Why is this article acting like there aren't plenty of women in positions of power/authority who abuse there underlings or treat people badly?
I agree with plenty in that article but the cherry picked examples are ridiculous and ignore (assumption) that women express their butt crevasse gene in different ways from men.
It isn't hard to do a little research and find plenty (depending on source 'plenty' could be anywhere from more that 0% to anything less than the average of the population) of examples of female politicians and entertainers using their status/positions in immoral or unscrupulous (value judgements) ways. Women, and i say this as a complement, are more subtle (overly vague) than men.
Research also shows that men are far less likely to report things like domestic or sexual abuse (non sequitor).
Women are newer to the power game and there are less (fewer - :facts3: of them in these positions...that coupled with men being likely to not report incidents means that (not a fact - it could indicate it but it does not have to mean that) cherry picked examples or gross numbers are useless
Look at all (without more context also a non-sequitor ) the incidents of female teachers sexually abusing students. Those same gender dynamics cause less societal outrage and women's sentences are on average almost 50% less than men. (if true this is actually a relevant fact - so there's one)