I don't know where to start...

Well I've a bit of time on my hands - well I haven't really, I should be tidying and starting dinner.

But this talk of QI has interested me, so I've done a little totting up on the M/F panellists and:

In 2003: Series A: 4/12 shows, and the pilot were all male. The remaining 8 had 2 male guests and 1 female. 4 of these 8 shows featured Jo Brand.

Role forward to 2012 and: there was indeed 1 all female show (Jo Brand, Sue PErkins & Lisa Tarbuck). There were 3 all-male shows. 9 shows featured 2 men and 1 woman. 3 shows had 1 man and 2 women.

So, do I detect a slight improvement in the female participation on QI in the decade it has been running? Possibly. But even in the 2012 series, there were still a total of 30 men ( not including the male presenter) and only 18 women.

Interesting - because this is a show on the BBC - which is notoriously left leaning and 'women-friendly'. And so, I think this shows that people saying women are under-represented in the media are not "seeing what they are looking for."

Btw, FamilyGuy you can convert your links so that they're clickable - makes it easier.

'Admittedly QI is a predominantly male show but I would reckon that the OP would have quickly neglected the show if she had tuned into the episode where the guests were all female (Jo Brand, Sue Perkins and Liza Tarbuck).'

What does that mean? Was that particular show rubbish?

I don't really know where to start with FamilyGuy's post.

Can I ask why you don't know who the two other women are? It's certainly not due to under representation as they all feature equally on the show. Therefore Dr. Christian gets one third of the airtime compared to his female colleagues.

Isn't that my point? We went from a situation where they were all co-presenters with equal airtime, and where they were all good presenters, to one where Dr Christian is the one we mostly see popping up on panel shows and other medical programmes (I remember him a few years ago on the Christmas OBEM for example). He has in some sense become the face of the programme outside the show, reflected by the fact that the people here who haven't seen it have only heard of him, while there are three presenters. He also solo presented the one-off special on the little girl who appeared in the show whose immune system was found to be abnormal.

I would reckon that the OP would have quickly neglected the show if she had tuned into the episode where the guests were all female

Why so? I would have watched that. Is seeing just women talking boring?

Perhaps the 1st choice females were at a conference as it was more important to keep abreast with progress than get 10 mins of fame? Ha! If you knew how badly women are represented at conferences in many fields relative even to their numbers in their respective fields you would, like me, be rolling around on the floor at this idea.

I really think there is a limit to how long you can tie yourself in knots saying "but perhaps the women just weren't available that day" before you have to concede that this is a systemic phenomenon.

Oh, I'm sorry, I understood your point, I meant that I just didn't understand his. It seemed odd to me given he'd begun all of this with a derailing and negative comment.

LRD
I was addressing the fact that namechangeguy accused you of being snarky and sniping rather than addressing his points, by pointing out that he had behaved the same way.

rosa, to be honest, I didn't understand that comment.

I was really enjoying this thread and my perspective (faulty as it must be) was that we were having an interesting discussion whilst gently and jokily explaining that it's nice sometimes to consider women instead of primarily men.

But, well, perhaps that was too much.

I thought you were making a really interesting point.

Separately, I found this interesting: 'Admittedly QI is a predominantly male show but I would reckon that the OP would have quickly neglected the show if she had tuned into the episode where the guests were all female (Jo Brand, Sue Perkins and Liza Tarbuck).'

Does it not occur to you that it might be we're actually discussing the fact that shows like QI are 'predominantly male'? That we're suggesting it may, perhaps, not be entirely coincidental that this is so?

I don't know what the OP does and doesn't neglect - not being her - but I must point out that her chances of tuning into a QI show where all the guests were female are vanishingly small. It's rare. That's the point. And she could never tune into a show where more than 3/5 of the panel are female, whereas she could easily tune into shows where 5/5 are male.

I am not knocking QI especially - I think it's often excellent.

But I just don't think you have a leg to stand on arguing this point.

