It's no secret that Donald Trump has a woman problem. His support among female voters is startlingly low, and the list of sexist comments from the candidate continues to grow. But Trump's female issues go deeper than his crass language and his lack of popularity with the ladies: He doesn't seem to think women are qualified to hold positions of power at all.

Consider the evidence that Trump believes men, and usually only men, are capable of occupying senior leadership roles: There was not a single woman on his billionaire-heavy economic advisory team. There are no women on his core management and strategy team. There were no women on his convention and delegate strategy team. There are no women on his foreign policy advisory team.

There are women working for the Trump campaign, but they largely occupy traditionally female roles in communications and public relations — important work, no doubt, but less about advising the candidate and shaping policy than communicating an already decided-upon message to the press and the masses. Out of dozens of advisers and state and regional staff, women's names do show up, but you can count them on one hand. Ditto his Supreme Court shortlist, where eight of his 11 picks were men, and all 11 were white.

This view of men as central, and women as either tokens or a secondary (and often inconvenient) political concern is exposed elsewhere in the campaign too. Trump's chief strategist Paul Manafort said Trump would be "pandering" if he picked a woman as his running mate, implying there simply aren't any highly qualified women in a country of nearly 319 million people to hold the seat. It's as if he thinks the vice presidency is a man's natural habitat, and inserting a woman would be a bizarre aberration, a choice made on gender alone and not because there are actually women capable of doing the job. Manafort also suggested women will support Trump because their husbands can't afford to pay the family's bills — women apparently don't have jobs and bills of their own.

The candidate himself seems to agree most women are incapable of occupying high-level positions: When asked which women he would appoint to his cabinet, Trump couldn't name any beyond his own daughter.

Trump fans often hold up his championing of Ivanka, his eldest daughter, as evidence of his egalitarian tendencies. And Ivanka is certainly successful, although she, like her father, saw her success enabled by the luck of being born into a life of wealth and privilege; neither of them are exactly stories of entrepreneurs who pulled themselves up by their own bootstraps. And there's a difference between championing your own offspring, who many parents see as extensions of themselves, and championing women who didn't spring from your own loins. Ivanka reflects well on Trump, and if there's anything Trump likes, it's his own reflection (Ivanka "is one of the great beauties of the world, according to everybody," he once bragged. "And I helped created her.") He seems less interested in women he can't claim to have built himself.

Unsurprisingly, he's also entirely tone-deaf to the basics of not pushing women out of the workplace. Pregnancy, something the majority of women — and the majority of working women — will experience in their lives? An "inconvenience" for businesses, Trump said in a 2004 interview. Sexual harassment? Just "find a new career," is Trump's advice — and his son, Eric, doubled down by saying sexual harassment wouldn't be an issue for his sister, because "Ivanka is a strong, powerful woman. She wouldn't allow herself to be, you know, subjected to it." Sexual harassment, apparently, only targets the weak.

Trump says, "I respect women, I love women, I cherish women." But he doesn't respect, love, or cherish them enough to put very many of them in charge. Nor does he respect, love, or cherish them enough to pay the ones he does hire as much as their male coworkers: Male Trump campaign staffers make about 35 percent more than female ones. To be fair, some of Trump's former female employees have come to his defense, saying he helped advance their careers. But even many of them have dealt with office behavior that would make an HR professional cringe: One of Trump's defenders, Louise Sunshine, says Trump promoted and mentored her, but he also kept a "fat picture" of her in his drawer, and he would pull it out when he felt Sunshine had done something wrong.

Women, in Trump's world, are decorative, not powerful or particularly talented. This is a man who loves beauty pageants and publicly humiliates beauty queens for not being as thin as he prefers. Under his ownership of the Miss Universe pageant, "the bathing suits got smaller, and the heels got higher, and the ratings went up," Trump, who recently sold his stake in the pageant, said. In Trump's Miss Universe and its sister competition Miss USA, there is no talent portion, just bathing suits, evening gowns, and a brief "personality interview" (in the Miss America pageant, which is not affiliated with Trump, the talent competition is weighed significantly in each woman's total score). The prize for winning Miss USA is the ability to compete in Miss Universe, and a series of perks designed to keep the winner fit, attractive, and modeling (the winner of Miss America, as well as the runners-up, receive generous educational scholarships).

