It doesn't matter about the objective power of any given man, I don't know why you keep reverting back to the laymen example. The virtue of men being at the top is in and of itself the issue. From the micro to the macro, you can find gender power imbalances that are residual from the sociological evolution of humans. We have been socially conditioned to rank men higher then women, and white men at the top. And now that that notion is being refuted and dismissed by a growing part of society, that's where the reckoning is.

Who held what job when, who died when, who actually held power when is irrelevant.

What a profoundly sexist interpretation of history

What relevance is the sex of the person on top of the pyramid to everyone else? You have inserted this useless metric, which half of society knows is useless. You can say 'the richest person in the world is a man', but this doesn't make the median man any richer. It's just bad logic.