ilmw Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 ilmw, I did not say the sports were impopular. Shan2k did (both quotes were from him, hence the statement of contradiction) . ...oops sorry quoted wrong post... :laugh:
champagne Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 DO you really think so? http://uk.eurosport.yahoo.com/17052007/58/wimbledon-haas-criticises-equal-pay.html In the article, two of the three male players agreed with the decision.
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 ilmw, I did not say the sports were impopular. Shan2k did (both quotes were from him, hence the statement of contradiction) . I have not heard of an female ice hockey player who is earning on the same level as the NHL pros. I have not heard of a female football (soccer) player who is making $200,000 a week And as men are making that kind of money, women should be making that kind of money too, even if there were no interest in women playing hockey or football. We are all the same PERSON! If you fight for equal pay, you do equal work! Treat each other as the same PERSON. You're just saying that because you want women to be equal regardless if they don't work longer than the men. Equal pay signifies that women are equal to men. What women fight for so much! Gives merit to women. Or just money hungry. I still say women should play best of 5! This issue is contradiction, double-standard, and sexist. But I guess all of that equals "Go with the flow".
ilmw Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 a crowd of 17 is hardly "packed"... the main problem with female based spectator sports is that men aren't interested in watching them and neither are women Alpha... I wouldn't have posted if I did think it was true... I don't watch it myself much.. but... I do know woman who do... so I have actually watched on occasion... as for the World Hockey game... it was a professional hockey arena... and it was PACKED... it was not in someone's home made ice rink, in the backyard..
alphamale Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 I still say women should play best of 5! . why? right now no one is even watching the best of 3 matches...
champagne Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 Actually, Alphamale, if you read the link to the article that Shank so kindly posted, it does state that women's tennis is quite popular.
InsanityImpaired Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 We are all the same PERSON! If you fight for equal pay, you do equal work! Treat each other as the same PERSON. You're just saying that because you want women to be equal regardless if they don't work longer than the men. Equal pay signifies that women are equal to men. What women fight for so much! Gives merit to women. Or just money hungry. But you have not: a) condemned men for getting more prize money when playing 3 sets b) condemned men for (as per your argument) for making millions in the NHL as opposed to their female counterparts - after all it is only work that counts. c) opposed pay differences between female and male soccer football players, despite that both need to play 90 minutes a game. d) actively opposes equal pay for equal work, by pointing to irrelevant factors such as popularity - which have no place in his system, except for when it suits him. So I can only conclude that you have no interest in equality between men and women, with regards to pay; you are only opposed to inequality if women earn equally as much if they may actually have to work less long for the same result. For me that is a sign of a misogynist.
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Ha ha, when did I say that we were all the same person? I don't recall making that statement....and I'm not ranting about anything....you began this post ranting about how unfair it is that a women's champion is going to get a 6% pay raise this year. Anyhoo...... They are physiologically different. They are doing the same work for their bodies. they are equal as human beings. Just because a man is physiologically different doesn't mean that he is superior to the woman. To base the pay on how many sets are played really doesn't make sense because a guy could win in three straight sets, totally wipe out his opponent quickly, and have spent 45 minutes on the court. In the women's final, the women could be playing a tie-breaker set, and end up playing for three sets, and end up playing for an hour and a half to two hours to win. That's how it is in tennis. So....it's not fair to base it on the number of sets played. Seriously. I played varsity tennis in high school and I love watching the game. 1) You said it in another post! You are the same person with the same beliefs right? You're contradicting yourself. You said that gender doesn't have nothing to do with a PERSON! We all are the same people. HA HA HA HA HA!! 2) Women are equal as human beings. If we both get shot we both bleed and die (sorry to sound so brutal). But not 100% completely equal, which is obvious. A man is superior in strength and a women is superior in giving life. But if you shout about equal pay for equal work, you should get paid for it IF you're doing the equal work. No exceptions. Women should stop fighting so hard to be equal to men so badly! Gosh, Let us be men and accept it. 3) 9/10 male tennis players are not going to play and win three straight, especially if they're pros!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Makes no difference according to you. Equal pay for equal work. So why alter the argument? Just seen your opinion. Well I agree.... to a point. Still feel this is a sport and a person should get paid for the work they put in equally regardless of who's brings in more revenue. Educate me on female football, soccer, and hockey... Do the women play as long as the guys in those sports?
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 In the article, two of the three male players agreed with the decision. yeah but you said they all did! lol!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 But you have not: a) condemned men for getting more prize money when playing 3 sets b) condemned men for (as per your argument) for making millions in the NHL as opposed to their female counterparts - after all it is only work that counts. c) opposed pay differences between female and male soccer football players, despite that both need to play 90 minutes a game. d) actively opposes equal pay for equal work, by pointing to irrelevant factors such as popularity - which have no place in his system, except for when it suits him. So I can only conclude that you have no interest in equality between men and women, with regards to pay; you are only opposed to inequality if women earn equally as much if they may actually have to work less long for the same result. For me that is a sign of a misogynist. Well you're showing signs of a misandrist! I don't agree with the pay some of these male athletes get. I think It's too much and unfair. In a way, I kinda agree with the whole revenue thing. But I still feel that they should play the best of 5! Men are superior in strength so I think they should get paid more unless a woman shows she is as equal in that strength as he is. I wish women would stop debunking our attributes. You don't like it when men say, "women are suppose get pregnant and stay at home to take care of the baby!" You gals get furious!!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Shan2k, your arguments are illogical. You are mixing apples (payscale of the entertainment industry) and oranges (worker bee salary). It's like saying that actors should not be compensated while the industry is making billions. They should all be satisfied at worker bee salaries. Also, have you ever watched tennis? If you want to grind it down to work effort, women's tennis is much more grueling because it's more about rallying and finesse than brute strength. Men's tennis relies a lot on acing the opponent off the serve. Racquet stroke for racquet stroke per match falls to the women. No they're doing the exact some work with exact same effort at times. This is sports!
