Anti-male discrimination: Australian Open tennis.

Originally posted by Wyn Hawks
...thats what all the armchair racket slingers say as they lift their belly up off of their laps and tromp to the fridge for their next beer...

LOL. Maybe so, for your stereotypical ''armchair slingers'', but sadly I don't fall into your categories.

Sorry about that.


I'm a non-smoking teetotaller who says ''NO'' to recreational drugs. Sorry about that.


I play football ( soccer ), cricket, rugby, tennis, and love to utilise my athletic abilities.

reply to post by Wyn Hawks


Sorry, I almost forgot to mention...

I'd easily give the likes of Wozniacki, Serena and Venus Williams, and any other of these ''top'' female players, a decent match... And I'm sure that I'd easily beat these ''professional'' female players in a genuine match...

It's not my fault that I'm a half-decent tennis player, now is it ?!

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes

I agree that male tennis players are the main draw to any tennis tournament. I, personally, get bored watching most female matches - I said most not all. I took notice to the women receiving the same amount as the men last year watching some of the Slams. But did not really think much of it except for how very much money winning just 1 Slam tournament would get someone!! Hell, I could lose in the first round and still walk away with $20,000. That is more than I, currently, make in a whole year..........

Anyway, if the men are not complaining about it themselves, I do not see why it should be a bother for anyone else.

Originally posted by wagtail
Seriously! Where do women get off!!!? I mean, come on, thinking they can participate in their chosen sport against evenly matched opponents of the same gender!

There's no problem with a woman participating in a sport, and thinking that she's succeeded ( aww, bless ).

The problem lies with the fact that all female sportswomen that I've seen, just aren't as good as the men.

Originally posted by wagtail
This is crazy - I mean, let's be honest here - at the end of the day men are stronger, faster, more intelligent, more useful, better to watch, more qualified, harder working and jeez, the list just goes on and on...

By Jove !

I think you've got it !



I appreciate the sarcasm of your post, but, still...

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


Hehe
the world's a crazy ol' place...
cheers
Wag

Originally posted by wagtail
Hehe

the world's a crazy ol' place...
cheers
Wag

Roughly translated as: ''you've got me on this one, Sherlock''...

Thanks.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


As a male all I can think of is, who gives a shint. Besides aren't all the spectator sports athletes salaries based on scale by how much draw potential they have and popularity. The ladies might lose if they played against the males, but if they put buts in seats and sell tickets and whatever else tennis is about, then who really cares, maybe they got more females watching tennis now a days then in the past, so the female players are asking and deserving a raise. I mean I don't freaking know what your supposed to do in tennis other then hit that ball back and forth and, they keep saying love over and over for some reason, but I don't see no male discrimination there. Besides tennis is kind of boring to watch, but at least its not golf, now watching golf is like watching paint dry.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


Bobby Riggs said something similar to what you are saying, and we all know how that turned out.

Since you are not playing in the Open, why do you care who gets how much money?

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


So if you are a half-decent tennis player. why are you not playing professionally? Why don't you get in touch with the Williams sisters' agents and challenge either of them to a match? Or since you are so good, why not challenge them to a 2-on-1 match?

reply to post by galadofwarthethird



The problem is that Tennis is a perfect example of what women and feminist's mean when they say "equal pay for equal work". What they really really mean is that they want "equal to or more pay for doing much,much less work".

And that is a problem to all us guy's unless we want to be reduced to a slave like status. Small things tend to lead to big things eventually.

reply to post by Sherlock Holmes


I gotta agree with the OP. The women exert far less effort than the men, mainly because they play far fewer games.

There are multiple, far better players than Wozniaki. The problem is that the racquets have ruined the joints of the hard hitters. It starts with the wrist, then the elbow, shoulder, hips, knees, ankle. There's no shock absorption, so the bones and joint sockets take the abuse. As much as I love tennis, it is a dead, altered sport. I'd never allow my children to play with anything but a wood frame.

If you watch slow motion ball strikes, they don't even try to come near the center of the racquet anymore. They developed new string material that attempts to soften the hang time, but all it really does is to provide spin in that off center hit, in a fraction of the time that wood frames do. Tennis will never be the same, and neither will the persons who play professionally be able to walk when they hit fifty.

Just for reference, who made it a rule that women should play 3 sets while men play 5?

And also, they play for trophies - The money they win is a bonus. Think about it, any famous sports personality can earn money through sponsorship and what not.

Maybe you should compare the incomes of the top male tennis star to the top female tennis star and i'm sure you'll find he's the breadwinner, coz...women belong in the home /end sarcasm.

I'm quite sure the ITF makes more money on female tennis, since -at least around here- it's far more popular than male tennis. Having two female topplayers (Henin and Clijsters) in our country might explain of course..
Equal price money seems just fair to me.

