US TV lionizes the CEO of Hewlett Packard for continuing to cut jobs despite the "economic recovery" in the US (thus helping insure it's not a real recovery for the American people).

One incidental detail, irrelevant to the issue, is that this CEO is a woman. It's irrelevant to the issue because a male CEO could have done the same, and it would be equally wrong. The wrong here has nothing to do with her gender. It was right of FAIR not to mention that.

I mention it, though it is irrelevant to this issue, because there are feminists who campaign to have more female CEOs. I think they are being distracted by an irrelevancy.

With regard to CEOs, what matters most for working women isn't whether their chance of becoming one of those CEOs is one in a million or one in ten million. It is curbing the CEOs' power to harm them. Never mind how women CEOs get paid; focus on how women workers get paid.