This "pro women" thing?

Totally agree the best person should get the job regardless of sex, race or disability. Radio 2 has quite a few female DJs now just to be PC and I find them banal.

what kind of woman doesn''t want to see/hear other women on TV ? The young "blonde" who does the rugby interviews etc knows as much about the game as anyone who has played it so why shouldn't she do the interviews and pre match chat? If its the one I think it is she's from a well known sporting family and married to a Scottish rugby legend .Would you prefer her to be a Mary berry type and just bake for a living/

Good point. I never thought of it it that respect

Phoenix I agree with you.

Eskay10, that tells us about your attitudes, nothing else.

If it bothers you, why not campaign for women presenters to have a 'uniform' as men do with their suits & ties?

You can’t look at a professional woman doing her job without picking her appearance apart and wondering whether she’s had a boob job?

Do you look at female doctors / lawyers / teachers the same way?

Oh, how pleased I am to read all these comments. For quite a time now I have been very aware of the many women on tv reading the news, giving the weather, presenting the shows, giving their opinions and I am sick of it. I find that when a woman presents any programme I am looking at what she is wearing, whether she has a hair piece attached or had her boobs done, I am trying to put an age on her and - often I don't hear what they are saying. I have a GD who I would love be happy, do well and succeed in life. I also have a GS who I hope has the same opportunities when he grows up if he ticks all the boxes when his time comes.

Totally agree with you Phoenix. Should be always the best person for the job. Not discriminating against one group can lead to discrimination against another.

I haven't read all the posts so sorry if someone has already commented on the case against Cheshire police. A first class recruit for the force was rejected and he sued the force for discrimination. The force was trying to boost diversity and was found guilty of discrimination against this candidate who was a 'white, heterosexual male'.

Or just that those individuals did / did not do their jobs well, grumpa?

Hmmm. Well I am joining you behind the sofa too Phoenix. I appreciate WHY there has been positive discrimination and I would like to hope there is a more even playing field of late in terms of who is considered for jobs, roles etc. I do firmly believe merit has to be the deciding factor though.

This is by the by but OH and I have a knowing nod at each other when watching dramas that all of a sudden have only women as top bosses. And they all happen to be tough, ballsy women and nothing like the strong and competent women I know in positions of 'power' who aren't loud and sweary and direct. Are we in danger of losing the plot now and going completely overboard , or OTT, when a certain sector has to be represented?

Tin hat on. Budge up behind the sofa. Have you brewed up phoenix - or should I not ask that of a woman any longer?

My sentiments exactly, Phoenix. I’m getting to the stage where I think ‘I would rather hear a man reading the news, etc’, and Radio 2 is now ‘overrun ‘ with women presenters.

Not a Radio 2 listener myself but I am wondering if it bothered you when Radio 2 and the news were 'overrun' with men presenters? And if not, why not?

Also, what percentage have to be of one sex to be considered they are overrunning?

I agree as well... nobody should get a job based on anything other than their ability to do said job. Why would anyone want a job on any other basis anyway., knowing you may have been second choice.

Nobody who heard Stella Creasy interviewed by Nick Robinson on Radio 4 this morning could say that all women MPs are useless. Nobody who heard Michael Gove being constantly interrupted by the woman interviewer on the Today programme could not have thought that a man might have done the job better.

I do think that immense progress has been made in my lifetime towards equality for all - genders, disability, sexuality etc. - although there is still much to be done in some areas. But at least now a woman can fight her corner if she is getting paid less for the same work and there is a general consensus that she is right to do so.

However I do think that sometimes these gains can only be achieved by the pendulum swinging too far one way before settling somewhere in the middle where common sense holds sway.

It is clearly a nonsense for the Arts Council to skew a production by insisting on an ethnic/gender mix rather than the integrity of the performance musically or artistically. This is what is happening - trust me on this one. Sometimes laudable aims have unfortunate results.

We have to acknowledge the huge problems for small businesses when they employ women of child-bearing age. It is rightly illegal to ask a woman at interview whether she is planning to have a family (not always a question that predicts the future, as many women have "little surprises") but maternity leave/s are problematical for these small companies, and it is crazy to pretend otherwise.

Things are improving, as we can see for instance from the large number of people from ethnic minorities represented in the media and in sport - that is a massive step forward from when I was a child.

Well said Hm999. I totally agree with you.

ALERT!! For those who get irritated by my extolling the virtues of Scotland.From its inception 20 years ago the MSP's serving the country have been much more equal gender wise.More women right from the start ,in the past couple of years it was notable that three of the party leaders were women ..Nicola Sturgeon,Kezia Dugdale and Ruth Davidson ,3 party leaders were also gay ,two of the aforementioned and the UKIP leader whose name escapes me...he was a bit of a nonentity .No one could imagine that these people got their jobs simply because of their sex or sexual preferences and that is how it should be

Agree with you. I would hate to think I was given a job or award based on being a female or anything else other than being the best candidate. There is a lot of hype about gender ethnic origins, sexuality having to be accommodated in loads of jobs. I just hope the surgeon operating on me was awarded the status and the job based on skill, not on any of the popular 'must have' categories.

I agree with Siobahn!

Craicon Hmm I only get to hear the occasional football commentary but have to say I'm not sure any of them are any good. DH gets somewhat miffed what I answer 'yes, of course' when they say things like 'got to get more goals it they wan to win' and loads more blindingly obvious twaddle which even I know and I know very little about football!

women first for fighting criminals in riot gear.... no, you don't see that do you.

You most certainly do, Johno. Some of my family, male and female, are in the police force, and of course they are expected to do the same job. They have all been involved in policing riots and other violent situations and have all been injured in the course of their duties. The days when female officers wore stockings, carried handbags and looked after lost children are long gone, thank goodness!

Of course the best person for the job (or award) should get it.
But who decides who is the best person?
Who decides what the criteria for deciding are?
When it comes to film directing, I can't think of anything about the job that would favour one sex over the other in terms of how they perform it. Nor can I think of any reason it would attract more of one sex than another (unless it is inherently sexist in either direction which would deter some people).
So logically the people who are 'best for the job' ought to be roughly split between the sexes.
If not, why not?

Why does having a penis make you inherently better at commentating on Sport?

Answer: it doesn’t.

Sorry:- redistributive,

Totally agree. Best person for the award/job/whatever should get it.Also agree with commenters about Women's Hour which goes totally over the top on an aggressively pro women/anti men agenda.

The one which is getting my goat at the moment is Cambridge saying 25% of places should be given to those who do not meet its strict entry criteria but who come from underprivileged groups.

All these reditributive policies are doing is selecting against those who deserve their talent, merit, genius and work to be rewarded.

Think about it. A music conservatoire has two candidates with equal natural musical ability, perhaps perfect pitch.
One has put in the 10,000 hours of study and practice it takes to becopme a concert pianist. Should they give the place to the one who can play 'Chopsticks'?

The men are also the most useless bunch
What's the reason for that, *Johno"?
Equal stupidity all round, it seems to me so why suggest that the women were unfairly pushed into the jobs?