Over the past week or so, there has been some debate around the MSM and the blog world about whether there are enough women writers in the media.

It was started when Susan Estrich wrote some angry notes to LA Times editor Mike Kinsley; she complained that he failed to print enough articles written by women. That prompted a million responses, from, among others, Anne Applebaum, Virginia Postrel, Maureen Dowd, Ms. Musings, and Katha Pollitt.

We might transfer the debate to the sports world and ask: are there enough women writers covering sports?

Of course the stakes aren't as high. Sports writers don't wield the same influence as op-ed columnists. Having a "woman's perspective" on basketball isn't as important as having a women's perspective on the Iraq war. But perhaps it still matters enough to ask the question.

My sense is that it's a mixed bag. I haven't studied the matter, but I would guess that the majority of beat reporters and wire reporters covering women's basketball are men.

At the same time, many of the best and most influential writers are women. Nancy Lieberman and Mechelle Voepel, with their work at ESPN.com, are probably the two most widely read writers in the game. Recently, it looks like ESPN may have bulked up its web presence by adding work from Beth Mowins and Stacey Dales-Schuman.

To those, you could add Patricia Babcock, Jayda Evans, Kathy Orton, Lori Riley, and Michelle Smith, among others.

Is that enough? Is there anything we can do? Does it matter? I don't know.

In a related vein, Eric McErlain recently took on a WaPo reader who complained about the lack of women's hoops coverage, and some of his readers responded.