Why is that women fought so hard to get equal prize money for grand slams but never fought to play an equal amount of sets personally I think If your getting payed the same they should do the same amount of work
-
Mobile App Discontinued
Due to a number of factors, support for the current BigFooty mobile app has been discontinued. Your BigFooty login will no longer work on the Tapatalk or the BigFooty App - which is based on Tapatalk.
Apologies for any inconvenience. We will try to find a replacement.
Selective Sexism???
- Thread starter Dylz48
- Start date
- Tagged users None
🥰 Love BigFooty? Join now for free.
Wahooti Fandango
Brownlow Medallist
- Mar 10, 2007
- 20,229
- 7,825
- AFL Club
- Essendon
- Other Teams
- Queensland Reds, Melbourne Rebels
Is not sexism inherently selective? That is what makes it a form of discrimination.
i think they did want equal prize money and then organisers were like you don't play as much as the men. therefore less prize money. i think it's fair. tennis is one of the sports were women are more or less equal, they get televised etc. unlike AFL, basketball or soccer. If they want more money they should have to play the same as the men.
I've always thought the argument for equal pay was based on the notion that the women brought in just as much money in merchandise and just as large a television audience? Though I'm not sure hwo you would prove that, considering the men's and women's matches are played in the same tournament. If they were played separately, I suspect women's tennis wouldn't be all that popular.
Log in to remove this Banner Ad
totally agree!
NOT THIS ARGUEMENT AGAIN!!1!1!1!
DO NOT WANT
It is easy to see how much attention the WTA gets aside from the mixed tournaments, SFA.
The funny thing is, if the women played 5 sets, then wait for all the people to come on here and bitch ZOMG they had 3 and a half hours of Serena Williams when I could have been watching Tsonga ZOMG!1!!!!1!1!! get women off our screens.
Best of 3 means women play less, and that is what I want. Fact is I chip in SFA to the Australian Open in terms of cash, so I dont give a damn how they distribute prizemoney.
Hell, have women play a match tiebreak to decide each game... suits me
- Jul 11, 2007
- 10,821
- 83
- AFL Club
- Port Adelaide
^Good point actually.
Any chance they can double what the women get so they don't play at all?
- Aug 30, 2007
- 9,004
- 6,155
- AFL Club
- Melbourne
- Other Teams
- Warney's IPL team!
http://www.news.com.au/heraldsun/story/0,21985,24967320-661,00.html
"Ice vests will be provided to all players when temperatures become extreme and 10-minute breaks will be offered to women and juniors between second and third sets. "
Men aren't given this option? Imgaine the outcry had it been the other way!
"Ice vests will be provided to all players when temperatures become extreme and 10-minute breaks will be offered to women and juniors between second and third sets. "
Men aren't given this option? Imgaine the outcry had it been the other way!
Marklar_33
Brownlow Medallist
Stand alone ATP Masters events are far richer than stand alone WTA Tier 1.
Mens tennis is the big magnet and the womens game hitches a ride at the slams and one or two other events. Good for the girls but they are being carried.
this sums it up. sure some of the girls are pretty and we fawn over them, but there is no comparison between who brings in the attendances, gets higher ratings, commands greater sponsorship etc.
Aarick13
Senior List
i think the thing that sums it up perfectly is when you look at the schedule of matches. why are women played first at night. becuase if the men were played first everyone would turn off after the mens match. and this also goes with sexism. why should the men be forced to play to 2-3am for some matches but women arent. they want equal pay but different conditions.
Easy fixed. have the men go to best of 3
A late women's match might go to 10pm