How is it that the old boys network predominates on Sunday morning talk shows while just last week, the media mused about the "year of the woman" as conservative women prevailed at the polls?
"Women are still scarce on Sunday morning news shows," wrote Erika Lovely for Politico, who cites soon-to-be-published research from American University's Women & Politics Institute that found just under 14% of lawmaker guests on Sunday morning talk shows have been women. However, unlike NPR's earlier piece this year called "Where Are the Women?" the Sunday show producers appear to have no intention of remedying the disparity. In fact, their reactionary responses remained defensive as they justified structural sexism.
It's high time for Sunday morning news shows to take responsibility for their "men-in-suits mind-set" rather than blaming women who have been underrepresented and disregarded for decades. Still, producers continue to reject accountability for the lack of diversity, resorting to a laundry list of meaningless justifications, including our underrepresentation in Congress, time zone issues, and even diva-baiting Speaker Pelosi.
It's disappointing to hear those sentiments echoed by Washington Post columnist Howard Kurtz. It is contradictory for him to say "I'm not in the business of inviting female politicians on the air" but then support "a bigger pool of female columnists, bloggers and talk show hosts." Perhaps Howard Kurtz did not mean to privilege female columnists while disenfranchising female politicians -- but the impact may override the intent.
Enough with the excuses. The mindset that "there are no good women" is too common and too casually accepted. While we celebrate when a woman triumphs over sexism, last week's primaries did not signal equal representation for women in Congress, any more than today's piece in Politico represents a tide turning on Sunday morning. These stats are not new.
While it's a positive step forward that media outlets recognize the gender disparity on Sunday morning, there are qualified women available, and producers need to book them. The Women's Media Center represents hundreds of experts available on every issue from beltway politics to foreign policy to financial reform. The solution is clear.
There will always be those who make excuses and point to the one woman on the four person panel as progress. View the Women's Media Center award-winning video highlighting the gender disparity still widely prevalent in media:
Follow Jehmu Greene on Twitter: www.twitter.com/jehmu
Oh and according to Rachel Maddow when discussing discrimination with Rand Paul, nobody should be allowed to discriminate... ever... and that would include affirmative action.
Face it, modern feminism is the biggest benefactor of patriarchy and the biggest supporter. Women vote for President Obama and Bill Clinton and Kerry and Gore for sugar daddies... apologetic men who "give them stuff". even Gloria Steinem gave Bill Clinton a pass on sexual harassment saying men get "one free grope".
Its skirts, not shirts holding women back. Look how progressive women attack Palin and Bachman and Clinton and others on purely misogynist grounds. Boob-gate? REALLY? Female candidates are judged by their breast size? REALLY?
Liberals need to take progressives out back behind the tool shed and give them a good beating with the tolerance rubber hose. They seriously need to line progressives out, snap them back and let them know who is the boss with a serious pedigree.
We'd have a woman in the white house by now if women didn't have the right to vote.
Yes women are over half the population and like 58% of the vote so there exists NO excuse OTHER THAN WOMEN THEMSELVES that a woman is not in the white house.
Women need to stop voting in Sugar daddies.
Seriously, she's complaining about Sunday morning news shows? Must there be an equal amount of females on TV at any and all given times of day and/or days of the week?
Enough excuses...when, oh when, will we have equality?
This is why modern feminism is considered irrelevant.
Do you know how underrepresented women are in the coal mining industry?
Why are you not fighting to right that wrong?
But gender advocacy is different, since your descendants will not share your gender.
Same with gay advocacy; your children (if any) are not any more likely to be gay.
If you are white or black, or Christian or Jew, you can logically want preferential treatment for your group, because that will likely include your descendants (or so you might hope).
But if female or gay, you must fight for equal rights; your descendants may be male or straight.
Gender and gay advocacy must therefore be toward equality, not preferential treatment.
That goes for straight advocacy too, like DOMA.
Cheney learned that you better not be anti-gay, you may have a lesbian daughter.