That does not make any sense. I don’t see why you would have any problem with a category about astrology. How many times has there been a category about Greek Mythology? Do you think that means the writers are saying Zeus was a factual being who absolutely existed? Hell, probably one of the most repeated topics to ever appear is “The Bible” and all the many sub-categories that come from that. Does that also have no place on Jeopardy? What about questions about movie plots? Those are fictional so I guess they don’t belong there either.
Yeah, Jeopardy is supposed to be a “bastion of hard science.” I don’t know why the producers
didn’t get the memo 25 years ago, but it’s high time we purge it of all those categories about TV shows, literature, sports, art, music, history, not to mention the wordplay categories like Before and After, that never belonged there and have been perverting the spirit of Jeopardy from the beginning. Nothing but physics, chemistry, and biology from here on out!
No relevance at all? .
I don’t know how this could be definitely studied in an ethical way. Trying to think what would be needed, I guess you could follow people like Donald Trump and, if allegations are true, Ghislaine Maxwell. and see who they grope and procure. The problem I see is that someone would have to take pictures not just of the successful conquests, but of other similar age women in the vicinity, to see whether there was a difference in exposed skin percent, or clothing tightness, or cleavage, or something else I’m missing that could be relevant. I think this would be an invasion of privacy. But if a bold social psychologist did it (better get tenure first!), I suspect it would undebunk some of that debunking.
There is more than one.
The Trumpy right wing position would see no problem needing to be addressed, delighting in being able to walk into that Miss Teen USA dressing room.
Another kind of conservative would see universals in human nature where Bialik, in the New York Times, attributes the situation to “our culture” that “I believe we can change.” Personally, being more conservative than Bialik on this, I believe that no matter how many sexual harassment trainings men go through, some are going to misbehave in ways relevant to what you say has been debunked for decades.
I don’t know about “his own” in the sense of having a brass plaque with his name on it, or whatever other criteria you may have in mind. But surely all the hosts got the use of a dressing room. None of them, so far as I know, wore the same outfit for each “day” of their week of shows (filmed all in one day).
It seems unlikely that the hosts would have been expected to change in a hallway or other non-private space.
A dressing room, yes. I suspect all of the guest hosts were given a room in which to prepare themselves, but probably the same one. Maybe the one Alex Trebek used, or one less private? I don’t know.
Jeopardy is filmed at Sony Pictures Studios in Culver City, California. I would suspect that there are multiple dressing rooms in that facility, and more than one is available for Jeopardy hosts and contestants.
Did you guys coordinate your tag-teaming on me? 
I searched on the J-Archive for “astrology,” astrological," “horoscope,” and “zodiac,” and found a total of 510 clues that used those terms. Since there have been nearly 423,000 clues in the modern version of the show (since 1984), that’s slightly more than one tenth of one percent of all clues.
Some of those were one-offs in categories that otherwise had nothing to do with astrology; but on at least 67 shows (out of a total to date of 8,465), there were whole categories devoted to astrology. So about 0.8% of all shows had a category on astrology, and a larger percentage had at least a passing reference to it.
Obviously, these are not particularly large numbers, and in fact smaller than I might have guessed. Mythology figures in more than twice as many clues. But I still think there is an important principle at stake.
Some of these clues are pretty innocuous by any standard: “Sissy Spacek was born on Christmas Day, so this is her sign.” It does not make any truth claim about the tenets of astrology, merely acknowledges its existence. If that’s all Jeopardy did, I wouldn’t object strongly.
But this one from the same show, “People born under this fishy sign, like Tommy Tune, are often slim & make excellent dancers,” strongly implies that astrology has a factual basis. I estimate that well over half of the 510 are in this mold. I think this is insidious and should have no place on Jeopardy.
Let’s consider your claimed equivalence between mythology and astrology as presented on Jeopardy (and other popular media). I hope we all agree that neither accurately describes reality as we know it.
However, AFAIK (and I know I can count on Dopers to correct me if I’m wrong) there is virtually no one alive today who sincerely believes that any of the gods of ancient mythology (e.g., Zeus, Jupiter, Thor, etc.) literally exist as deities with the powers and personalities ascribed to them by the legends.
The same cannot be said of astrology. According to Gallup in 2005, and Harris (PDF) in 2009, about a quarter of Americans believe in astrology. That’s more than 80 million people in the U. S. alone who accept as true a pseudoscience that has repeatedly been definitively disproven.
Does the show treat any any other pseudoscience – homeopathy, flat earth theory, moon landing hoax – this way? No, I don’t think it does, or should. And it shouldn’t treat astrology that way either, IMHO.
Really? I didn’t realize that! 
As @BigT says, astrology is (mostly) harmless, especially compared to the morass of pernicious lies and conspiracies that abound in our country today. If I could magically wave a wand and convert every anti-vaxxer and Big Lie believer into (only) an astrology believer, I certainly would. But that doesn’t mean that any pseudoscience should get a free pass on one of the few popular media outlets that promotes facts, science, and critical thinking.
I too cringe whenever astrology appears as a subject. It is a completely different situation from mythology AFAIC, mainly for reasons cited in the post immediately above this one.
I think you’ve confused Jeopardy with high school biology class. Jeopardy doesn’t promote anything (except the sponsors products). It rewards people with an encyclopedia knowledge on an array of topics, from chemistry to 19th century Russian literature to the Billboard Top 40 to … yes…astrology.
I did the same search and came up with 511 clues. So I think I’m looking at the same data that you are.
I have no idea what your criteria was for a ‘factual basis’ clue, but I found far less than half of the clues to be of this nature. In fact, I only found about 50. And I included clues such as “If you were born under this ‘maidenly’ sign, you may be shy & modest”.
While I agree that even 50 clues that may possibly assert the factuality of astrology are 50 too many, I don’t think it’s at all a problem.
“Your sign determines your destiny” would be a problem, but Jeopardy would never make that statement. “Ringo Starr was born under the sign of Cancer” is a factual statement, and that’s fine.
And arguably, those questions really aren’t about the traits that may or may not be assigned to the sign - they’re asking “which sign goes with the word ‘maiden’” and “which sign is a fish”? and those are things have factual answers.
To be fair, there are SOME questions that might be construed as being astrologically factual, like “Women born under this “bullish” sign, like Michelle Pfeiffer, are known for their beauty”, and “People born under this chaste sign, like Jason Priestley & Gloria Estefan, are perfectionists”. But, again, this is really nothing over which to fret.
Do you guys watch The Chase?
I do, and I’ve been enjoying it, though there’s a bit too much dead time in between the actual trivia rounds. They could probably edit it down to a half hour without losing anything.
And out goes Richards:
No surprise there. There was really no way they could keep him on after that shitshow. You can’t really argue that his history of offensive remarks and sexual harassment allegations was too much for him to host but just fine as an executive producer. It’s probably only taken this long because they were negotiating his buyout.
Maybe he just wants to have more time to spend with his family.
You heard it here first, folks! 
… Or pursue other projects. 