Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free

Should female tennis players have equal prizes? Watch

  • View Poll Results: Should female tennis players get the same prizes as men?
    No
    63
    81.82%
    Yes
    14
    18.18%

    Offline

    19
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by isitisisitis)
    This is circular logic.
    It isn't; it is perhaps badly phrased though.

    By revenue, I mean stuff like ticket sales, advertising revenue etc.
    Offline

    0
    ReputationRep:
    Firstly, equivocating all feminists with white middle-class feminists betrays your ethnocentric privileged position. As a feminist myself, I don't give a sh*t about tennis or who gets paid what. There are way bigger issues out there. There's this thing called 3rd wave feminism and intersectionality.. look it up and educate yourself before you start attributing views to groups and then deriding a whole political movement because of tennis...
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    Why of course yes! So surprised to see so many nays on this. No one else has mentioned the fact that female athletes are less powerful than male athletes partly explains why the women's game only goes to 3 sets.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Erebor)
    Djokovic caused a SJW/feminist media uproar a few weeks ago by expressing his opinion that men should make more since they bring in so much more money to the tourneys they take part in. He is talking about the tournaments where both male and female players play at the same time and the women are paid as much as men even though the men bring in far more income through sponsors, TV rights, tickets, merchandise etc.

    First of all the amount of sets played is irrelevant in the way most people look at it (the relevance come from men's matches having a lot more TV ads because of their length), before anyone gets into that. Tennis is a business and the organizers of tournaments can afford to offer the prizes because they get their money from the sources mentioned earlier. Women are a side show as far as money/public interest is concerned. I remember female Roland Garros semis where the stands where barely half full. The closest thing I can think of is paying an act opening for The Rolling Stones the same because ''mah equality''. Which would be absolutely****ingridiculous.

    This is a perfect example of how feminists see ''equality'' : women should be ''equal'' to men simply because they are women, the circumstances are irrelevant. They don't need to ''beat'' men at whatever the ''game'' is, they just deserve it on account of their genitals. I guess it makes sense since feminism is basically gender marxism.

    EDIT: People not getting this, IT'S NOT ABOUT TENNIS. It's about the pay gap, it's about quotas in unis, company boards, jobs, election lists and everywhere else where women are getting preferential treatment simply because they are women. It doesn't matter that they would be obliterated if they competed directly against men, everything has to be fluffy and PC. But even mentioning it will make the media blow up with social justice feels and end up in the ''culprit'' apologizing in tears. So much for patriarchy...
    They should not grunt and exert themselves like they're getting pounded by a 20 incher
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Chief Wiggum)
    It isn't; it is perhaps badly phrased though.

    By revenue, I mean stuff like ticket sales, advertising revenue etc.
    I see what you mean but I still think it's a kind of circular logic because:

    the men's game is better rewarded in prize money
    this bring greater esteem and interest to it
    more revenu is generated from it as a result

    and we are back to believing it deserves higher prize money.

    Of course there are other things influencing these decisions however the male game has always been better remunerated, which has effected its development up to how it is seen today (to which this thread is testimony).
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by isitisisitis)
    I see what you mean but I still think it's a kind of circular logic because:

    the men's game is better rewarded in prize money
    this bring greater esteem and interest to it
    more revenu is generated from it as a result

    and we are back to believing it deserves higher prize money.

    Of course there are other things influencing these decisions however the male game has always been better remunerated, which has effected its development up to how it is seen today (to which this thread is testimony).
    Wait, are you saying men are far better than women at tennis because of the money in it? And if money was the issue, just take a look at the WTA site. Tennis is by far the most lucrative sport for women, they make the same money as the men while being far worse at the sport and being incredibly inconsistent : Simona Halep has already earned over $11 million at the age of 24 without ever winning a single GS tourney and only reaching one GS final. And this is just tennis money, as I mentioned before there are more women than men in the top 10 richest tennis players list. The top women would be massacred by guys who can't even get into the male top 1000 but hey this is what equality is all about, ey?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    As long as men and women don't play against each other in the same tournaments, they shouldn't be earning the same amount, it should just depend on the individual tournaments and how much money they bring in.

    Also, voted "yes" by mistake
    Offline

    7
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Erebor)
    Wait, are you saying men are far better than women at tennis because of the money in it? And if money was the issue, just take a look at the WTA site. Tennis is by far the most lucrative sport for women, they make the same money as the men while being far worse at the sport and being incredibly inconsistent : Simona Halep has already earned over $11 million at the age of 24 without ever winning a single GS tourney and only reaching one GS final. And this is just tennis money, as I mentioned before there are more women than men in the top 10 richest tennis players list. The top women would be massacred by guys who can't even get into the male top 1000 but hey this is what equality is all about, ey?

    No, I'm not saying that I'm just saying what I said. I did not know those statistics that you just mentioned though and that does change my view a bit. The bottom line is still that the tournament money should be the same for men and women in my opinion. Of course men are 'better' but men and women should have equal opportunity in sport.
    • Welcome Squad
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    Welcome Squad
    My take on this:

    I think that mens tennis players should be earning more at the moment. If female tennis players want to earn the same amount of money, make them play the best of 5 sets - not the best of 3. Or alternatively, make it so that the male tennis players only have to do the best of 3 sets.

