I think, Larry, you completely fail to understand the restrictions that are placed, both overtly and covertly on women's lives. Apart from the negotiation that many women have to go through to ensure some time sans childcare or family responsibilities, and apart from the travel and time costs that women typically spend on their families because the blokes keep that sort of money for themselves sporting events are frequently not safe places for women.
On the surface it may appear to you, as a man, that women are welcome at sports events, but next time you go open your ears to the misogynistic comments that circle around. Listen to the sneers, the labeling of poor play as "playing like a girl" the 'jokes' about tits, the cameras lingering on attractive women in skimpy clothing and try to put yourself in a woman's skin. You probably won't hear as much of it as I routinely do because they are not directed at you, or you may not catch the underlying tone of threat that is ever present in women's lives.
Women really are that restricted. It's just subtle.
I'm flattered that you think I spend my household income on wine, cinema and Sky TV. I'm not that wealthy, nor would I ever knowingly put money into the hands of the Murdochs.
However, all of this is a smokescreen. Why should I have to attend sports events? The BBC takes my money in the form of a licence fee (and yes, I pay it, I'm the higher earner) yet put's women's sport behind the red button while putting men's on prime time. The BBC does not have the same commercial pressures as Sky and their like, so that particular part of your argument, of which you are so fond, is irrelevant.
You've not managed, in any way to address the original question on this thread i.e. why shouldn't women be paid the same prize money as men. All I hear is you insisting that women should perform like men because, ultimately, the male is the stand to which women should aspire