Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- NPR Climate Experts
- Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- “Siberia might stay livable”
- Deep Thinking From The Atlantic
- Making Up Fake Numbers At CBS News
- Your Tax Dollars At Work
- “experts warn”
- End Of Snow Update
- CBS News Defines Free Speech
- “Experts Warn”
- Consensus Science With Remarkable Precision
- Is New York About To Drown?
- “Anti-science conservatives must be stopped”
- Disappearing New York
- New York To Drown Soon
- “halt steadily increasing climate extremism”
- “LARGE PART OF NORTHERN CALIF ABLAZE”
- Climate Trends In The Congo
- “100% noncarbon energy mix by 2030”
- Understanding The US Government
- Cooling Australia’s Past
- Saving The World From Fossil Fuels
- Propaganda Based Forecasting
- “He Who Must Not Be Named”
Recent Comments
- Bob G on Grok 3 Trusts The Government
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- William on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- gordon vigurs on “Siberia might stay livable”
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on NPR Climate Experts
- conrad ziefle on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
- conrad ziefle on “Siberia might stay livable”
- Timo, not that one! on “Siberia might stay livable”
- arn on Defending Democracy In Ukraine
Guardian Upset That Men Are Interested In Women
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.
Don’t waste your click, guys . . . no pix.
What is sexist at Wimbledon is that women get the same prize money as men for playing much shorter games – a maximum 3 sets for the women as opposed to a maximum 5 sets for the men.
Supply and demand, old son — supply and demand.
Not true.
Woman’s single prize money was less than men’s until 2007. It was raised due to a political campaign.
The critical factor ought to be supply and demand. In which case men should get paid more due to the fact that more people watch the men’s tennis than women’s. eg.
Television viewing figures and attendances at tournaments show that, in general, fewer people watch women’s matches than men’s matches, although that trend might be changing. At Wimbledon last year, for example, the men’s final between Roger Federer and Andy Roddick was watched by a BBC TV audience of 5.8m, while 6.8m watched the previous day’s women’s final between Venus Williams and Lindsay Davenport.
Note there is now a campaign to raise the money for wheelchair tennis:
http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/paul-m-davies/wimbledon-prize-money_b_3561719.html
Maybe next year all female players and fans should wear burkas.
Surely the feministas would be happy with that?
They won’t be happy because wearing burkas implies that women need to cover their skin to prevent themselves from being sexually objectified by men. The feministas feel that the only time a man has a right to be sexually attracted to a women is when she explicitly gives him permission, thus the feministas would push for even less clothing in women’s sports.
Reblogged this on The Firewall.
The announcer who made the remarks about the winner not being a “looker” was an idiot, even if take all his remarks in full context.