Barack Obama – ein frauenfeindlicher Heuchler?

Hier hatte ich ausführlich darüber berichtet, wie sehr sich der demokratische Präsidentschaftskandidat Barack Obama derzeit der feministischen Ideologie andient. So verbreitet er gerne das Ammenmärchen weiter, dass Frauen für exakt dieselbe Arbeit deutlich schlechter entlohnt würden als Männer. Dummerweise gibt es jetzt folgende Nachrichtenmeldung über ihn, die Google zufolge bereits in hunderten amerikanischer Foren und Blogs diskutiert wird.

On average, women working in Obama's Senate office were paid at least $6,000 below the average man working for the Illinois senator. That's according to data calculated from the Report of the Secretary of the Senate, which covered the six-month period ending Sept. 30, 2007. Of the five people in Obama's Senate office who were paid $100,000 or more on an annual basis, only one -- Obama's administrative manager -- was a woman.

The average pay for the 33 men on Obama's staff (who earned more than $23,000, the lowest annual salary paid for non-intern employees) was $59,207. The average pay for the 31 women on Obama's staff who earned more than $23,000 per year was $48,729.91. (The average pay for all 36 male employees on Obama's staff was $55,962; and the average pay for all 31 female employees was $48,729. The report indicated that Obama had only one paid intern during the period, who was a male.)

Also ist Barack Obama jemand, der Gleichberechtigung predigt und selbst Frauen diskriminiert? Nicht mehr als dass die Partei "Die Linke" tut, die ständig viel mehr Frauen in Managementpositionen einfordert, aber selbst zwei Männer an der Spitze hat – weil sich einfach seit Jahren keine Frauen finden, die auf diesen Zeit und Nerven raubenden Job Böcke haben.

So argumentiert auch Selwyn Duke, was Obama angeht. Nach einigen durchaus lesenswerten Ausführungen gelangt er zu der Schlussfolgerung:

So it's entirely possible that Senator Obama is a sexist, misogynistic creep who gleefully rubs his hands together and laughs demonically while scheming to persecute his female employees. Maybe he has nothing better to do. But far more likely is that the aforementioned factors explain his office's inter-sex pay differential. Perhaps his male employees work more hours, have been more likely to accept promotions involving greater responsibility, have more experience, sacrificed "personal fulfillment" and instead chose more lucrative fields, and/or have greater seniority. Whatever the reasons, I'm quite sure of one thing: The phenomenon is attributable to natural, market-based factors and not a conscious desire to disenfranchise women.