FamilyGuy - Anyway, I read the OP with interest and whilst I fully accept that we do not live in a 100% balanced environment think that there is an element of seeing what you're looking for

No, we're really not 'seeing what we're looking for. Numerous studies have shown that women are under-represented in the media - please don't try to tell us we are imagining it.

And why stop at the media? Let's look at the more important positions of power. Women being so tragically underrepresented both in parliament, and especially in the cabinet. We are not just seeing what we want to see.

namechangeguy said LRD, every response so far has been a snarky, sniping comment rather than trying to discuss whatever is posted.

Whereas his dismissal of my comment (and the highly respected, intellectual novelist who prompted it) which, although an aside, was actually addressing the main point of the thread, as "middle class angst" was, of course, not at all snarky or sniping or an attempt not to discuss what was being posted.

Is it just me? When I read the article about Brian Cox wife I thought 'typical, why can't he wash his own bloody underpants, washing machines are less complicated than particle colliders...'

Can I ask why you don't know who the two other women are? It's certainly not due to under representation as they all feature equally on the show. Therefore Dr. Christian gets one third of the airtime compared to his female colleagues.

It's a bit difficult to answer that question, but I guess that's kind of the point we're trying to make!

Why does the man on the show (I'll take your word for it that they all get a third airtime) get to be famous outside the show itself, whilst the women don't?

runningforthebusinheels

"I can't watch Embarrassing Bodies, I'm far too squeamish. But I know who Dr Christian is, and can picture him easily. I've never heard of the 2 women you mention."

Can I ask why you don't know who the two other women are? It's certainly not due to under representation as they all feature equally on the show. Therefore Dr. Christian gets one third of the airtime compared to his female colleagues.

Anyway, I read the OP with interest and whilst I fully accept that we do not live in a 100% balanced environment think that there is an element of seeing what you're looking for. In the same way that when you replace your car, you suddenly see more of the same model on the road all of a sudden. Look hard enough and you will see what you want to see in every situation i.e. confirmation bias. I'm not suggesting that feminism is some bogus ideal and that the OP is a crackpot, far from it. However, you need to be careful about all this. How does one know the intent of the producer? I don't and neither do any of us on here so why attempt to second guess whether there is some untoward bias or not? I've already posted an article, written by a female science producer, who claims that sexism isn't something she consciously thinks of so who are we to question her motives?

Admittedly QI is a predominantly male show but I would reckon that the OP would have quickly neglected the show if she had tuned into the episode where the guests were all female (Jo Brand, Sue Perkins and Liza Tarbuck).

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_QI_episodes

I often watch Michael McIntyre but how does one know that the guests appearing that night were the only ones available? The same goes for Horizon. One thing worth noting is that scientists can travel quite a lot. Conferences, meetings, field trips etc. so are difficult to pin down. Perhaps the 1st choice females were at a conference as it was more important to keep abreast with progress than get 10 mins of fame?
Also, how does one know whether there was a leading female scientist with expertise in the field of interest? I know a number of leading female scientists but perhaps not with specific expertise to discuss the topics on Horizon. What I do know, however, is that they have been interviewed in the past by the media.

In fact, cast your minds back to the recent 'How to Build' series and there were a number of female engineers/scientists that were interviewed from Mclaren, Rolls Royce and Astrium.

I think it's sad that anyone should get laughed at for airing their beliefs but I would tend to scoff at the Bechdel Test too. Fiction is so called because it is exactly that. Thus it need not represent any factual or realistic events or people. Fiction has no duty to represent women/men/race without bias but to convey the intent of the author. If the author happens to be sexist, bigoted misogynist then so be it.

Btw, my mum has always instilled in me a very good sense of feminism and equality, and is a very strong woman.

But these habits that are instilled in childhood die hard, and she does all the housework, while dad relaxes on the sofa.

No doubt, there was some 'older sibling' thing going on too, LRD, you're not wrong there.

