By Monica Hesse / The Washington Post

If you turned on CNN on Wednesday morning curious to see how Don Lemon would address his mini sexism scandal after his mini sabbatical and his “formal training,” the answer is that he wouldn’t address it, at least not on air.

A few moments before his show began, the news anchor tweeted that he appreciated “the opportunity to be back” and, to his colleagues and viewers, wrote, “I’ve heard you, I’m learning from you, and I’m committed to doing better.” Once “CNN This Morning” started, though, it was business as usual. Co-host Kaitlan Collins reported from Poland while Lemon and Poppy Harlow were back at their table, shuffling papers. So that’s that, huh?

Maybe you’re at peace with Lemon’s bland apology, and if so, great; save yourself a few minutes and read no further. But I have thoughts.

Just in case you missed what happened: Last Thursday morning, Lemon’s CNN show discussed presidential candidate Nikki Haley, 51, who had raised the idea of mental competency tests for politicians over age 75. Was Haley’s suggestion ageist? Yep. But Lemon’s response was a whole other thing. “Nikki Haley isn’t in her prime,” he announced unbidden to CNN’s viewers. “Sorry, when a woman is considered to be in her prime in her 20s and 30s and maybe 40s …”

While his horrified co-host Harlow repeatedly tried to reel Lemon back in (“Prime for what?”), Lemon defiantly blundered forth, insisting that wasn’t according to him, that he was just the “messenger,” that this was according to common knowledge and “Google.”

First, why was Lemon Googling when a woman is in her prime? Second … I don’t need to tell you what’s second. Lemon’s comment was a toilet-bowl swirl of sexism and ageism and lookism and; did this man have an undiagnosed head injury, or what?

A few days before Lemon’s mess, I’d been invited on a CNN panel to talk about Madonna’s cosmetically enhanced face, where I watched a team of male journalists trip over themselves to defend Madonna’s right to look as shellacked as she damn well pleased. Did these men believe what they were saying? I don’t know, but they were no dummies. They understood that in the Year of Our Lord 2023, the only appropriate commentary on an aging woman’s appearance is to comment that it’s none of their business. Then, a few days later, there was Lemon on the same network opining on Haley, hitting rock bottom, then pulling out the jackhammer.

Lemon, by the way, is 56.

He was absent from the air Monday and Tuesday, and his return Wednesday came after CNN CEO Chris Licht promised via internal memo that Lemon had “agreed to participate in formal training, as well as continuing to listen and learn.”

Guess we know where the “I’ve heard you, I’m learning from you” verbiage came from?

The thing that bothered me, and that I was truly hoping Lemon would address Wednesday morning, is that I don’t know what “formal training” could provide Lemon that living through the #MeToo era apparently did not.

His error was not borderline, as if he’d enthusiastically commented that Haley “looked great for her age.” His error was unforced and repeated. The noteworthy thing isn’t that Lemon believed that women, like steaks, have sell-by dates. The noteworthy thing is that he believed his opinions were so universal as to be unremarkable. Something he could say on air. He did not anticipate blowback.

Hell, he didn’t even think about the fact that the colleague sitting next to him — Poppy Harlow, who is 40 and therefore in the “maybe” zone, according to Lemon’s personal index — might find his remarks hurtful. At the end of the debacle, I felt worst for Harlow. Haley, after all, has now been handed a ready-made campaign ad, one that positions her as a scrappy fighter and supports a narrative that the mainstream media has a problem with conservative women.

But Harlow was the one who had to parry Lemon’s initial remarks on live television, swallow her employer’s decision to reinstate her colleague after a scant long weekend (it wasn’t clear how much Lemon’s absence was owed to punishment and how much was owed to Presidents’ Day), then appear calm and composed in a public-facing job that requires chemistry and collaboration with her co-host. The same co-host who had, a few days prior, telegraphed that maybe women like her should be put out to pasture.

I am envisioning the kind of formal training that Lemon was provided to make him again camera-ready. It can’t have been long. At most, a few days in a conference room while a human resources rep highlighted CNN’s terms of employment and flashed Roxane Gay quotes on a screen. Maybe a quiz at the end, maybe, maybe a take-home copy of “Men Explain Things to Me,” by Rebecca Solnit.

Corporate formal training tends to be good at helping employees keep their mouths shut before they say bad things. It’s less good at helping employees learn about the societal forces — centuries’ worth of casual misogyny — that infiltrated their brains to begin with.

Here is what bothers me about Lemon, and I’m sorry you had to read this whole thing for me to figure it out: Good journalists are curious about the world around them. They are interested in societal changes. In what is fair, what is accurate, what is just and in how understanding those concepts can change as we all evolve. Good journalists pay attention to things. It’s the bare minimum of the profession.

Don Lemon didn’t pay attention. He didn’t pay attention to the fact that his dismissive old-women tropes were no longer acceptable, that they would reflect badly on himself and would harm his colleagues. It definitely makes me question how great he is on women’s issues. It kinda makes me question how great he is at his job.

Monica Hesse is a columnist for The Washington Post’s Style section, who frequently writes about gender and its impact on society. She’s the author of several novels, most recently, “They Went Left.” Follow her on Twitter @MonicaHesse.