Woman’s hour

[wordsinourmouths]

I quite like the current presenters and Emma’s interviewing style. But was surprised to find Monday’s programme unbalanced in favour of men. The item on fertility ( male ) was long and interesting but despite the man saying several times that his partner might want to contribute, this seems to have been ignored. Just afterward there was an item on girls mental health issues, where one of the experts turned the focus on himself while apparently ignoring the issue of girls with a brief nod to internet use. Turning into men’s hour or anyone’s hour at least. Shame.slightly balanced by the reporting on the CPS case.

New 'womans hour' does this all the time. Always reading out multiple men's comments when they are live, leaving just enough space for a womans...like, really please tell us more about what men think about feminism. It feels like the producers are trolling us at this point

It's a misnamed programme nowadays

What was the male fertility programme about OP? Sperm motility or same sex male relationships?

How odd that they featured men so heavily in either case.

It's been rebranded but the name stays and it's basically false advertising. I stopped listening when rape was discussed and it was all "men get raped too", even the interviewees sounded pissed off.

Handmaid's Hour.

They only mention and discuss women's issues in the context of how and why they're more important to male people.

'Women, don't forget men, not even for an hour'

Prompted by this, went back to Monday's programme notes to refresh my memory. It didn't have fertility but this item I'd forgotten about:
"Does it matter if female cabinet ministers are missing from flagship political programmes and TV briefings? Emma speaks to former Government minister Anna Soubry, and later in the programme to Therese Coffey MP, Secretary of State for Work and Pensions."

What stuck with me in this discussion of female Cabinet ministers was when Soubry said Caroline Nokes was doing such a good job on the select committee and Emma Barnett brought up Liz Truss as another example, she was quick to disagree, saying, Not Liz Truss. I was gobsmacked. It just seemed spiteful and personal. She wasn't asked why or challenged on it though, which I thought was slack.

Sorry abitofalark it may have been another day.... I heard and thought Anna Soubrey was ok until the Truss comment. The fertility one was with acomedían and woul€ have been useful for all the men there listening, but it could have had its own slot elsewhere. Yes whenever there’s an issue about w9men, men have it harder.

In fairness I do think that at the end of the interview about male infertility with Rhod Gilbert Emma did say that maybe they could have his wife on in the future to discuss endometriosis.
I don’t think it’s wrong to discuss male infertility, after all it does affect women.
I agree about the social media/mental health one though, the man didn’t have much to say specifically about girls.

I thought it was great to give airtime to a male experience of fertility treatment. I know for us I got lots of pity and understanding handholds where as he got comments about wanking into a test tube with porn mags.
I know why there is a question about it being on woman’s hour, but if not there then where?

Ah the name Rhod Gilbert sparks my memory. I did hear some of it. It seemed to go on a bit, probably because he's made a documentary about it. It looks as if they were getting in a bit of promotion for that.

@StanfordPines

I know why there is a question about it being on woman’s hour, but if not there then where?

Maybe a programme targeted at men might be a good place to start 🙄

We can't have anything for ourselves now. There's nothing that men haven't hijacked. What a time to be alive.

Wo(ke)mens Hour

I don't know who the other presenter is, but I'm not keen on her at all. They had a section on micro aggressions last week, and the presenter was doing all the 'you're so stunning a brave' stuff, without any of the intelligent standing back and actually discussing the whole concept in the way that JG and JM would.

I was listening to the start of the programme this morning when EB was talking about the item on (potentially) the first female football manager. She gave an overview of the issues of women in male dominated jobs, the criticisms raised when a man got the job of managing the woman's team, a request for people to get in touch with their thoughts and experiences etc. She then read out ONE tweet that had already come in. From a bloke called Gary, who said 'if she's the best person for the job, great. Just don't cry sexism when she gets stick or the sack like all other managers.'

Of all the responses they must have had, this was the one she chose to read out at that point in the programme. Why? Why would you actually put a man's sneering dismissal of women 'crying sexism' at the forefront of the discussion? It was like a warning over the whole conversation - don't complain, ladies, you asked for it. There was actually no need for a man's input in a conversation on Woman's Hour about the challenges of women taking on positions of authority in male dominated areas. But there it was, front and centre.

