>>>>Of course position and responsibility is everything:
>>>>
>>>>http://www.scrippsnews.com/node/36234
>>>
>>>Which seems to indicate that, at the time the numbers were reported, Obama's staff had more men in senior positions than women, which accounts for the disparity.
>>
>>And which is where there should be some parity, eh?
>
>If he only employed men, or employed women only in clerical positions while men had leadership positions, sure, there'd be a question. But in any endeavor, at any given time, there will be some mix of men and women in various positions. I'd expect the composition to change over time as people come and go. (And, of course, the salary issue depends on how long people have been there, as well as their positions.)

Like Tracy said, a campaign isn't a multi-generation business, but let's assume we are talking about one.

The long term trouble which hampers the women's careers is the expectation of being always at the company's disposal, beyond the 40 hours a week - travel, longer hours, golf club, dinners, and always being there when promotion is discussed. Having children takes time from this - so most women just let their careers lag, or leave completely. I have heard a long report, a couple of years ago, about women in engineering. They tend to leave the workforce after a few years, for various reasons. They may be skipped for promotion during maternity leave, or just skipped otherwise, or... generally seeing that the game is rigged, they leave it. I don't remember the specific numbers, but the order of magnitude was that within 10 years after graduation, only 10% of female engineers are still working as engineers.