Discussion in 'General Pro Player Discussion' started by pushing_wins, Mar 28, 2012.
whats up with that?
how does attendance and tv ratings compare?
My theory is that the WTA is sponsoring big events to over-reward the top players so that they can retire sooner, creating an opening for the next generation of women. Can anything be worse than the present state of their tour? We might be about to find out if the generous prize money keeps coming.
I seriously, and I mean seriously, do not understand why you guys even care that women get paid equally. Do they play less? Yes. Is there lower attendance? Usually, depending on the match. Does this even matter? No. You guys sound like you're from the 1950s.
Theyre getting paid more. That's what the issue here is.. why do they deserve to make more than then men?
Considering it's not taxpayer money, I cannot see how this even matters. I bet you that you won't find any male players complaining about the amount women are being paid. More importantly, I assume you realize that overall, women are still paid much less than men. Perhaps that should make you feel happier.
Actually,I thought that this issue had been raised by some of the male players?
Where are you getting this info? They are getting more money - but the total prize money is only off by a little more than $13,000.
Where do you get $850,000?
what does it matter if overall women make less than men? that's not the issue here.
And you didn't answer my question, why do you feel women deserve, in this instance, to make more than men?
Men and Women's total purses are the same. Its up to the WTA and ATP respectively how much they decide to distribute to their players. Maybe the WTA pay out more to their players?
Im sure the total purse for both is $4.5 Million!
women deserve to make more than men because innumerable studies demonstrate they do far more uncompensated work (cooking, cleaning, laundry, dishes, child care, etc.) in the course of their lives than men. Except for a very few at the top of the game, this would be true of tennis players as well. (Even Yvonne Goolagong was busy with child care in the hotel before playing her Wimbledon final). So fairness dictates that to make up for all this uncompensated work, women should be paid more for their professional time. It's peevish to complain about it.
hahaha, the thing is though if men actually put there mind to doing those things we would still be better at it than women, men are far superior to women in every aspect, i cannot think of anything that women are better than men at, you can say cleaning and laundry but thats only because men don't do it lol, and thats why women should always get less than men, i know it sound terrible but its just true, its an absolute joke the WTA players are getting played more when the mens game is a million times better in every aspect and deserve more.
LOL these threads are getting boring.
and to add to your sexist thoughts.....
Why hasn't a woman astronaut gone to the moon? It doesn't need to be cleaned yet.
Why don't women wear watches? There's a clock on the stove.
I agree with this. I'm not sexist, but I recognize that equality is often not the correct ideal to strive for. Fairness is the important thing.
Men and women are not equal. If they were, then men would be wearing bras and teeing off closer to the hole.
That's not to say that women's tennis is inherently less exciting to watch than mens. But at this stage in the era, the men's game is simply higher quality. I'd pay a pretty penny to see Graf vs Seles in their heyday. Or even Henin vs Clijsters. But I won't pay a lot to see Azarenka vs Serena. So if the majority of people agree with me, is it fair that women get paid equally right now? Not in my eyes. Attendance and T.V. ratings are a good way to judge this.
By the same token, if the men's game was struggling, then yes, I'd say the women deserve to make as much if not more than the men.
I like Billy Jean King, and other people who have brought women to where they are today in society in general, but they lose sight of what matters sometimes.
and I can't remember who the woman was(comedian) but she said, I might be paraphrasing....
A woman needs four animals in her life: a Mink on her shoulders, a Tiger in bed, a Jaguar in the garage, and an Ass to pay for it all......
LOL then why are you LOL'ing :shock:
yeah, I agree with you here. I'd pay big bucks to see Seles, Graf, Navratilova, Evert but today I don't even bother watching the WTA and wouldn't pay a penny to see any female player. It is one big mess. no real champions. sisters are playing a couple of tournaments a year, anybody can win anything on a given day ... how many #1's we've had in last 5 years (many of them never won a GS) etc.
With all undue respect, I think you're wrong. It depends on the context. In reference to things like power of the soul, impact on humanity, necessity for reproduction, even intelligence, yes, saying men and women are not equal is sexist. Spiritually, mentally (emotionally? Oh god another can of worms) men and women are equal.
