', as he was hopeless in the kitchen. 'I can't even cook an omelette,' he pleaded. Perhaps not, but you'd have thought he could run the numbers. Even given today's prices, £500 a week will buy a man a lot of breakfast. I realise it was for a noble cause, but in completely denying any kitchen prowess, Entwistle has let the man side down. Jamie Oliver has been on TV for a quarter of a century. As with tax fraud, ignorance is not an excuse. Nobody is saying you need to memorise the entire Larousse Gastronomique, but in 2025 every man ought to have at least seven pairs of pants and the same number of recipes up his sleeve. A minimum of two should be midweek dinners that do not involve piling up every pan in the kitchen and kicking back to glug the claret while one's partner sets about the washing up like Hercules approaching the stables. Speaking for myself, I have found cooking at home a good way not to feel like a spare part. This time five years ago, my wife and I had our baby daughter at home. Caring for a one-month-old in a lockdown was a good lesson in gender essentialism. Cooking was one of the few things I could do. (I am told 'making some money' would also have been popular.) And it is not hard. Put a chicken in the oven for 45 minutes*? Brownie points. Huge batch of pasta sauce? Brownie points. Bake some brownies? You guessed it – a pat on the back. An irony for Entwistle is that if he had bothered to get his head around a couple of one-pan dishes – and even washed them up afterwards – he might have come off better in the original ruling. Traditional divorce awards were a reflection of sacrifice as well as need. Women gave up their own careers to devote themselves to their husbands and children; it was right they shared the pot. Martyred apron guy is a more persuasive vibe than entitled whinger. Instead, the judge was having none of it, and awarded Entwistle just £325,000. It must have stung all the more given Helliwell had previously offered £800,000. Mr Justice Francis commented: '[Entwistle] said to me, 'I can't even cook an omelette.' Well, my answer to that is, 'Learn.' It is not difficult. You do not have to be a master chef to learn how to eat reasonably well.' And then there was this zinger: 'Being married to a rich person for three years does not suddenly catapult you into a right to live like that after the relationship has ended.' As Entwistle had spent £450,000 in legal fees, his pleading culinary ignorance left him down £125,000 net. I wonder how he likes them eggs.
The Independent
24-03-2025
- The Independent
Daughter of Taliban-imprisoned British couple fears for health amid court delay
The daughter of an elderly British couple imprisoned in Afghanistan has spoken of her serious concerns about their deteriorating health. Peter Reynolds, 79, and his wife Barbie, 75, were arrested as they travelled to their home in Bamyan province, in central Afghanistan, in February. Sarah Entwistle said the continued detention of her father 'poses a serious risk to his life'. Mr Reynolds is 'experiencing tremors in his head and left arm', Ms Entwistle told The Times, adding Mrs Reynolds was 'collapsing due to malnutrition'. Mr Reynolds has had a chest infection, a double eye infection and serious digestive problems since he was moved to a maximum security prison, she said. 'We remain extremely concerned for Dad in particular. Without access to the medication he needs, his continued detention poses a serious risk to his life,' she has said previously. Court proceedings for the couple were scheduled for Saturday but they were returned to their separate prisons after the hearing was delayed. Ms Entwistle said she was 'devastated' by the delay but added guards had 'indicated that a different judge would be handling the case'. 'We continue to hope they will receive a fair hearing,' she added. Mr and Mrs Reynolds have lived in Afghanistan for 18 years, where they run school training programmes. They were arrested alongside Faye Hall, an American friend who had rented a plane to travel with them, and a translator from the couple's Rebuild training business. A Foreign, Commonwealth and Development Office spokesman said on Monday: 'We are supporting the family of two British nationals who are detained in Afghanistan.' However, the UK Government has said its ability to provide assistance was 'extremely limited' due to the closure of its embassy after the Taliban's takeover in 2021.
Telegraph
23-03-2025
- Telegraph
Fears grow for UK couple held by Taliban
A court decision has been delayed for an elderly British couple detained by the Taliban in Afghanistan as the mother's health is 'rapidly deteriorating,' the family has told The Telegraph. Peter Reynolds, 79, and his 75-year-old wife Barbie were taken to court separately yesterday in Kabul but did not appear before a judge after spending four hours chained to other prisoners. The couple was returning to their home in Bamiyan, central Afghanistan, on Feb 1 when they were detained, ostensibly over accusations that they had fake Afghan passports. The Reynolds, who have lived in Afghanistan for 18 years and have joint UK-Afghan citizenship, are being held separately in the Afghan capital. Prison guards told them that a different judge would be handling their case, according to their daughter. Sarah Entwistle said yesterday: 'Despite being told that today's court appearance would result in a final decision, they spent four hours sitting on the floor, chained to other prisoners, before being returned to the prison. There are still no charges against them, and no evidence of any crime has been submitted.' The delay comes amid serious concerns about the couple's health. Ms Entwistle said her mother is suffering from malnutrition, receiving only one meal per day compared with three meals provided to male detainees. She said: 'Mum's health is rapidly deteriorating and she is collapsing due to malnutrition. She and the other women are provided only one meal a day. She requires support to climb the four flights of stairs to the room where the judge is located (which is not like a Western courtroom). Dad's health is also still declining and he's experiencing tremors in his head and left arm.' The family expressed disappointment over the continued detention and unexpected delay. Ms Entwistle said: 'We are devastated by this delay. It makes little sense, especially given that the Taliban have repeatedly stated that this situation is due to misunderstandings and that they will be released 'soon'.' Ms Entwistle said the family hopes for a resolution this week. The couple married in Kabul in 1970, before war ravaged the capital, and set up a company to provide education and training.
