Should female tennis players have equal prizes? Watch

Poll: Should female tennis players get the same prizes as men?
No (63)
81.82%
Yes (14)
18.18%
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#1
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...
7
reply
ikhan94
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#2
Report 3 years ago
#2
There is that assumption that men and women do the same work so they should get the same, but this simply isnt true, womens tennis games are out of 3 sets, mens are out of 5 so they have to play more, so yes they deserve more, stupid how they changed it, say for example women footballers and men both play 90 minutes then yh they both deserve the same, assuming anyone watches womens football
1
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#3
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#3
(Original post by ikhan94)
There is that assumption that men and women do the same work so they should get the same, but this simply isnt true, womens tennis games are out of 3 sets, mens are out of 5 so they have to play more, so yes they deserve more, stupid how they changed it, say for example women footballers and men both play 90 minutes then yh they both deserve the same, assuming anyone watches womens football
The amount of sets is irrelevant unless you count in the extra TV ads time. Would you be happy working for a sales company that paid you the same as your colleagues even though you made 3 times more money for them? This is what pro sports are about : money.
0
reply
rockrunride
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#4
Report 3 years ago
#4
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.
5
reply
TheArtofProtest
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#5
Report 3 years ago
#5
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.
6
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#6
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#6
(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.
Actually there are more female players than male in the richest top 10 . But this isn't about that, it's about the principle. It's about how people who have been affected by the brain disease that is middle class/white feminism see the world and what their idea of ''fairness'' is : that women ''deserve equality'' simply by being the owner of a vajin.
0
reply
Sayed0123
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#7
Report 3 years ago
#7
The men's game earns more revenue so male players should be rewarded more than female players, who bring in less revenue.
3
reply
rockrunride
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#8
Report 3 years ago
#8
(Original post by Erebor)
Actually there are more female players than male in the richest top 10 . But this isn't about that, it's about the principle. It's about how people who have been affected by the brain disease that is middle class/white feminism see the world and what their idea of ''fairness'' is : that women ''deserve equality'' simply by being the owner of a vajin.
I honestly don't give a toss. And I like tennis.
0
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#9
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#9
(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.
Andy Murray said he would be surprised if any of the women would be in the top 1000 in the men's. That means even Serena would struggle to earn a single ATP point in the most poverty local tournaments.
0
reply
richpanda
Badges: 16
Rep:
?
#10
Report 3 years ago
#10
The men are better players and also play for longer. So they shouldn't be paid equally.
3
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#11
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#11
(Original post by rockrunride)
I honestly don't give a toss. And I like tennis.
This isn't about tennis. It's about how irrational and oblivious to reality feminists are. It's about what happens to the logical side of your brain after being infected by marxism. It's more of a mental health issue, really.
1
reply
Tcannon
Badges: 18
Rep:
?
#12
Report 3 years ago
#12
Using economic principles of supply and demand to calculate market price. Men's tennis generates more advertising revenues, higher television ratings, more ticket sales and sponsoring. By commercial reasons, men merit higher market price as there is a higher demand for their tennis product. People vote with their feet and men's matches generate more demand: Tickets prices for the Wimbledon finals on secondary market: Men's final at £2,400 and women's final at £1,600. In same rounds, men's matches are full whereas women's matches are only 40-60% watched. Hence women's matches are played in smaller stadiums rather Centre Court or Court 1. There are more fans (300-500) watching Federer/Nadal on the practice(!) courts than in some competitive women's matches. In women's tennis tournaments, organisers struggle to sell tickets and one sees plenty empty rows.

In short: Due to political correctness, women's tennis as a product is artificially higher priced. It is subsidized by men's tennis.

Golf and football are popular sports played by men and women. Yet they have different payment structures.
2
reply
Chief Wiggum
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#13
Report 3 years ago
#13
I think men generate more revenue, therefore deserve higher prize money.
0
reply
Chief Wiggum
Badges: 20
Rep:
?
#14
Report 3 years ago
#14
(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.
Lol exactly. If the women are just as good as the men, why not just let them compete with each other? If they don't want to do this because they aren't as good, why should they be getting paid the same anyway?
0
reply
user73867
Badges: 19
Rep:
?
#15
Report 3 years ago
#15
Poll currently at 8/0,


a rare moment of lucidity for TSR.



Many congratulations...
1
reply
leinad2012
Badges: 12
Rep:
?
#16
Report 3 years ago
#16
Men's game brings in more money, play at a much higher level and play for longer.

I'm all for equal pay.... when those factors are also equal.

I watched an atp womens game a week ago, 2nd round I think. One of the players served 6 double faults in the space of 2 service games. How on earth could someone say they are doing the same job as men in the same situation?
1
reply
SirMilkSheikh
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#17
Report 3 years ago
#17
(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.
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.
0
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#18
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#18
(Original post by leinad2012)
Men's game brings in more money, play at a much higher level and play for longer.

I'm all for equal pay.... when those factors are also equal.

I watched an atp womens game a week ago, 2nd round I think. One of the players served 6 double faults in the space of 2 service games. How on earth could someone say they are doing the same job as men in the same situation?
Actually I wouldn't be against women getting paid more even if their level of play is pathetic, as long as they bring in the money. And of course, when some sheik in arabia sponsors a female only tourney he can pay them whatever he wants.
0
reply
isitisisitis
Badges: 7
Rep:
?
#19
Report 3 years ago
#19
(Original post by Chief Wiggum)
I think men generate more revenue, therefore deserve higher prize money.
This is circular logic.
0
reply
Erebor
Badges: 2
Rep:
?
#20
Report Thread starter 3 years ago
#20
(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.
I believe he was actually smoking and drinking during the breaks of those matches. And this a journeyman who has never won a singles tourney in his life.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

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.

Personalise

How did your AQA A-level Psychology Paper 1 go?

Loved the paper - Feeling positive (212)
21.88%
The paper was reasonable (419)
43.24%
Not feeling great about that exam... (185)
19.09%
It was TERRIBLE (153)
15.79%

Watched Threads

View All