Tuck the cape away superman it is not needed. You can tell by just listening that she parrots a lot of stuff she heard from Bryan. Guys like you are no better than the ones you call sexist by defending women in a way you wouldn't do for a man.
Objectively, does she bring film study content to the discussion in the way that Broaddus does? Certainly not.
But the same can be said for what Eatman or Eagleton does. And Sterns.
What Eatman and Eagleton bring is essentially what Sterns does... opinions. All three are civil, somewhat coherent/rational, and together with Broaddus, it makes for a pretty excellent hour on-average.
Mind you, any one of the four could feel an incessant need to dominate and talk too much (re: Nate), but none of them do. Any of the three could ad nauseum demonstrate some wildly inappropriate I-know-what-I'm-talking-about-just-because attitude (re: Micky), but none of them do, at least, not as a rule, imo.
"You can tell by just listening" is code for, "I have no solid evidence here, but trust me because all of my assumptions and biases are correct."
Otoh, if you'll listen to just this most recent show, I believe you'll hear evidence that... if your assumption is correct... must mean that Broaddus disagrees with himself sometimes. That, b/c he specifically disagrees with at least one thing Sterns "you could tell just by listening" was parroting from him.
To the last comment, I would agree in principle that that's a way that people can be sexist... but then, just because the principle is correct doesn't mean that there are not times when males (or females) are not approaching a situation with a bias against the other sex's capacity to perform as adequately as their own.
This is one of those times, imo.