Why are female tennis players paid the same as male tennis players?

Tbh I don’t think there’s any doubting that men are superior in any sport I can think of, but as with most things and as it should be, it’s all about supply and demand. It’s quite a few years ago now but I’m almost certain that in the US the viewing figures for Womens tennis overtook the Mens, that is when the Women fought for equal prize money.

You can’t only go on time taken to play a game to work out prize money because the hours spent on court etc. pale into insignificance when you take into account time spent training. If time spent “performing” was what they were paid for then Usain Bolt would be the lowest paid sports star in the world instead of the highest paid.

Watch the mixed double tennis if you want to see who the superior players are, the players on both teams try to target the opposing female every chance they get – think that says it all.

TheNorfolkMafia wrote:

Ge wrote:

TheNorfolkMafia wrote:

that’s why men are kept apart as they are stronger, faster in every sport ever invented.

I think it is just basic common sense that that statement is clearly not accurate, or based on any reality. As the Olympics demonstrates.

What do the olympics demonstrate ? Name a sport which can be measured in quantifiable measurements such as time/distance/postions where women beat men instead of vague references to my statements being inaccurate. My statements are based on facts… not a single distance run in any olympic event including marathons which are based on endurance have womens finishing times remotely close to men. The fastest woman in the world in every distance would not even make the final in the mens race or the heats in the first place. As we are talking about tennis, the best female tennis player in the world couldn;t beat a guy ranked 203 in the mens event … how does that equate to equality? Both genders are biologically different and to assume otherwise based on some kind of utopian ideal where equality reigns supreme is just daft.

I agree the debate was about tennis, until you started making block statements about sport and gender in general and so called male dominance across the board. It is totally irrelevant what sport you decide qualifies to fit in with your argument, or not. Quite clearly when the outcome of a sporting event is NOT based solely on testosterone levels men are NOT superior at all.

And whilst this isn’t aimed at anyone in particular, a certain kind of man has always got a ready made excuse why men should be paid more than women. If only it was that simple.

At the end of the day…sport is very big business…..not only in money sense but in national pride. There are also factors these days like the surge of women wanting equal pay rights which is fair in it’s self but has got some how lost in the political, media and business propaganda that keeps fueling this debate. High end sport has always been government and nationally invested in and cashed in on by big business with sponsor-ships, merchandising.

The equal pay right has fair issues but is more of a movement about women’s rights than a simple query about pay structure.

All top athletes and sports stars are incredibly rich. Most don’t need all the money they got already so the fighting over the extra few million they could have had is not really about the money.

I mean you got black people fighting for rights, gay people fighting for rights, women fighting for rights. today’s world is all about fighting for rights and it’s true with tennis, as much as other things, the rules don’t always makes sense.

Here’s an interesting question……….why arent there many women playing snooker…after all its a big sport…lots of money in it. There are women referres so why isnt there more of a call for female snooker players?

TheNorfolkMafia wrote:

I can barely think of a single sport that doesn’t rely on speed/power/endurance of which testosterone is a facet of so that narrows it down to a tiny number meaning male dominance across the entire sporting spectrum. Gymnastics /ice skating really is clutching at straws as whilst the females are talented, it’s an artistic sport with ability being judged on presentation/ appearance/execution but even in gymnastics they have different routines with vaults at differing heights due to strength differences etc. If gliding round the ice is the best example of competing at similar levels , it’s a fairly weak argument.

It is not a weak argument at all, in fact it fits in with what my argument would be if it wasn’t 1am and I wasn’t knackered. Why should “tennis” be centered around men and male prowess and so called physical superiority and dominance. For example I read an article that the female game in tennis is poles apart than the male game. They could be two totally different games according to this article. The female game being slower but far more tactical. (this was before the William sisters) If that is the case, at the top level, then women are clearly under far more psychological stress than men because they are making far more decisions and snap judgments in a game than a man and as such, should be rewarded for it.

Lastly, to suggest gymnastics eg is based solely on “artistic merit” is clearly inaccurate, a hugely physical demanding sport, but even so, why should artistic merit etc not count in sport, dominated by grunting men in a male dominated society and sport which favors that so called male physical dominance and going back to what Mister said, why is it that there are not top level female snooker players, quite clearly there are other issues as to why not and absolutely nothing to do with men being superior.

TheNorfolkMafia wrote:

Arc en wrote:

TheNorfolkMafia wrote:

If men work 5 days in an office, women work 3.. what company would pay the same rate to both?

Possibly they would be the same rate but pro rata as in most jobs. In life you are generally paid for the hours you work so you have blown your own argument out of the water. Quite obviously a director / manager in fact every one employed gets paid the same rate or should do if they are at the same level. As the majority of sports prize money is corrupt why are you just singling out tennis? Deuce !

Your points don’t make any sense. As you say pro rata , so as the average mens match lasts longer in tournaments like wimbledon why should pay rates be the same ..” game set and match” you have just argued my case for me. We are discussing tennis as that is the topic, would you go on every thread and say why are we discussing X Y and Z because the thread was directed to a specific topic? No thread can encapsulate every topic known to man can it? In life as you say people are generally paid for the hours they work and during a tournament like wimbledon the men work more hours as they need to win more sets to progress yet you argue the merits of equal pay which goes against the whole gist of your own post

None so blind that don’t want to see …… which brings me back to one of my original statements. Your views are sexist – that old chestnut men are worth more.

As usual your comments are blinkered & aggressive.

YOU CANNOT BE SERIOUS !! lol

• This reply was modified 7 years, 4 months ago by  Arc en.