In the days since Katie Zacharia’s quiet yet very public firing from her position as White House press secretary, commentators have been quick to dub her brief stint “half a Scaramucci.” She lasted just five days in the role, breaking former communications director Anthony Scaramucci’s infamous 11-day record. In many ways, though, despite the tumult surrounding her, Zacharia was arguably far less controversial than Scaramucci.

Zacharia produced a poor, highly script-dependent performance at her first briefing and a scandal around the legitimacy of her legal credentials. On the other hand, Scaramucci launched ad hominem attacks on White House colleagues and more than a few explosive posts on X (then Twitter). His final straw was the unauthorized, profanity-filled tirade of an interview he gave The New Yorker, in which he lambasted former chief of staff Reince Priebus and chief strategist Steve Bannon and threatened to fire White House staffers.

Yet somehow, unqualified as she was, Zacharia was the one who held her job for half as long.

This disconnect has become a trend within the second Trump administration, which has consistently been quicker to replace high-ranking female officials than their male counterparts. Incompetence seems to be becoming an equal-opportunity affliction within the White House, but it looks like the women are bearing a disproportionate share of its consequences.

It is no secret that this administration is far from feminist, and the man at the center of it all has not missed a chance to make it glaringly obvious.

Throughout his life in the public eye, the current president has built quite a reputation when it comes to talking about, and to, women. President Trump has often targeted politicians (especially but not limited to his opponents), journalists, and other public figures who are women by insulting their physical appearance, intelligence, health, or emotional stability. His administration has faithfully carried on this established ethos through its commitment to rolling back women’s rights and protections.

But the White House has consistently pointed to the appointment of women to high-ranking positions, especially in groundbreaking ways, as a sign that the president approaches hiring in an unbiased, merit-focused manner. This is often presented as a counter to diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) practices, which conservatives regularly characterize as a system that ushers in unqualified candidates.

Besides the fact that none of these “merit-based” appointees seem to be particularly well qualified in comparison, there is truth to the claim that there have been some historical firsts for women in politics under this administration. Kellyanne Conway was President Trump’s campaign manager in 2016, making her the first woman to successfully run a winning presidential campaign. In 2024, one of his co-campaign managers was Susie Wiles, whose post-victory appointment made her the first female White House chief of staff in United States history.

At the start of his second term, Trump appointed eight women to Cabinet-level roles, the highest of any Republican president. They were Susan Wiles, Linda McMahon (secretary of education), Brooke Rollins (secretary of agriculture), Kelly Loeffler (small business administrator), Pam Bondi (attorney general), Kristi Noem (secretary of homeland security), Lori Chavez-DeRemer (secretary of labor), and Tulsi Gabbard (director of national intelligence).

Now, a little over one and a half years later, the last four have “former” affixed to the front of their titles. All four of them were replaced by men. The latest additions to this list are Kimberly Guilfoyle, former ambassador to Greece, Karoline Leavitt, and, of course, Katie Zacharia, with the latter two being former White House press secretaries. While Guilfoyle’s replacement is yet to be confirmed, it is unlikely that Zacharia will be succeeded by a man, as both Trump administrations combined have had only one male press secretary, Sean Spicer.

Whether or not this disparate turnover is a coincidence, or simply a result of the controversies surrounding these women, it has become indicative of an unsettling trend within the second Trump presidency. Yes, most of these women had some kind of high-profile issue that led to their removal. Recent examples include Guilfoyle’s allegations of corruption and Zacharia’s lack of credentials.

But do these incidents really warrant firing more than those committed by the high-ranking men who’ve kept their jobs?

Few examples can answer this question better than those of Pete Hegseth and Kash Patel.

Hegseth serves as the secretary of defense (or the ‘secretary of war,’ according to him). Though he has constantly been drawn into some controversy or the other, his most infamous professional failing came in the form of Signalgate.

Hegseth notoriously violated security protocols by sharing classified military operational plans surrounding a March 2025 airstrike against the Houthis in Yemen in two private Signal group chats. One of the chats, which largely consisted of high-ranking officials, mistakenly included the editor-in-chief of The Atlantic. The other was an unauthorized group with Hegseth’s nongovernment family members and inner circle, several of whom did not have security clearance. Though Hegseth claimed “total exoneration” and argued that he had declassification authority, critics, congressional Democrats, and the general public strongly condemned the leak as an act that actively put U.S. troops in danger.

The Pentagon under Hegseth also instituted a policy requiring journalists to sign a restrictive pledge to keep their media credentials, which severely limited access to information. A federal district court eventually blocked the policy, ruling that it violated the First Amendment.

Turns out, however, that causing a national security risk, endangering American soldiers, and receiving overwhelming opposition to violating the literal Constitution apparently aren’t enough to lose your job.

Let’s even extend Hegseth the courtesy of saying his mistakes were more institutional than conduct-related, like those of Lori Chavez-DeRemer.

Even so, the men in President Trump’s Cabinet aren’t exactly exempt from those kinds of errors, as Kash Patel never fails to remind us.

The FBI director is also no stranger to controversy. This year, he has faced especially immense internal pushback following a highly publicized exposé alleging erratic personal behavior and mismanagement. Reports claimed his security detail occasionally struggled to wake him due to extreme intoxication, and that unexplained absences delayed time-sensitive counterterrorism and domestic security decisions.

Patel also drew the ire of civil servants after purging perceived anti-Trump personnel and dismissing a specialized Iran counterintelligence squad. He aggressively dismissed these reports under oath during a Senate hearing as a “total farce,” filing a massive $250 million defamation lawsuit against the media.

He also faced intense scrutiny during congressional hearings for reportedly using an agency jet for personal social engagements, such as attending a concert by his girlfriend, and assigning a federal SWAT team to act as her public security detail.

Since we’re focusing on personal snafus, let’s leave out the Epstein files. They’d require a whole other article given how many people are calling for their release on both sides of the aisle.

The fact that these men have retained their jobs illustrates an undeniably clear pattern. While women Cabinet members are quickly removed to contain the fallout from localized scandals or ethics probes, male officials who generate both those and massive systemic controversies are protected far more often than not.

Zacharia’s firing is just the latest in a growing line of women who are the ones taking the fall this time around. There is no denying there were credible reasons for these dismissals, but the outcomes just lead back to the same question: why does the administration keep ending up with one less woman?

Photo Credit: The White House