it only takes an expert to solve a problem. it takes a little thinking outside the box to identify what the problem actually is. i think the symptom here might be the fact that this article was even published. the problem seems to be within the editors' work procedures. you guys might want to consider some preliminary incognito method of broadcasting your opinions about all to-be-published articles, so you can better avoid such an embarassing article in the future. Try creaing a mailbox into which you can drop your thoughts of an article (only one comment per editor) incognito. that way you get e better picture of the power balance and can better formulate your thoughts about an article. Nitza Cahana's article was debatable, but had some quality or merit to it. This pile of nothing doesn't. it is possible that dealing successfully with difficult issues like the Cahana story got you blindsided to these kind of dud articles.

But your idea isn't extreme enough. I think the female editors should lodge harrassment complaints against the male editors (sexual, violence, whatever), just to make sure they can throw them into jail immediately if they ever try to approve an article like this again.

a. you're silly.
b. it's called peer consensus. very common practice. especially among expert panels.

To me, it looks a bit more like PC censorship and attempts at online intimidation. But that's just me and my primitive mindset. I'm sure it's really peer consensus, as you say.