Today at Forbes Woman, Mary Ellen Egan questions the cause for the persistent wage gap between men and women. But where are the solutions?

If women ran Apple, would they have unveiled a product called the iPad? In Business Week, Vivek Wadhwa argues more women are needed in the executive suite (and not just for name changes).

This week, the Economist cast a critical eye toward measuring the progress of women in the workplace. But their unit of measurement appears to be more concerned with "social consequences of women's economic empowerment" than the overall benefit to women.

"The earning power of women globally is expected to reach $18 trillion by 2014 [...] That is more than twice the estimated 2014 GDP of China and India combined." The story of the current recession is definitely about women.

Out of 100 people who made the cut on Vanity Fair's 100 list, only thirteen are women. Seems like the New Establishment is still taking notes from the Old one.

Forbes magazine loves to track the wealthy. It has lists dedicated to billionaires, top earning CEOs, and top-earning dead celebrities. So why, when it comes to the new list about women, have editors decided to use the vague metric "influence?"