BUT This is a tennis forum. Tennis is a sport. Sports are, by nature, physical. Physically, men and women are not equal. If that makes me sexist to say, then call me sexist.
Just because in many ways men and women are equal, that does not mean it is fair to pay them equally all the time. If a man is doing a better job, he deserves more pay. If a woman is doing a better job, she deserves more. In the context of this thread, the women are doing a worse job. Context is everything.
Deserves got nothing to do with it. It’s a private business not your tax dollars. Who cares if they make 10x what the men make. If tennis players have a problem they can quit and go work at McDonalds. Nobody is forced to play on the tennis tour, nobody is forced to watch it and more importantly, nobody is forced to sponsor it.
I see your point, and in the big picture I don't care (and I assume the OP as well). As others mention above, the people who really have a right to complain are the men on tour. I can't think of any off the top of my head, but I think some male players have voiced similar opinions.
All I'm saying is that in an ideal world, both men and women would be compensated in their jobs in a manner corresponding to their level of performance, regardless of their gender. It's a shame that we live in such an over-sensitive age that even saying this gets you branded a sexist.
Check out Devilito pullin' the Clint Eastwood line from Unforgiven.....
the rule is equal pay for equal work. differences allowed for seniority and merit.
in tennis, the work/product/merit are not equal. jmho.
how is the amount of uncompensated work relevant? some men do more uncompensated than other men, so they deseved to be paid more?
The issue is that they're getting paid more and the woman, for years, complained that prize money should be equal.
It's an issue because women made an equality issue out of it.
Men should make more at grand slams because they play more.
thats like saying a car is a car. lexus is the same as a toyota. local open players plays at a higher level than the wta.
Equal pay for equal work has never applied. Women still earn about 70 cents for every dollar a man earns doing exactly the same work. It's just juvenile to whimper about feeling that women are overpayed in tennis while they're underpaid so many other places. This is a tennis forum, you reply? Sure, but you're raising what is really an ethical rather than a tennis issue, and ethical issues have to be examined in context. The context here is that society rips off women, for the most part, or in some cultures rips them off and mutilates them. Get over this nonsense already! Men get most of the breaks in this world.
equal pay for equal work is legislated in most developed countries
atp website: $3973050
wta : $4828050
per tournmant itself: $5,536,664
the prize money from the tournament organizers is equal. i was wrong for saying it was 850k more for the women. but still, equal money for an product with less merit.
I can't speak for pushing_wins, but for myself, I am trying to do exactly that. I am trying to this make NOT an ethical issue, and make it a tennis issue.
And your logic that just because women have historically had things worse means that they can unfairly get higher compensation now is poor reasoning. You are doing what I said not to do: take things out of context. Overpaying female tennis players in 2012 is not even remotely the right way to deal with how women have been put down in many cultures throughout history. Suffrage? Good. Civil rights? Good. These are the ethical issues.
Feminism simply for the sake of feminism without looking at what makes sense is what irks me. And people around the world look up to the WTA as an inspiration. Now I doubt that there are little girls watching tennis saying "Oh look I should get free stuff just for being female even if I don't work as hard as a similarly qualified man." But it's the principle.
equality is not necessarily equity
for jobs with merits based on pyshical attributes for which men and women will never be equal for eg. construction, how do you propose we compensate them?
That argument is outright stupid.
If women earn less (for the same work) in certain places then the way to fix this problem is giving them more money in those certain places.
What makes no sense whatsoever is giving women in places where this problem doesn't exist more money. How would that help the women in those other places? They're still being treated unfairly.
But now, you also have men being treated unfairly in addition to that. You must have some very contorted logic to believe that these two somehow cancel out. The way to fight inequality is not creating more inequality somewhere else....
Apart from that I don't buy that 70:100 for modern western countries. I've heard these claimes a lot, but closely looking at the data usually reveals that it was in fact not equal work being compared etc.
otherwise explain me this: in capitalism companies try to maximize their profit and often they are willing to do all kinds of things to reach that goal. Wages are often the greatst factor in terms of cost. So why on earth would you hire a man if you could have a woman doing the same job for 30% (!) less money!?
Separate names with a comma.