Disrupting the Borg is expensive and time consuming!
Google Search
-
Recent Posts
- One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- New Video : Analyzing Oil And Gas
- Is Antarctica Melting?
- High Speed Analysis And Visualization
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Fake News Update
- Growth Of Antarctic Sea Ice
- 65 Years Of Progress!
- El Nino To The Rescue?
- Worst March Drought On Record
- ChartGL Process Control Demo
- The Biggest Money Laundering Scam
- Drought In The Headwaters Of Lake Powell
- Unrealistic Expectations Of Water Availability
- Did Bill Gates Do This?
- Worst March Drought On Record In The US
- The Real Hockey Stick Graph
- Analyzing The Western Water Crisis
- Gaslighting 1924
- “Why Do You Resist?”
- Climate Attribution Model
- Fact Checking NASA
- Fact Checking Grok
- Fact Checking The New York Times
- New Visitech Features
Recent Comments
- conrad ziefle on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Timo, Not that one on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Bob G on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Bob G on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Crispin Pemberton-Pigott on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Crispin Pemberton-Pigott on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- william on 65 Years Of Progress!
- arn on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Gordon Vigurs on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
- Gordon Vigurs on One Atomic Bomb Per Hour
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.