Women only want equality when it suits them!

hypothetical situation:

scneario 1:woman yelling at a man on the street & slaps him, people gather around and most if not all side with the woman even though they dont know what actually happened.

scenario 2:man yelling at a woman on the street & slaps her, people gather around and many would attack the man/verbally assault him despite of not knowing what actually happened.

i dont see women ever complaining of the sheer inequality there and favor towards women!!!!

They are being treated as weak damsel in distress and in need of protection. While the men are seen to be capable, strong and macho.

Instead of using the feminist movement as a scapegoat. Why not realise there were a lot of women tennis players and tennis fans, who were calling for women to play the same amount of sets as the men.

women want equality when it suits them, they do not demand equality in situations where they get the better treatment...!!

Tennis is one of those sports where equal pay is not fair. Males play more sets, the pay should reflect their work.

Because I am a man and therefore not worth speaking to?

Bye then

No, no you did not make the tennis rules up. That is an important job, and therefore a man did it.

So you have a big rant at me, I respond, and i'm pissed off

Far from it love.

The prize money was decided in full knowledge that the men would work harder, and in full knowledge that men bring more money into tennis than women. It was also decided in the knowledge that the women play less sets, which allows them to play doubles, and earn more than the men. Serena got paid more than Nadal this year.

Wow, you really need to come up with an original comment, like mine was

Women make up over 50% of the population. Of course it would have been greater.
In standardised jobs men get paid more than women. This isn't equal.
These feminists obviosly have bad taste in porn for this, surely we should pity them?
They also call women who are comfortable with their sexuality wh*res and sl*ts and such. Hence we're back to the elitist fems. of which there are few and far between yet everyone knows of.
Most women I know have felt this way at least once. Little instances that add up to quite a lot in the long run. Very mundane things such as men being taken more seriously for the same claims, and don't even get me started on presentations.
I think it's fair to say I have no problems with self-esteem.

Is there actually any evidence that is true? I don't doubt that it happens on occasion, but does it really happen that much? I've never seen any evidence that still happens today.

What about jobs where pay is negotiable? In that situation it may well be that women are generally paid less for the same job, because they didn't negotiate as well.

Of course I agree that men and women should be paid equally for the same job. I'm just sceptical that women being paid less due to sexism is really that widespread.

As for the tennis thing, either way you spin it, it seems obvious to me that men should be paid more. The games are longer, and you could argue their job is to play well to attract more viewers, in which case the men are generally better at it anyway. Just like how female porn stars are paid more than male ones.

I can't give you evidence but I have experience. You wouldn't notice it, it's not an isuue for the men as it is for the women so men who aren't interested in feminism don't generally look into it.
Jobs where pay is nogotiable is a completely different kettle of fish. It's not really relevant to this discussion.
Lets face it: tennis stars and all other atheletes are payed for their name. Take this world cup, Rooney played terrible, but he gets people tuning in because, well, he's Wayne Rooney. And you can bet he got a hefty sum for that.
And so they should be. They're terrific actresses

It's exactly attitudes like yours that makes debates about this almost impossible

Your tone sounded pissed off, I offer my deepest apologies if I misinterpreted

I think that you're not taking into account "effort". The men play more sets, but this doesn't necessarily mean they expend much more effort.

Let me explain. Men, by and large, are physically superior to women, hence why tennis is seprated by gender in the first place. If a man and a woman were to do exactly the same training programme and were then to compete against one another, the man would win (except in exceptional circumstances to do with gene disposition etc) - say they did a sprint. The woman working at full pelt would run slower than the man working at full pelt. Yet they would still be expending the same effort, and would feel pretty much the same whilst they were printing and in the aftermath. But if the woman wanted to produce as much output as the man, she would have to work that much harder. Similarly, if williams were to spend as much time playing as nadal, she would have to work much harder than he would have done to play for that time.
Therefore, if women had to do the same amount of sets to the men, the women would be wronged because they'd have to work harder for the same amount of money.
As usual with desert rewards, it's not necessarily fair, as what it essentially rewards is the natural lottery - the fact you were born a man rather than a woman, and hence can do more sets.

The current merit system they've set up of course also has it's flaws - the men in this instance are being screwed over.

The problem with things like this is that you can never really ever have a perfect way of sorting this out as whatever you do will be unfair in one way or another.

sighhhh I came up with the most stereotypical response to show how idiotic you were being.

Yup, and it all goes to charity. Just like all the England international pay they get.

And what you've said there doesn't say anything about the injustice that the women get paid the same as the men at Wimbledon? Illogical argument you've made there and I'm struggling to see the link between what was asked and what you've said.