    You play more sets, you earn more money. That's how it should be :yep:
    • Thread Starter
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nadile)
    As long as men and women don't play against each other in the same tournaments, they shouldn't be earning the same amount, it should just depend on the individual tournaments and how much money they bring in.

    Also, voted "yes" by mistake
    Ideally yes, but women wouldn't even get in the top 1000 if they played men, no woman would ever be a pro (tennis is a very tough sport to make a living from, only a few hundred people can make a living from it). And of course, the organizers of women-only tournaments can pay them whatever they want, it's their decision. Btw it's very refreshing to see a woman using logic instead of feelings, sadly it's quite a rare sight especially on here. Are you a maths/science person by any chance?
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Erebor)
    Ideally yes, but women wouldn't even get in the top 1000 if they played men, no woman would ever be a pro (tennis is a very tough sport to make a living from, only a few hundred people can make a living from it). And of course, the organizers of women-only tournaments can pay them whatever they want, it's their decision. Btw it's very refreshing to see a woman using logic instead of feelings, sadly it's quite a rare sight especially on here. Are you a maths/science person by any chance?
    I know that women wouldn't really be able to compete. Problem is that men's sports tend to be more popular, so by default they will bring more money and let them earn more. My point is basically that if you can't compare different tournaments, their size and popularity will affect the prize poll and it just so happens that unfortunately women are at a disadvantage here. I imagine there must be some sport where women earn more?

    Also, I do Physics at uni. So yes
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    This video summarises how pay in sport should be viewed: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=w5xRHz8Su6E
    Offline

    17
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by rockrunride)
    The men's game is bigger business and they play for longer, so in theory, yes they should earn more.

    But I'm not going to waste my energy fighting a millionaire's corner on a financial issue.
    (Original post by richpanda)
    The men are better players and also play for longer. So they shouldn't be paid equally.
    ^ Them.
    Offline

    15
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Nadile)
    I know that women wouldn't really be able to compete. Problem is that men's sports tend to be more popular, so by default they will bring more money and let them earn more. My point is basically that if you can't compare different tournaments, their size and popularity will affect the prize poll and it just so happens that unfortunately women are at a disadvantage here. I imagine there must be some sport where women earn more?
    This is an interesting point. But should we really be thinking along the lines where individual interests should be targeted with gender issues? Point being, that rather than focusing on the fans, interest groups should market female sports in a manner that makes the sport more appealing. This happened with cricket in India, where large interest groups were incentivised to invest in pushing the sport and creating a lucrative league. If I'm not mistaken, the IPL has a revenue of over $200 million: www.forbes.com/2009/08/27/cricket-india-ipl-business-sports-ipl.html
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SirMilkSheikh)
    Already happened in 1998. The Williams sisters were the best in the world
    No, they weren't. Serena Williams at the time was 16 years old, ranked barely in the top 100, and hadn't played in a Grand Slam yet.
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    I think at Grand Slam level where the men actually play more sets, it's fair to say men should get more. At other tournaments where both play best of 3 sets, it should be equal. The "who brings in more money" argument is stupid - by that logic, the more popular, well-known players should always get more prize money regardless of how far they actually get.
    Offline

    6
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by TheArtofProtest)
    For a year, they should mix it up (i.e: men and women can play each other), and then when the females start dropping like flies and the men go onto win what most likely will be all the tournaments, then the feminists will finally shut their gobs.
    I am all for the opening up of all sports, meaning the end of male and female teams. Of course, the top teams in almost every sport would be full of men, but I am a believer in equality
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by SirMilkSheikh)
    Already happened in 1998. The Williams sisters were the best in the world and confidently said they could beat any man over 200 in rankings. Well they were brought back down to earth by Kaarsten Braach who was ranked 203. He was a chain smoker and binge-drinker and he wasn't even trying when he smashed them 5-1 or 6-0 or whatever it was.
    lmao
    Offline

    16
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by spotify95)
    My take on this:

    I think that mens tennis players should be earning more at the moment. If female tennis players want to earn the same amount of money, make them play the best of 5 sets - not the best of 3. Or alternatively, make it so that the male tennis players only have to do the best of 3 sets.
    Men only play 5 sets at Grand Slams, everywhere else they play best of 3 as well.

    There has been some talk of some sort of partial introduction of 5 set matches at women's Grand Slam tournaments - I've read a couple of articles suggesting they might consider bringing them in from quarter-finals onwards - and I think this might be a good idea, at least as a trial.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    no - paying them equally because they're women assumes that their gender is a factor to their payment. it's not. skill and demand-satisfaction is (or "should be", anyway).
    a similar situation would be having two people of the same height having to be given the same wage even though they have different levels of skill - why would you give them equal wages even though they have different skills? simple: because people simply don't understand that even though they are equal in one respect (their status), they are not equal in another (their skills)

    we live in a society where it is easy to not think through these kinds of mechanisms behind why men and women earn different amounts of money for cultural and politically correct reasons (i.e. to question the idea of gender equality payments would be to attract potential suspicions of sexism). reality isn't politically correct though. reality doesn't care about your ignorance or your feelings. reality dictates that skill brings in $. if women don't have as much skill on average as men, then they'll not bring in as much $. simple.
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Has a teacher ever helped you cheat?
    Useful resources
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Write a reply...
    Reply
    Hide
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.