Equal Pay For Women Athletes

The US Women’s soccer team, which can’t beat middle school boys, is demanding equal pay with the men’s team.

FC Dallas under-15 boys squad beat the U.S. Women’s National Team in a scrimmage

Meanwhile, you can pick up tickets for tomorrow’s men’s Wimbledon semi-final – for only $9,000.

Federer-Nadal Wimbledon tickets vault to staggering costs – AOL News

This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

33 Responses to Equal Pay For Women Athletes

  1. arn says:

    When a local team of U 15 boys can beat the female world champions
    than the world best U 13 boys can do this too.

    But the real interessting questions is:
    Do those U 15 boys from Dallas get the same(or more,as they are obviously better) money as the female world champions do?

  2. LvJohn says:

    Actually judging by recent trends the US team will probably soon consist solely of Transgender women. So maybe they are just getting ahead of the game with their requests. Another victory for feminism Yeah.

  3. Gator says:

    I have a novel idea. How about equal pay for equal performance? When female athletes can bring the same profit as men, then they should receive equal pay.

    Everything has a value, and everything is not equal. You wouldn’t spend the same amount of money on a mint 1984 Yugo that you would on a mint 1963 Corvette, even though they are both cars.

    Guess what you drive when everyone is equal?

    https://nl.wikipedia.org/wiki/Lada_2105#/media/Bestand:Wikiniva13a.jpg

    • Robertv says:

      If it depends on progressives soon all women athletes will be men who just feel like women.

    • TimA says:

      That is one sweet ride…

    • Colorado Wellington says:

      I also have a novel idea although I must give full credit to woke Progressives like Rapinoe for moving the Overton window and championing the full emancipation of the oppressed.

      Open up women’s soccer to men. Let men compete for spots on the US women’s team. Everybody must be treated equally.

      It’s shameful and blatantly unconstitutional that some American institutions still support segregation. The legal doctrine of separate but equal belongs into the dustbin of history.

      • Gator says:

        Rapinoe is a woman? Maybe someone should tell her.

        • rah says:

          No matter which of the 70+ sexual identifications she goes by, part of what is repelling about Rapinoe to me is that it’s so obvious she thinks it’s all about her/him/it.

          • Gator says:

            The left is always loudly pointing out that we are not all the same. The rest of us probably wouldn’t pay much attention to the differences, but we get them thrust in our faces 24/7.

            I have never once allowed my sexuality to define me, and I certainly do not go around with bumper stickers and flags touting my heterosexuality. I have never marched in a straight pride parade.

            I must be oppressed.

          • Colorado Wellington says:

            It’s impossible to keep marching through life.

            Whoever said this got it right:

      • ken says:

        Just do a unisex and enjoy the view. Rapinoe and every other woman will be left on the sideline while only men play. Biology says, “Sucks to be a female athlete.” And I say this as a father of three female athletes.

    • Robertv says:

      If it depends on progressives you don’t drive at all. You spend all day in front of a shop to see if they have anything to sell.

  4. Weylan McAnally says:

    Mens World Cup tournament produces over $6 billion in revenue while the women’s World Cup produces only a puny $130 million. The men produce 45 times the revenue, but are not paid 45 times more in salary. Men are paid out $400 million while the women receive $30 million. This is only 11 times the total revenue instead of 45 times.

    Despite that ridiculous amount of income disparity, the top US men are paid about the same as the top US women. The pay disparity is very large for lower end female players, however.

    One could validly argue that the top US women are vastly overpaid given the large income disparity between men and women World Cup soccer. Would the women accept 45 times less than the men in salary? Doubtful.

    • Phil. says:

      But on the world stage the US Men’s soccer team isn’t consistently good enough to make the World Cup competition, on the rare occasion that they have made it they don’t progress far. On the other hand the Women’s team has been the best in the world for some time and have won the last two World Cups. My understanding is that the US Women’s team does bring in the same or maybe more revenue to the US Soccer Federation. More US TV viewers watched the Women’s final than watched the Men’s final last year.

      • Weylan McAnally says:

        The top US women players already make as much as the top US men. The pay disparity comes in the lower tier players and in potential “prize money” or bonuses. But there’s another challenge in comparing the earnings of men and women players: They face different pay structures. The collective bargaining agreement for the women’s team provides for (guaranteed) salary-based pay. The men’s team earns bonus-based pay or “pay-for-play,” which is less steady and means the men don’t get paid anything if they don’t make the roster.

        I have an idea. Let the US Women team play the 2018 men’s NCAA champion Maryland Terrapins. If they cannot defeat that team, then their salaries will be lowered to that same level. Zero.

      • Colorado Wellington says:

        Phil swings and strikes out, again.

      • Gator says:

        Big fish. Small pond.

        What matters is how much the overall games bring in.

        The pay gap is an outrage, outraged pundits proclaimed. Others fired back that the men’s World Cup last year generated $6 billion, of which the participants split $400 million, or about 7 percent of the total revenue. The women’s World Cup is expected to generate $131 million, of which the women’s teams are splitting $30 million, or about 23 percent of the overall revenue. Arguably, compared to the men, the women were actually grossly overpaid.

        So should we now demand that male models make the same as female models?

        The pay gap also extends to the modeling rank-and-file. Female models make an average of $41,300 annually, which is 148% more than the men, who earn an average of about $28,000, according to data from Payscale.

        Why not just pay everyone the same living wage?

      • rah says:

        So Phil thinks that the players an Bush league baseball team that consistently dominates the competition should be payed as much as the players on a Major League team that has a poor winning record.

