Got a reply. Of course we all know women can't be sexist so that's just dandy then 
Mind you they do concede they could have done with a longer discussion. (Where's the straw...)
"Thanks for contacting us regarding ?The One Show? broadcast on the 10 November.
"We raised your concerns with ?The One Show? team who replied as follows:
?We are sorry to hear you were unhappy with The One Show?s item on ?Female Finance?. The focus of the report was on how women manage the money they earn rather than exploring the gender pay gap or the discriminatory influences at play on women?s income. We certainly did not set out to perpetuate any stereotypes and apologise if the item was interpreted as such. Our intention was to report the findings - and explore the implications - of recent empirical research by both industry and academia. Amongst other things, this research showed the percentage of women being declared insolvent has risen by 28% this year (compared to 8% in men) and that almost half of women don?t have a pension. This seemed to the production team a compelling reason to look at how women can take better control of their finances.
"From the off, the team were conscious of the need to ensure the film was not sexist, rather it was to be a piece that reflected of credible, evaluated evidence. We quoted research from, variously, The Insolvency Service, ICM, Barings Bank and the University of Hertfordshire and ensured that the statistics quoted were clearly sourced. We used onscreen graphics to give the date and source of the research, and in the case of the research published by the University of Hertfordshire, the basis of the methodology also.
"Whenever any of the content risked supporting a stereotypical image of women, our reporter, Anita Rani, challenged such clichés. Indeed, she opened the piece by saying:
"?I for one am not buying the idea that women are worse with money than men?.
"We represented opinions and experiences from different members of the public, all women. The four interviewed in a Brighton cafe described their own real life stories and the production team did not seek to influence these contributors in any way. The anonymous headlines handwritten on white boards were genuine statements from a cross section of women. The views expressed by the interviewee Simone Gnessen were her own, and based on published academic research she carried out at the University of Hertfordshire.
"Ms Gnessen has been advising and coaching clients on their finances for over 18 years. In her experience of coaching women, she says all her client?s financial problems have been within their own control. Interestingly, it was a predominantly female team who pushed for this story to be told. All agreed it was important to address this subject and let women who need help know there are financial advice centres who can provide advice specifically tailored for women.
"Further, in defending any allegations of sexism, it?s important to emphasise the film was presented by a woman and that the expert and contributors were also women, and that all the opinions and experiences contained therein were those of women.
"We?re aware statistics showing women are more prone to emotional spending makes uncomfortable listening. However it would be wrong to ignore credible evidence. While we recognise most women are in control of their saving and spending, we do not think it is helpful to disregard facts such as ?4 million women have built up £13 billion of debt? (ICM/Barings) or ?36% of women say they spend more than they can afford.? (University of Hertfordshire).
"The item set out to cover a complicated issue in just a few minutes of air-time. We acknowledge it would have benefited from a more detailed and wide-ranging discussion in the studio and, therefore, we must apologise if you felt let down by the programme.?
"Thanks again for getting in touch.
"Kind Regards
"BBC Audience Services"