Why should women tennis players get paid the same as men?(63 Posts)
It annoys me that women are demanding more money at Wimbledon - they don't play as many sets. Maybe if they played on equal standing versus men as well as other women they should then.
Some tournaments see the men playing best of three sets, same as the women. They should all get paid the same for those.
I'd like to see all the names put into a hat for Wimbledon, and drawn at random. Men and women could draw each other. Then there could be no complaints about getting paid the same.
Of course women should be paid the same prize money as men. In some tournaments men only play 3 sets as well. In tournaments like Wimbledon the women aren't given the opportunity to play 5 sets so are discriminated against - it is the equivalent of telling female athletes running the 500m they can only run 300 of them. Tournament organisers don't want women to play 5 sets because there wouldn't be time to complete all matches.
They should get paid a set amount per set played during the tournament. The same amount for men and women.
The main prize therefore being the trophy and the title, not the money.
Of course men and women should paid the same. However, I think that the amount of games played by men and women should also be the same.
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
I expect they all do the same amount of training though. Women don't train less because their games are shorter. Competitions are just a small amount of playing time in the grand scheme of things.
OP perhaps 400m runners should be paid 4 times the prize money of 100m runners?
A quick google tells me that women have been getting the same prize money as men at wimbledon since 2007.
Now they are demanding more money???
I can't see it being agreed that they get more than the men. Where did you get that from?
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
Why don't women play the same number of sets?
OP said that women are demanding more money at wimbledon.
I find that hard to believe as well
Also, why does this come up every year? They have been paid the same for years, it is a private prize fund, why do people care so much? Do they think that professional female tennis players who are on the tour and winning competitions are taking the piss in some way? I can't really understand why people raise this all the time, why it upsets them.
I never see threads saying that women should get lesser medals at the olympics. Or that different weights of boxers should go in the ring together. Or that competition at secondary school must be mixed. Or that football teams or rugby teams should be mixed.
This obviously gets some people's goats and I cannot for the life of me understand why. Unless they are top ranking international tennis players themselves, I suppose
Gertrude upthread said time constraints.
I imagine it is "tradition" - women have frequently not been allowed to do things considered as physically challenging men (see marathon & zola budd and stuff) really until quite recently, and then they don't want to change it as it would lengthen the tournament.
The (recent) history of women and long distance running (and not being allowed to do it) is really interesting a worth a google if anyone wants.
I imagine there is a similar story for things like (off the top of my head) boxing.
Perhaps the women are knackered after 2 or 3 sets of shrieking every time they hit the frigging ball .
You think that is likely to be the genuine reason?
No. I was joking. Just hate the shrieking - puts me off women's tennis.
The WTA have been pushing for years to play 5 sets in the slams (the only tournaments where the men play 5) and have got nowhere. Scheduling issues.
But it really gets my goat that they are condemned for not being allowed to do what they are perfectly willing to do.
"Also, why does this come up every year?"
NT, let me ask you this.
What if it was the other way round?
What if Men, after complaining and getting the prizes changed, were the ones being paid effectively 40% more than the women, you would be fine with that?
Even though the women's finals tickets would be valued at 5x the price of the men's , you know..that is the same tickets that pay for the prizes, as Wimbledon don't give away money from the goodness of their heart, do they?
And even though the fact that the men would be playing less sets than the women meant that they would have the time to earn an extra £250K in the Doubles and mixed doubles.......You wouldn't want to post about it every time Wimbledon comes around and discuss it?
Men get paid 40% more than women in lots of areas of work, and while I get annoyed about it, I can't do much to change it.
I don't understand your arguments, at all.
Sport isn't paid "by the hour" like a job cleaning windows. It is rewarded like most other sports, equally for people putting in effort and competing according to the rules and within the set parameters, and being the best in that category of that competition.
It is not women in tennis who make the rules of the competitions, it is the private organisers and prize funds.
There are plenty of women who want to be allowed to play 5 sets, but they aren't. Same as women weren't allowed to run long distance races until frighteningly recently.
Telling women that they are not allowed to compete over 5 sets, and then saying, well obviously you can only have 3/5 of the pay, is ridiculous. And frankly anyone who says that, or has the idea that females should just compete against males from the get-go and HA where will that get you are coming from a perspective that women's sport is boring/pointless/uninteresting and (often) not worth watching unless they're hot.
It is fucking depressing.
You lot do realise, I assume, that if females compete against males, then that is more or less the end of females engaging in sport. My DD learnt at 4 that "football is for boys" and there is no way most teenage girls would feel comfortable in contact type sports with boys. Due to average differences in size and strength, boys and men would defeat most girls and women. So that's the end of that. What is wrong with the "best in group" idea? No-one is suggesting that different weight classes of boxers compete against each other. Why not?
Women can play in the doubles at grand slams, men really can't because they wouldn't have time to rest between games.
I think female tennis players have a good deal tbh, they are fortunate really. In general the ladies division is far weaker than the mens, you get very few upsets from the lower ranked players beating the top ranked ones.
It helps to market the sport though I guess, womens tennis players are really the most high profile female sportspeople, and the sport attracts a high level of female interest for both the mens and womens game as a result.
So is that "No I wouldn't be bothered by it and wouldn't post on the subject?"
Nice rant by the way.
Yawn. We really have to do this Every. Fucking. Year??
What NiceTabard said.
Other sports do not get paid relative to the time they spend playing otherwise marathon runners would be be paid 1000s of times more than 100m runners and that obviously isn't the case.
No idea what NCG was going on about with regards women playing men and what that has to do with being paid equally. It just sounded like a 'let's put women in their place' type comment.
And btw Wimbledon was waaaaay behind some of the other Grand Slams in giving equal prize money to women. Notice 'prize' money. Not a salary. At the Olympics everyone gets the same prize regardless of their sport and the length of time/effort put in. Are you suggesting a sliding scale should apply there?
Message withdrawn at poster's request.
If they all play 3 sets then they should get paid the same.
If the men play to 5 sets then they should get more.
Seems only fair....more hours, more effort?
Do some people even read other posts on a thread
Time/effort put in isn't restricted to time in tournaments btw. Are you saying that women train less than men? Because I can assure you it doesn't work like that.
Join the discussion
Please login first.