        Tell you what Phil, lets have the US women’s team take on the US Men’s team. Winner takes all!

        • Phil. says:

          “So Phil thinks that the players an Bush league baseball team that consistently dominates the competition should be payed as much as the players on a Major League team that has a poor winning record.”
          Suggest you read it again. What I said was that if an organization has two teams, one of which is the best in the world and brings in more revenue than the other, it’s reasonable that their pay scales should reflect that difference.

          • Gator says:

            What does that have to do with womens’ soccer? They do not bring in more revenue than mens’ soccer does.

            … the men’s World Cup last year generated $6 billion… The women’s World Cup is expected to generate $131 million…

            Poor Phil, so confused. But that is what happens to lefties…

          • Phil. says:

            What does that have to do with womens’ soccer? They do not bring in more revenue than mens’ soccer does.

            The US women’s soccer team does bring in more revenue to their organization that the US men’s soccer team does. Those are the entities that are negotiating.

          • Gator says:

            The NBA brings in more money than the WNBA. Mens’ soccer brings in more money than womens’ soccer, it doesn’t matter how good the team is, what matters is how much revenue they generate.

            What part of supply and demand do you knuckleheads not get? The women have every right to negotiate contracts, and if they don’t like the terms they can find employment eslewhere.

            For the 2018 men’s World Cup, the prize money was $400 million, compared to $30 million for the Women’s World Cup in 2019. Given the vast difference in total funds available to allocate, it’s essentially guaranteed that the women would end up with far less prize money than the men could have — even though the women won the championship.

            Glad you enjoy womens’ soccer, but most of the world prefers to watch the men play, which is why they earn more money.

      • arn says:

        Well,Phil.

        The “World Stage” in female soccer is almost inexistent.

        99% of their “fame” and attraction they get is being the shadow of the most popular male sports.

        There are about 40 nations that play male soccer on a very high level,
        while there are at best 5 female that have even have a chance to win against a good team of 14 years olds.

        The gap is much closer in volleyball,as male volleyball is just so much brute force that a rally is generally very short,while females usually have longer and more entertaining rallies.

        And the gap gets reversed when you can attract enough people as Ronda Roussey has proven.
        She made more money than most of the male fighters
        though in real live she would be beaten up by 16 old hoodrat.

        There is a simple law:
        Male are more into atheletic stuff as during history women
        were more into collecting and taking care of children.
        (that”s why in mongolia nowadays beduins sent their daughters to university but not their sons,as the daughters are pretty useless for hard work)
        female are known for beauty and elegance.

        That”s why women earn more money as models
        or attract more people with eurhytmics,gymnastics etc.
        while men do this on the physical side.

        • Colorado Wellington says:

          This is true, arn, but if you want to be thorough you must also tell Phil about other scientific breakthroughs like the recent discoveries that high school girls form cliques, lions kill other animals and eat them, water flows downhill and the sun rises in the east.

  5. jst1 says:

    Weren’t these wages collectively bargained?
    Who is discriminating?

    • Accordionsrule says:

      It’s hypocritical. For decades the colleges have tried to spread the football money amongst the women’s and lower/no income sports. Now a women’s team is a money producer it suddenly becomes mine, mine, mine.
      Also hypocritical is a self-described LGBTQ activist to be totally silent on the rights of transgenders to take over every spot on every girl/woman sport team in the world.
      It’s a matter of be careful what you wish for.

  6. Bruce of Newcastle says:

    Cartoonist Mike Lester nails it today.
    When the ladies can bring in the same dough they can have the same pay.

  7. MGJ says:

    Take away the coercion and let the fans decide with their wallets. If the women command more pay than men – even if not based purely on sporting achievement, perhaps it’s just great entertainment – then well done, good effort.

    If not then try harder or stop complaining.

  8. Gamecock says:

    Employers pay what they have to pay to attract and retain people who can do what they want done.

    Share of revenues, audience size, what somebody else makes, etc. have nothing to do with it.

    Until government gets involved. Distorting the marketplace, which they call “helping.” Which surprisingly looks like pandering to others.

  9. richard verney says:

    Women in tennis, are on a much higher hourly pay rate. How is that fair?

    Bjorn Borg, one of the all time greats of the men’s game, won in prize money some US$ 3,655,751, whereas a contemporary top class women player, Chris Evert won $8,895,195. Both are greats of the game. Evert might have had a bit more success, largely because of the lack of depth in the womens game, but even taking her extra success into account, is it right that she should have accumulated more than double the prize money won by Borg?

    The fair and equal pay for women in tennis, would be to calculate the number of hours the men’s championship winner spent on court, obtain an hour rate, and then apply that hourly rate to the number of hours that the women championship winner spent on court. Essentially, you would apply something similar to each stage/round.

    I am aware, of course, of the argument that women only play the best of 3 sets not the best of 5 sets, but the lack of depth in women’s tennis does not warrant the best of 5 set matches. In the early rounds, one frequently sees a 6-0, 6-1 result. Do spectators really want to see a 6-0. 6-1, 6-0 match or would that just be tedious? Even in the later stages, and even the final itself, there are often walk overs.

    A good women’s match which is tight and competitive can be good tom watch, but these are far too rare.

  10. Gamecock says:

    Solution: announce minimum pay for the women will be a million dollars a year. Those who deserve it will get ten million a year. Then state you are bankrupt, and are closing up shop. All employees laid off.

  11. Tel says:

    As soon as Rapinoe’s team can beat a better paid team than themselves, they can lay claim to the higher pay. Welcome to open competition.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.