Why should women tennis players get paid the same as men?

scallops you mean someone posting in FWR might have an agenda?

Also if women are getting such a 'good deal' why aren't the men campaigning to change to 3 sets so they can supposedly get paid more for less work? Because they know where the prestige and status lie. They are quite happy for that to be denied to women.

Are you suggesting the OP may have an agenda WitchOfEndor?

Meh.
I can barely contain my indifference.

You are interested in such a range of topics OP. Threads on extended breast feeding and equal pay for women. Whatever next? I wait with baited breath.

And we aren't asking you to feel sorry for them They get the same prize money.

No Badvoc that isn't the case. at. all. Hence the ludicrousness of the argument. It is prize money. Money for winning. Why should one person who wins get less than another?

And as NiceTabard carefully explained up thread, why should women be prevented from playing the same length of matches as men and therefore be paid less? Doesn't that sound like discrimination? Not allowed the same opportunity and being penalised for not having that opportunity too. Delightful.

I find it really hard to feel sorry for all these poor multi millionaire tennis players tbh.
As Stella says...England's ladies team won the worlds cup did they not?
Are they being paid £500,000 per week?

As the prize money has been the same since 2007, and only OP seems to think they are calling to be paid more than men, I think Wimbledon prize money isn't a big issue at the moment.

How about the gender pay gap in, say, football instead?

I'm not sure I really care sufficiently buffy :)
They are all amazing athletes.
They all train.
They all work hard.
But the fact remains that the men's game is 2 sets longer.
I don't know how runners get paid but I assume the farther you run the more prize money you win?
But...as I say...dont really care.

This one again?

What NiceTabard said - can't add to it or say it any better.

Also take into account training - they do the same amount of training and work etc. just in competitions they aren't allowed to play 5 sets.

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.

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?

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?

NT

So is that "No I wouldn't be bothered by it and wouldn't post on the subject?"

Nice rant by the way.

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.

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.

That aside

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?

"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?
Really?

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.

No. I was joking. Just hate the shrieking - puts me off women's tennis.

You think that is likely to be the genuine reason?

Perhaps the women are knackered after 2 or 3 sets of shrieking every time they hit the frigging ball .