Women's tennis and equal pay

[messyisthenewtidy]

Can I ask what everyone thinks re. the recent furore over women's equal prize money at Wimbledon?

Surely, the fairest solution would be to let women play 5 sets? Or am I missing something fundamental here?

Biwi,

That question is a false dichotomy. You are saying that you either believe in equal rights for women ergo equal prize money or that you do not. I can believe in equal rights for women but think that they deserve far less money in an area where the market will pay them far less and, on any objective criteria, they have less ability.

Do you believe in equal rights for men? If so, should all male models be awarded equal pay with female supermodels?

And, en passant, men's final tickets are trading at £12k. What would you pay to see the women's final?

And there it is. The 'what about thee Menz' argument

OFGS,

Let's put every logical argument on a "bingo card" so we don't have to engage.

Tick away...then go watch some women play some live tennis.

No it's not a false dichotomy. It was a simple question.

• do you believe in equality for women?

Yes I do...and so what? Has nothing to do with this discussion. Please don't try and then go from that to the fact that women deserve equal prize money in tennis. It does not follow logically. Or, if it does, you will have to make your case with reference to:

Total renumeration of tennis players (prize plus sponsorship) plus media deals post career.

Looking at some uncomfortable comparators (such as modelling) where women get paid more than men.

Considering where the prize money is ultimately coming from (tournament revenues) and how the women benefit from playing in the same tournaments as the men (look at mens' and womens' tournaments individually).

To me, equality is equality of opportunity, not equality of outcome. I am not a marxist. If the women could arrange their tour to generate more revenue than the mens' tour, they would deserve higher prize money.

But do they have equality of opportunity?

Does a young tennis-playing girl have the same opportunity as her brother to earn the same money, receive the same funding, get the same exposure and enjoy the same respect?

So larry, tennis refuses to give women players equality of opportunity (only allowed to play 3 sets, less tournamnents), and you complain that they are paid the same as men, and yet you claim to believe in equality.

There's a bit of cognitive dissidence going on there surely

And before you draw a comparison between that and the inequality of opportunity in modelling I would like for all models to earn the same,ie a lot less.

It's not about what you're born with but about how much you put in, that should be the message society sends out.

Exactly slug, as far back as Billie jean king they have offered to play 5 sets.

Did anyone see the match between lisicki and kerber? How was that not good?

Slug,

How many sets are 99.9% of the population allowed to play at Wimbledon? How many sets were last played by a man under 5'6? Or a man over 40 (excepting the silly invitational doubles)? I keep saying that sport has never been and is not meant to be egalitarian.

Messy,

You are clearly a Marxist. I respect that postion but I do not agree with it. Our lives depend on the brains and bodies we are born with plus what we put in. I like Marxism as an ideal but it is fatally flawed as people want to be paid according to what they achieve, not some altruistic ideal.

I think that in the UK tennis establishment, girls and boys have pretty much (if not exactly) the same funding and opportunities. As to respect and motivation, whether the leading woman was worth £20mio or £50mio, it is still a lot of money and a goal worthy of fighting hard to achieve.

Of course sport cannot help but be about the body you were born with but that shouldn't be all that it's about. It should be about working to the best within your field, within your group. Work and dedication are things to be rewarded. I think that is what equal prize is saying and that's a good thing.

Anyhow about the Marxism thing, I don't know what i am but I do think it's a huge mistake to treat market forces as if they are the be all and end all. Unfettered capitalism leads to all kind of injustice where people are reduced to what they have to sell, and all this is excused by the God of market forces. Still thanks for diagnosing me!!

Also I really do think that women's tennis is great and incredibly skilled. People who don't think so really don't know much about tennis.

I wonder if mayorquimby could explain why, if women's football was so dire it used to attract crowds of 50,000 until it was banned in 1922.

Well I never said women's football was inherently dire by its very nature, I simply pointed out that the women's team perform as badly and perhaps worse than the men because during the last women's world cup many people continued to repeat the myth of the English women's team performing well. I never said anything about women's football being dire just the English team.

Same sets and same pay. And also they should be given the same airtime. Women just aint given a chance in sport, were too quick to say 'oh nobodys interested' but who here has ever seen a televised female footie match? Cant say I ever have, and if you do you can bet your life its not on everyday like it is with men

I made a couple of threads during the last women's world cup (sorry on the iPhone do can't dig them out), there was a bit of interest but not many watching. Women's fa cup was on tv a couple of weeks back, didn't see a thread on that though.

FFS why be so quick to dismiss women's sport? Why so reluctant to give it a chance? Almost as if some people don't want it to succeed.

I saw a women's football match in Canada and it looked pretty good to me, even though football normally bores pants off me. Actually it was the first football match I've sat all the way through without falling asleep Whenever they fouled they'd be so apologetic to each other it was quite funny. But that might have been cos they were Canucks. Very polite lot.

If you read the frailty myth then she refers to studies that show where girls and boys are given equal encouragement and experience in sport, they develop the same muscle mass and skills as boys. However, girls are found to have so much less experience that even by the age of 5 they lag behind the boys, and by 10 they are dropping out of sport at a huge rate.

These things are culturally defined, not physiologically. So the only way to bring equality to sport is to change the culture, and giving equal status to make and female sports would be a good place to start

.... and the start point for this has to be that men and women should be given equality, hence my question

I can't see why people won't start from this position. It's much 'kinder' no? Then we can work out ways in which it can be achieved, rather than just dismiss women's sports (or women in sport) which is what many and most of the men on this thread seem determined to do.

I will continue to ask the question of which of you has bothered to pay to watch LIVE women's sport. Until you support it with actions, it will never achieve equal airtime, pay etc and nor should it. You cannot legislate for people to support sport or force uninterested men to watch women's sport. If I tuned in to the Eastbourne tournament and found the stands as full as Queen's, then I would say let's have more airtime and equal pay. The reality is that the stands are 75% empty.

Yes it is chicken and egg, more TV will bring more spectators. But, for those who are vocal and insistent about equal coverage and pay, you can contribute towards it happening if you really care.

You are clearly a Marxist. And how did you come to that conclusion? Was there dialetical socialism embedded in my critique of the patriarchy or is it just a convenient strawman on which to pin your mansplaining.

And the problem with watching women's sport is it tends to get hidden behind the red button on the telly.

Personally, I much prefer to play than watch.

Slug,

Live sport is never hidden behind any buttons. And I never called you a socialist. Why not address real points, not those you prefer to rebut.

But there isn't as much live sport by women because of the problems faced by women as they grow up. You have to start somewhere, and money is hugely influential in determining the success of any teams or individuals, so equal money will actually lead to equal play quicker than any other strategy.

Put equal money into women's sport, and the rest will follow. Increase the audiences will help the money, but at local level it will have far less impact unless prize money and sponsorship are there to give the boost needed.

Kickass,

There is plenty of money in women's tennis, more just about than any other sport. Yet women are more competitive in athletics, squash and plenty of other sports where the money offered is really a pittance.

And the men's game was super competitive in the 80s where (in real terms) the men then earned a tiny fraction of what the women earn today.