Sexism without sexism

There's an article in the New York Times today about the media's (allegedly) sexist approach to covering Hillary Clinton's campaign. It was pretty evident from the beginning I think. Though I also agree with the person in the article that says, she ran a fundamentally flawed campaign. I think her campaign was bad and people just don't like her - though that is true of every woman in a powerful position, like Nancy Pelosi in the House or Zoe Cruz at Morgan Stanley or even Anna Wintour at Vogue.

However, regardless of whether you agree or disagree that the media coverage was sexist, you have to agree that this statement is ridiculous:

Keith Olbermann, the host of “Countdown” on MSNBC, said that while there were “individual, sexist, mistakes,” there was no overall sexism.

What? You can't have it both ways, Keith. There can't be sexism and NOT sexism. Just because the act of denigrating women is so fundamentally ingrained in the human psyche that we don't realize we're being sexist, doesn't mean there isn't a persistent and deep-seeded problem.

If you were to ask my executive editor if he was sexist, if he treated his female employees as lesser beings, if he felt their place was in the home (or maybe in features) would he say yes? No, he would not. But if you asked his female employees the same question, do you know what their answer would be? An unequivocal YES. Yes from the fact that the number of women in the newsroom has dwindled dramatically since his arrival. Yes from the fact he treats us with disdain, if he treats us at all. Yes from the fact we are paid far less than our male counterparts. Yes from the comments on women's appearance in the newsroom.

People need to realize that sexism isn't dead. It's just resting its eyes.