The misogynist antics at Trump rallies and the Republican National Convention are simply additional data points that Trump, and his followers, have real issues with women, and especially with women in power. It's not enough for Trump fans to oppose Hillary Clinton the candidate; they go after Clinton the woman and focus specifically on her apparently emasculating professional success, relying on the kind of demeaning language assertive professional women are used to hearing — bitch, ballbuster. Sexist swag was on full display at the RNC: buttons adorned with phrases including "Trump the Bitch" and "Life's a bitch, don't vote for one"; T-shirts proclaiming a vote for Trump was a vote for a candidate with some balls; and signs casting the election as "Trump vs. Tramp." The regular behavior of Trump supporters at his rallies would get your average person fired from their job for either sexist or racist harassment. This behavior is not new; Trump himself stokes it and seems to thrive on it.

And then, of course, there is Trump's own treatment of Clinton, perhaps the most visibly successful woman in the United States. She's Trump's opponent, and so, of course, we can expect some harsh words about her. But one of Trump's lines of attack has been she's not qualified to be president. It's one thing for an opponent to say Clinton's judgment is bad; or that she's too hawkish, liberal, or corrupt to be president; or that her policies would be bad for the country. There is plenty in Clinton's record that Republicans might find objectionable: her health care reform efforts and support for abortion rights, her serving as a figurehead for a party with the most progressive platform in its history, the FBI investigating her email use and finding it less than transparent.

But in terms of qualifications, Clinton is one of the most highly qualified candidates in history. She's been a senator and secretary of state; she's crafted legislation, worked across the aisle, and seen the inner workings of the White House from a variety of perspectives. The claim she somehow lacks the qualifications to be president is patently false. It is, in fact, tough to think of ways in which a candidate could be more qualified — and there is not a single way, from military service to serving as governor, in which Trump, a person with no record of public service, is more qualified.

The United States, too, has a woman problem and remains a country in which women struggle to be on equal footing to men. Discrimination against women in the workplace means women are paid less throughout their lifetimes, leaving them less able to build wealth, less able to save for retirement, and broadly vulnerable — more dependent on male partners, less able to leave partners who are abusive, more prone to living in poverty, more likely to descend into poverty after divorce, more likely to live out retirement in financial need. We make up a majority of low-wage workers and a majority of broke parents raising children in poverty. We are penalized in hiring and pay for having children, while men are rewarded. We are a minority of senior leadership across companies and professions, from CEOs to law firm partners to members of Congress. And the United States is unique among wealthy nations in its abysmal federal policies to accommodate the modern reality that in the vast majority of families with children, the parent or parents work outside the home.

At least one member of the Trump family recognizes this: Ivanka. Her speech at the RNC highlighted many of these issues. Unfortunately, though, her talking points aren't repeated by her father, the actual candidate. And if Donald Trump can't picture a single woman other than her in his cabinet, that doesn't bode well for American women more generally. Paid family leave, child care, income inequality, and wage discrimination are some of the most pressing issues not only of this election, but facing the United States — and they're issues that are long overdue for a fix from the next president. While these are issues that impact everyone, they have a disproportionate effect on women and on working mothers in particular. Trump hasn't just ignored the problems women face, but has demonstrated working women are barely even a blip on his radar and certainly not competent individuals worthy of appointment to senior roles.

Trump is running on his (already questionable) business acumen, but, when it comes to women, his professional instincts are way off. Multiple studies have found excluding women from top positions means lower profits, while the companies that allow women to thrive do better when it comes to their bottom line. It's bad business, in other words, to make your highest ranks look like an old boys' club — or Donald Trump's leadership team.

Follow Jill on Twitter.

Jill Filipovic senior political writer Jill Filipovic is a contributing writer for cosmopolitan.com.

This content is created and maintained by a third party, and imported onto this page to help users provide their email addresses. You may be able to find more information about this and similar content at piano.io