But my mum tells me that she always had to make her bed, help in the kitchen etc, and when she complained that her little brother didn't have to do this, was told 'it's because he's too young.' This went on for years - many years longer than their actual age difference iyswim, until she realised her little brother was never going to be asked to do any chores around the house! Because he was a boy, not because he was younger.

Good for you!

(Now, how much of that is just typical older sibling/younger sibling? Or is it only me who has guilty memories of telling my younger brother to do it or else? )

I've just told my 8yr old son son off for making his 5yr old sister bring his lunch plate out to me in the kitchen.

Start the education young

I'm in the same position as running - never watched it, but I know who Dr Christian is. Not the women (didn't even know he wasn't the only presenter).

I think (hope) we are in the beginning stages of that feminist revival. There seem to be so many more of us, and things like Million Women Rise and Reclaim the Night are going strong again.

It's nice.

(I will say here, I find both Cox and Dr Christian to be smug, glib and patronizing from the little I've seen on other panel shows. But I'd always prefer to believe someone is different and nicer in real life.)

I have no idea who Judi Dench is married to or who Taylor Hackford or Greg Wise are!

I agree we are on the verge of a big rise in feminism. I think women are increasingly pissed off and events like the India rape only make it worse. Also all the articles about rape / women in the media etc this year - I can't remember a time last year when they weren't in the papers.

It may be daft but I think twitter has an awful lot to do with this. It has been wonderful at giving women a campaigning voice and bringing groups of women together

So true, ChristmasFayre, so true.

I can't watch Embarrassing Bodies, I'm far too squeamish. But I know who Dr Christian is, and can picture him easily. I've never heard of the 2 women you mention.

LRD It's ok don't shut up.

I find people often talk over my head to my husband too - tis very depressing.

That's funny about 'Brother of the more famous Jack' I haven't read it, but on the one occasion my dh came to an antenatal appt with me the mw talked to him more than me . Perhaps she was just thrilled to see a dad taking an interest??

Thanks for the article, Casey. To be honest, Cox doesn't come across terribly well as a human being if he doesn't even notice his wife being ignored in business meetings etc. How sad for her.

I think though that even when you take presenting ability out of the equation, men seem to get opportunities in media that women don't - if you look at the three original presenters from Embarrassing Illnesses, who were all unknowns when they began and were all good on TV, my impression is that it is Christian Jessen who has emerged most strongly from that show and seems to be all over the place, relative to Dawn Harper and Pixie McKenna.

To go back to what the OP was saying, I agree that having a feminist epiphany can be a really difficult experience especially if the people closest to you don't get it. I had mine about two years ago and since then I have been walking around in a permanent state of rage. The upside is that this seems to have happened to an awful lot of women I know recently, so perhaps we are on the verge of a big feminist revival?

It is definitely my posts that are more depressing. LRD, every response so far has been a snarky, sniping comment rather than trying to discuss whatever is posted. Twelve per cent was a starting point for a discussion, not an excuse for you to try to exercise sarcasm.

Sorry! I'll shut up for a bit. I agree re. Hackford (just going off wiki).

Ha another xpost

Keep xposting with you here LRD.

I think it's a very interesting topic. Taylor Hackford is very successful in his own right, and I doubt he finds himself sidelined (in the way that Gia M describes) because he is married to the super famous Dame Helen. I think that is the point exactly.

I think that's true, running - that it's general, I mean.

I've noticed it's surprisingly common to find people talk over me to DH - I've just bought a car from someone who tried very hard to address all his comments to DH despite knowing DH can't drive, wasn't buying the car, and wasn't selling the car we traded in. It was very odd.

Have you read 'Brother of the More Famous Jack'? There's a wonderful bit in there where the main character is in the gynae office discussing her fertility problems and the doctor is continually talking over her head to her partner about her malfunctioning womb. And she ends up idly pondering whether a man would ever talk over another man's head to his wife about an incompetent penis.