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 "women are suppose get pregnant and stay at home to take care of the baby!" You gals get furious!! Allow me to debunk that. "men are supposed to go out with a spear or bow and arrow and catch fresh meat. They are also supposed to kill or fight off anyone who attempts to steal their mate." I know you will argue that we're now civilized so men should go to work, etc. Same argument holds true about women. We now have Daycares and nannies.
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 No they're doing the exact some work with exact same effort at times. This is sports! And a sport, which is entertainment, should not be calculated based on worker bee grunt effort...
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 You mean none of the women do - despite equal work. And I don't exactly hear a major outcry that it is evil. It is fair to assume, that you are not interested in equality; prize money (I seem like a broken record) for female tennis tournaments is considerably lower than for men's tournaments. And a lot of these tournaments for men are also played over the best of 3 sets (eg. Monte Carlo). And of course that falls on the ears of a deaf man.... What? This wasn't even a reply to you. It was for champagne! LOL! You're iching to point me out as a misogynists!!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Allow me to debunk that. "men are supposed to go out with a spear or bow and arrow and catch fresh meat. They are also supposed to kill or fight off anyone who attempts to steal their mate." I know you will argue that we're now civilized so men should go to work, etc. Same argument holds true about women. We now have Daycares and nannies. Which robs you of motherhood for revenue!! LOL!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 And a sport, which is entertainment, should not be calculated based on worker bee grunt effort... I think is should! Men's football, Basketball and Hockey is....
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Men's strength today is strongly relied on in sports, work, and at home.... Where does spears and arrows come in at?????
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 Which robs you of motherhood for revenue!! LOL! IF a woman's chooses to not be a stay-at-home mother, there's no robbing going on. Don't pull the old guilt trip because it holds no water with me.
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 I think is should! Men's football, Basketball and Hockey is.... Oh? Refer to the multi-million dollar salaries of these players and tell me that they "earned" these contracts...
Star Gazer Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 Okay, time to get serious about this topic. Winnings should be based on a percentage of corresponding earnings. Earnings should be based on both attendance at matches and income derived from media coverage. I don't personally care which gender gets more, as long as it's based on the same rule of thumb. I totally agree. As of right now, women's sports (soccer, basketball, and tennis, specifically) do not bring in the same revenue that men's sports do. Women simply don't draw as large of crowds or generate the same media coverage, that is, unless they are actually engaging in a men's sport against men (like Danica and NASCAR). As such, they bring in a lot less money...and should get paid less than the men. And that's coming from an almost bleeding-heart.
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 IF a woman's chooses to not be a stay-at-home mother, there's no robbing going on. Don't pull the old guilt trip because it holds no water with me. I bet it doesn't pull any guilt! It's your business if you want strangers taking care of your child. I've seen dozens of stories where the Daycare and nannies abused the kids mental or physically! So it's up to the individual. And it does substantially rob you of motherhood! You miss those perish moments and the intense connection a mother has with her child as an infant. Read up on it! But your life, your child!
Author Shan2k Posted June 2, 2007 Author Posted June 2, 2007 Oh? Refer to the multi-million dollar salaries of these players and tell me that they "earned" these contracts... Heck No! I thought I told you that! it's too much money! but I still think you should get paid more on time and ability! The women got the ability just not the time. _________________________________________________ I still say best out of 5 for the women!
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 I bet it doesn't pull any guilt! It's your business if you want strangers taking care of your child. I've seen dozens of stories where the Daycare and nannies abused the kids mental or physically! So it's up to the individual. And it does substantially rob you of motherhood! You miss those perish moments and the intense connection a mother has with her child as an infant. Read up on it! But your life, your child! I've seen hundreds of news stories of parents that have molested, abused and killed their own children. You may want to read about it even within the confines of LS. Once again, invalid argument, unless you want to debate about how much of the best times that men miss, of their childrens' lives when they are at work or out having a beer with their friends.
Trialbyfire Posted June 2, 2007 Posted June 2, 2007 I totally agree. As of right now, women's sports (soccer, basketball, and tennis, specifically) do not bring in the same revenue that men's sports do. Women simply don't draw as large of crowds or generate the same media coverage, that is, unless they are actually engaging in a men's sport against men (like Danica and NASCAR). As such, they bring in a lot less money...and should get paid less than the men. And that's coming from an almost bleeding-heart. I think tennis has changed but I agree about the rest. Danica Patrick is something else!!
Recommended Posts