Equal pay for less work at Wimbledon

[Yorkshire Blue]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6385295.stm

I love the fact that this equal rights story is illustrated by a photo of a bloke lifting the woman's trophy.

Presumably this also means that women (and blokes in drag) will now play best of 5 sets.

 

[Pubey]

haha i never thought of it like that, but fair comment!

 

[Uncle Leo]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6385295.stm

I love the fact that this equal rights story is illustrated by a photo of a bloke lifting the woman's trophy.

I was thinking exactly the same :hilarious:

 

[dloman]

I have never really understood this argument about equal pay for women in tennis mainly due to the point that because the men's matches are 5 sets and the womens's are 3, this actually leads to the women being paid a higher hourly rate.

so in essence it is not equal as the women actually earn more for less work.

 

[C C Csiders]

I was thinking exactly the same :hilarious:

Why is there this fantasy a lot of men have about watching two lesbians at it. For Christ sake most look even worse than Amelie Mauresmo. Who, in the name of Evonne Goolagong, would want to watch Amelie and some other rough bird going at it?

 

[Yorkshire Blue]

I'm all for sexual equality.

The easiest way to stop accusations of sexism is to remove the arbitrary barrier of gender and have men and women competing against each other.
Scr.apping the "separate but equal" men's and women's tours is the way forward.

Equality is the right to compete on the men's tour.

 

[Einstein]

I have never really understood this argument about equal pay for women in tennis mainly due to the point that because the men's matches are 5 sets and the womens's are 3, this actually leads to the women being paid a higher hourly rate.

so in essence it is not equal as the women actually earn more for less work.

Exactly. I find this the most annoying argument which comes round every year, and this never ever gets mentioned in reply to them.

How would you feel if you worked 5 days a week, and the women next to you worked 3, but you were being paid the same?

It is exactly the same in my opinion. A first class ridiculous joke!

 

[Van Whale]

http://news.bbc.co.uk/sport1/hi/tennis/6385295.stm

I love the fact that this equal rights story is illustrated by a photo of a bloke lifting the woman's trophy.

Thought it was michael bolton!! :minger:

 

[scrounger]

I have been trying my hardest to resist the temptation of having a rant about this but here we go.

This argument has been going on for years regarding equal pay for women and men in tennis. The bottom line is that women do not play the same amount of sets as men. End of. There are no "ifs" or "buts" regarding this, this for me is the whole point of the argument.

In the past I have spoken to many amateur women tennis players who have been graced with the opportunity to play for their county. Every single one of them had agreed that honestly they did not feel equal pay is fair. For me, it is a load of bollox indeed.

I remember when Serena Williams decided to get too big for her boots a few years ago when she was winning Grand Slams. She put out a challenge to play a man saying that she could beat a half-decent pro (over the course of best of 3 sets). The result was playing a 720-something male pro who completely whipped her 6-1 6-0. This for me confirms the notion that there simply cannot be equality in tennis.

Say for example women footballers were professional (obviously this is in fantasy land). Would they start asking for equal pay as men because they would play 90 mins of football, 4 cup competitions, European football etc? No that would never happen. Why? Because at no point along the line can you compare standards.

Therefore, even though both women and men are professionals, at no point can you look at each competition and feel confident in saying, yes they deserve equal prize money because they have achieved the gender equivalent.

Rant over..

 

[sufcintheprem]

Is there any sport in which women are paid the same as men? Probably a first for me but that's a serious qusetion.

It's a non-starter for me. The best man is paid the most prize money (any groom jokes?) and so ti should be. So then, if the best woman can't beat the best man, why should she be paid as much. In fact, if the best woman can't beat any of the ten best men, why should she be paid as much as them?

Even casting aside the sporting reality and assuming a corporate view as we have to in the current world of sport. More people want to watch men play tennis than women play tennis. The volumes we take on men's tennis are FAR greater than those on women's tennis because a) there's (traditionally been) much less competition for titles and b) people mainly want to see the best and the doubles suffers for the same reason.

Even with Federer's dominance, it's still a lot more interesting although a cheeky ante-post punt on Serena would have netted a lot of money...

 

[Uncle Leo]

Plus, the women can often supplement their pay by playing doubles tennis, thanks to the fact that they only ever play a maximum of three sets in the singles.

 

[scrounger]

Can someone explain to me that in the modern game, why women play best of three sets? Surely if they are atheletes, they should be able to handle a five setter. Men hit the ball hard in comparison, but women hit it hard to the best of their ability, so what is the difference.

Therefore, women should not have equal pay because:
a) they are nowhere near the standard of men
b) they only play 3 sets instead of 5.

Anyone care to disagree with this?

 

[canveyshrimper]

Why is there this fantasy a lot of men have about watching two lesbians at it. For Christ sake most look even worse than Amelie Mauresmo. Who, in the name of Evonne Goolagong, would want to watch Amelie and some other rough bird going at it?

I suppose it could bring new meaning to the expression putting your finger in the dyke.:o :eek:

 

[Shrimper2thecore]

I have never really understood this argument about equal pay for women in tennis mainly due to the point that because the men's matches are 5 sets and the womens's are 3, this actually leads to the women being paid a higher hourly rate.

so in essence it is not equal as the women actually earn more for less work.

You cant look at it as an hourly rate, that is the arguement being put forward by some for equal pay, as a few years ago the womens final actually last longer, because the mens are over so quick with Federer.

I do agree with the fact that there should be different prize money, as there is now!!

 

[steveo]

Women should be paid on a pro rata basis compared to the men. If they want the same money they should play best of 5. You can easily get a situation where one of the Williams brothers wins 2-0 in lessthan an hour. How is that comarable to two blokes slogging it out for 3 hours? Less entertainemtn should equal less money