gamingeek said:Let's start with Tennis, should women earn as much as men?
IMO only if they do the same amount of work. Men play 5 sets a lot of the time and women play 3 and get paid the same? How is that fair? How is that equality?
A newspaper yesterday totted up the monery earned per minute and women actually earn more than men, let alone this demand for equal pay.
I think they should be payed the same (per set), that would be fair.
Should be a revenue share of media sales. Advertising pays for sport.
Real equality would be to let the market forces determine how much they are paid, not artificially ensure that they get paid the same. It's what Djokovic tried to say before they warned him that he could be digging a hole for himself so he backtracked. Women's tennis matches are on average less technical and less powerful, hence less interesting for me to watch. I would pay less to watch the top two female tennis players than I would for the male counterparts. For something like swimming or gymnastics or track and field I would pay the same because I enjoy it equally. For something like figure skating I'd pay more to watch a women's tournament than a men's one.
___
Listen to Wu-Tang and watch Kung-Fu
Yep. I mean just look at the WNBA, or womnes sport leagues. They canno even draw 100 spectators live, yet the TV stations carry it ou of some sense of moral superiority.
I say get rid of gender-based divisions in sports, just like in the US armed forces. If someone, regardless of gender can show they belong in the league let them play. A gender-neutral team with men and women would draw more ratings than a single gender sports event.
aspro said:Yep. I mean just look at the WNBA, or womnes sport leagues. They canno even draw 100 spectators live, yet the TV stations carry it ou of some sense of moral superiority.
I say get rid of gender-based divisions in sports, just like in the US armed forces. If someone, regardless of gender can show they belong in the league let them play. A gender-neutral team with men and women would draw more ratings than a single gender sports event.
I've been trying to tell the women who I play volleyball with this for years, but they still insist on showering seperately...
gamingeek said:Gender neutral teams are awesome. I'd like to see it but not for violent sports like rugby.
What's the difference between something like rugby or tennis? Most women won't be able to compete with their male counterparts either way.
Personally I think gender neutral teams are a bad idea if this means we'd be doing away with the classic gender division. If gender neutral teams is all there is, you'd see a lot less women playing sports on all levels.
SupremeAC said:What's the difference between something like rugby or tennis? Most women won't be able to compete with their male counterparts either way.
Personally I think gender neutral teams are a bad idea if this means we'd be doing away with the classic gender division. If gender neutral teams is all there is, you'd see a lot less women playing sports on all levels.
That's true.
Don't care how much they are paid. But they should play 5 sets: ultimately will improve the standard of play, and make for far more entertaining matches. It's too easy to crush a player in 3 sets with brute force, and often a close match in 3 sets can't reach the heights of a 5 set match simply because there's not enough time for as many twists and turns as there can be in a 5 set match, or for a genuine slog to take place. The best women's matches are the very, very rare ones that last upwards of 4 hours, with the last set lasting the length or two or three. The women don't internally combust at this point...so why wouldn't it be beneficial for everyone involved for more matches in the women's game to last this long?