Are you following media coverage of Jill Abramson, the former New York Time’s executive editor until her abrupt termination on May 14, 2014? You’ll find people writing and talking about whether she was let go because she “pushed” the issue of being paid less than the male editors who preceded her or because of her “gruff” management style that included arbitrary decision making and inadequate communication with colleagues. You’ll find questions about whether it matters anyway when the real problem is not about gender discrimination among the 1% but rather underpaid, low wage-workers, primarily women, getting paid so poorly they must get food stamps and Medicaid just to cover basic needs for themselves and their kids.

Yes – Jill Abramson’s firing by the New York Times matters, because it is only women with some power, wealth and prestige who can take the risk of speaking up and then endure both the criticisms and the consequences for revealing the ongoing wage discrimination that impacts women. Women like Jill Abramson can use their influence and visibility to get people talking about the bigger issue that women get paid less than men, a disparity that is both unacknowledged and taken-for-granted by those issuing the paychecks.

Jill Abramson was characterized as gruff and rude…traits that might be admired or ignored in men but…not tolerated in women. What happens when men have difficulty managing their staff, communicating and facilitating teamwork? They are sent for leadership training, anger management classes, and communication workshops. Women? They’re fired.

And it’s not only about disparity in wages. There’s an underlying problem. Women are held accountable to two conflicting sets of expectations. The highly valuable professional is an independent thinker, takes risks and is a strong advocate for his own ideas. A woman, no matter what her professional position, is always balancing the tacit expectations to put relationships ahead of self-concerns, care about what other people think of her, be nice, be willing to accept less than men get, concede in order to keep the peace, and other commonly held expectations that compromise her choices. To step outside of those expectations will bring consequences – criticism, animosity, getting fired and more.

For both men and women, if you’re in charge, you are not always going to be liked. Leadership is not meant to be a popularity contest. When you’re a woman, however, you are measured according to a double standard: you need to lead like a man and speak, smile and behave like a woman.

Ruben Navarrette Jr. a syndicated columnist for the Washington Post Writers Group writes that “…no matter what your gender, if you want to be the first across the finish line, you have to push.” The difference is that women will be called pushy and men will be remembered as leaders.