I'm finding myself less and less inclined to listen these days. If I want to have a blood pressure spike with my breakfast I can read twitter.

AbsintheFriends I completely understand your POV, at the same time within the context of that particular item I didn't feel that was overly inappropriate to provide the man's view. First and foremost it should be the best person for the job. And it's for a men's fb team.

Granted, it could have been a female voice first, and I'd have liked to think that a woman had sent a similar message in? But it is the main point if someone is on a short list.

They did, however, miss out on covering some sex based important stuff wrt how she managed the Chelsea club which WH did cover under JG or JM a while back. It could have been slipped in.

Not that keen on the other presenter.

I did like the prison discussion though.

Yes the prison discussion was so nearly excellent. Especially that they are building new prisons for women due to the increased Numbers of police on the streets....taken apart by the woes orgs interviewed.but no mention of the the strange phenomenon of new crimes of rape and sexual assaults committed by “women” and the increased numbers of males demanding access to women’s prisons. Has anyone written in? I don’t think they notice mine any more. I think the new spaces should be used for those male prisoners currently in awful conditions, and most of the women’s facilities closed except for the most difficult and long term prisoners. Actually I would rather the money was spent of supporting women financially during our lives and when they leave prison

I haven’t heard WH much in its new form, but I did hear the male infertility piece. I do think it’s an important issue for women, as he mentioned, because often it’s assumed the problem is with the woman. That’s bad as it can lead to invasive investigations rather than look at the man - which you’d think would be one of the easier things to check. Also for changing perceptions of women in a couple that are having infertility difficulties. Or for women who might not realise it could be their partner.

I think male infertility disproportionately affects women. Speaking from my own experience, I went through a whole array of invasive tests and investigations due to our diagnosis of “unexplained infertility”. Turned out they only did a very basic sperm analysis at first, and only after they had approved us for infertility treatment did they examine the sperm more closely to see what type of IVF they were going to do. Turned out there was a problem with the sperm that would have meant we needed a particular treatment no matter what problems I may or may not have had. So if they’d done that one test (that they always do anyway) at the beginning, I wouldn’t have had to have any of those painful and invasive tests!

What a bloke off Twitter thinks about female football managers on the other hand? I couldn’t give two hoots.

I suspect I know why Anna dismissed Liz Truss, having had Liz Truss over us as Early Years minister. It's more to do with integrity and careerism.

I have a lot more time for Anna Soubry.

Reviving this thread as I'm just listening to the WH discussion of It's a Sin. They're talking to the actress who plays Jill, the real life Jill who looked after her male gay friends in the 80s, and a woman who was one of the founders (?) of Stonewall, and who used to operate the phone lines during the AIDS crisis.

I was hoping, given that it's Woman's Hour, and from the fact that they were specifically looking at Jill's role, that they might give a bit of background into Jill's character and centre her a bit more - what was her story, did she have a partner, why did she feel the need to step into a 'maternal' role with her male friends, asking them to take responsibility for their actions and worrying for them? Did she ever resent that caring role?

But no. Just saying how fabulous it is that every Friday night the hashtag #bemorejill trends on Twitter. We should all Be More Jill, apparently. Emma Barnett asks the actress who plays Jill 'Are you a nice person in real life?' She reads out a tweet from a gay man saying that all gay men need a Jill in their life.

I give this programme a year. And I won't mourn its passing.

Agree with you Absinthefriends sorry cross posted on another aspect

I just hear #bemorejill as #womenbemoresupporthuman

It feels like a stealth tactic to shame women into putting their needs last. A softly-softly approach - hey, Jill is great isn't she? So cool. Everyone loves her. Jill recognises that her role is supporter and facilitator. Jill is kind.

Lots of parallels are being drawn between AIDS and covid, which is obviously interesting. But since RTD wrote it long before the pandemic I think we can guess what contemporary issue he had in mind when he wrote it.