I’ve always looked at it as it gives countries a way to compete against one another without going to war and it allows people to take out their aggretions in a safe manner.
No, these are OLD possibilities, as in the 1960s and older.
Your suggestion that women should not try to play professional sports but should feel happy and fulfilled taking jobs on the sidelines is sexist. I haven’t engaged in the thread’s very interesting conversation about whether women in team sports should be paid the same as male athletes. The arguments against this were based on popularity and profitability, not on whether women should play at all. YOU are the only one who suggested women shouldn’t play professionally but should find fulfillment in non-athletic roles. Apparently, you think women just really, really want to be involved in professional sports teams somehow and that their talent and athleticism are negligible, so darn, why they can’t they be happy just being scorekeepers? What’s next, suggesting they can get fulfillment by marrying pro athletes and producing male sports stars?
Are you always a jerk? Did you even read the link you were responding to?
This topic has been well covered by Dr. Jordan Peterson.
Equality of outcome is a very bad thing for this world.
Equality of opportunity is what we want to focus on.
People should not be getting equal pay because of their genders but because of their level of competence, output, and quality of work.
Umm, I think I should report myself for threadshitting. I apologize to everyone.
Try actually reading the thread. Especially post #138.
For tripping the thread a yellow card is issued.
You’ve never heard of the NWHL? The WNBA? :dubious: Players like Amanda Kessel or Sheryl Swoopes?
That glass ceiling you are pointing out to us isn’t that new, and is way overdue for a good smashing.
I am SOOO glad the32% of women who work for the NFL dont listen to people like you. Where BTW, often long term they make more money and have more job security than many of the players.
And what is wrong being a scorekeeper? What is wrong with being a person who does stats? You ever done it? I did for high schools. It’s not easy. However if you get good at it it often it leads to better jobs in sports.
BUT, you think its demeaning and women should shun sports unless they are on the field/court.
Glad they dont listen to people like you.
Honestly no. But then I hardly keep up with any sports other than Kansas City or University of Kansas teams. Are their games on tv?
Thing is at mens pro and college games the ticket paying audience is nearly half women. If women supported womens teams as much as they support mens you would see more pay equity.
Women are free to play professional sports. But why would they need the income generated by anyone else? If the women’s teams become as popular and generate the same revenue that the men’s teams do, then surely they need to be paid on par with the revenue they generate.
Are they?
Most of the revenue generated by professional teams come from TV deal, not ticket sales (if I remember correctly)
The Womens national team may generate more revenue over some period of time but overall men’s soccer generates much more than women’s soccer. Because of this members of the men’s national team has large salaries on their club teams and does not need a regular salary to make ends meet. Meanwhile the women get a much higher percentage of their income from the national team.
That is the reason the women opted to have a contract that relies less on contingencies while the men have a contract that is less secure but potentially more lucrative. That is inseparable from the overall popularity of the types of soccer.
Well, he said they lacked the necessary athletic talent, putting employment as a top-level professional athlete out of reach.
This is unquestionably true for essentially 100% of women - and for 99.97% of men. IOW, only a microscopic fraction of the populace has anything approaching the skill necessary to play top-tier professional sports.
The fraction interested in sport careers is of course very much larger. It thus makes enormous sense for these to pursue any of the many sport-related jobs that don’t require athletic skill. Nothing sexist about noting this.
There is a reason people cherry pick that time frame.
2016 is the only year in which the women brought in more revenue than the men. If you go back further it isn’t even close.
We need to be looking at an 8 or 10 year span to determine revenue generation. That would include 2 world cup events and 2 olympics.
This CBS News article mentions the reasons given for the decision to dismiss much of the USWNT’s case:
This makes it sound like the WNT argument amounts to “We regret the terms of the CBA we chose, because as things have turned out, choosing the one that matched the MNT’s CBA would have yielded more money. Can the court please reach back in time and give us now what we freely rejected then?”
Dont forget sponsorships and alot of that comes from having good marketing. All successful teams, even high school, have good marketing departments.
For example check out the webpage for Kansas City’s premier womens roller derby team, The KC Roller Warriors.
Just out of interest, then, who do you think should get all the money that people pay to watch sports? Would you prefer that it go straight to the billionaire team owners, bypassing the players altogether?
I don’t think people should pay actors or artists or web designers or coders either. If people want to do that stuff for fun, have at it. I don’t think professional content creation is a good idea overall. If I need someone to design a website, they should do it for me for free, and if I want to watch a movie, well, I guess I’m just going to be completely out of luck.
There’s a reasonably extensive and very interesting legal analysis of this issue on the Volokh Conspiracy blog.
The author, Paul Cassell, who is a Professor of Law with a distinguished legal career, believes that the summary judgment ruling against the Women’s National Team in this case “is dubious and will likely be overturned on appeal.”
I’m not going to go through all of the points he makes. If you’re interested, you can read the article. But he does address the issue of the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and argues that, in order to reach the conclusion that he did about the WNT’s actions, the judge made far too many assumptions about how a jury would weigh the evidence.
Note that, in all of this Cassell is not arguing that the Women’s National Team should necessarily win their pay-related claims. His argument is that the case should go to a jury, rather than being dismissed on an order of summary judgment.