And I'm male, with no interest whatsoever in any sports competition.

Forget about the money, sponsors cover that anyway..

My question is, Why do they call it the "Womens Open" ??
Open suggests it's open to anyone..Male or Female..

The Mens Open was originally Open to anyone, that's the way it should be..

The Mens is trully the Open and the womens is just a womens championship..

Even the women who grunt their way through the finals still have enough time, and energy, from their weak work load, to hop over to doubles competition and snatch up another trillion dollars. Not to mention that by simply swinging their butts and hoisting legs over chairs in front of japanese and middle eastern vips, they pull off another fortune in endorsements.

Naturally, the most talented women don't cheat by shrieking, and are fairly ignored by sponsors. This adds even less to an already unattractive game.

The men players do not have nearly the sort of sponsorship monies that women derive. Even pan faced players like jankovich are picked up and idolized by sponsors. After these women spend a few minutes in new york, having their faces painted, men start shouting that they can't even stand up upon seeing their images. Meanwhile, the swiss robot seems to be the only guy in the world getting endorsements. How is that fair? We are talking about millions of dollars in disparity.

I agree with you, Sherlock. The same thing has happened at Wimbledon in recent years. Some people seem to be missing the point, I saw someone here earlier say that the women are still playing to the same intensity for their 3 sets- I think many would disagree about the level being the same, but that's irrelevant, anyway. The fact is, the men are playing more. If a person A and B did the exact same job, but person A worked 25 hours, compared to person B, who worked 40, you'd expect person B to be paid more- exact same principle here.

Additionally, as others have said, the males event is the main event- it draws the most attention. That should matter as well. Look at the Wimbledon site:

aeltc2010.wimbledon.org...

Mixed doubles only receive £92,000 for their first place, whilst "normal" doubles teams receive £240,000- mixed doubles isn't very popular at all, hence less money for winning it. Here's proof the ladies championship is less popular than the mens:

2010.wimbledon.org...

5.6m in UK watched the mens final
2.3m in UK watched the womens final
^^^^^^^
A clear indicator that the mens is by far the most popular, and will bring in the most sponsorship money and various other forms of revenue.

I come to tender my support for the OP, having been an avid follower of tennis this last 8-10 years (I make a living from it) I can confirm that ladies tennis is NOT a sport. Most armchair fans sit down to watch when the tournaments reach the business stage (QF, SF & F), I trade the tennis on certain exchanges & I sit through every tournament from monday to sunday & what is presented to us as a spectacle some call a sport, is in actual fact like watching two preschool boys playing a game of ding dong. This equal pay is a joke, 2% of the ladies will put in 100% effort, for perhaps an hour, wereas the men cand be out on court giving it their all for anything up to 3 or 4 hours. I do love the gladiatorial feel to tennis & if you watch closely enough you will recognise the ladies game is nothing more than a joke.

Before I share my opinion, I feel the need to say that if you know nothing about tennis and aren't quite sure what the OP is talking about then don't comment. Some of the things written are ridiculous, read the post before you comment.

The main point of the discussion is that the male tennis players play best of 5 sets and the women play best of 3 yet they get paid the same amount of money. The simple answer to this IMO is make the women play best of 5 as well. That way it will save all the arguments about money. The women complained about getting paid less and now, in theory (because they play less sets) they get paid more which seems a little pointless to be honest.

Equal play - equal pay. Seems fair to me.

I also don't want to hear any rubbish about women not being able to play as long or anything remotely hinting that women are weaker or less fit because I don't see that as the case at all.

The majority of women want equality and I completely agree, lets give them that, but it works both ways.They deserve equality but that also means an equal share of the work. I bet they are not complaining now they technically get paid more than the men. Because they play less games in the singles, they are then fresher for doubles and mixed doubles giving them a better chance for progression in those tournaments obviously earning them more than the men.

This link will help explain to those still a little unsure of what we are discussing:
www.seattlepi.com...

Very interesting topic.

There are actually independent Women's leagues for Billiards, Poker and Bowling... is there any possible physical disadvantage in these disciplines? So why the different leagues?

The general premise of the OP was brought into question in the summer of 2009 at the World Track & Field Championships in Berlin Germany, where the winner, a South African runner, of the 800m event was accused of being transgender.

Not to get overly graphic, but there many babies born with either both sexual organs or something in between that makes it visually impossible to determine their gender at birth. We all remember, from high school biology, that the XX chromosome pair is female, and the XY leads to a male, but did you know that XXY, XXX and XYY are possibilities as well? Chromosomes

All that to say, in a truly equal society, neither race nor gender would be considered (hey didn't Martin Luther King Jr. say that as well?) and the Women's segregation in sports would be nonexistent. But, we do not live in an equal society, and professional sports is market based, so, as long as someone is willing to pay to watch a separate women's only billiard tournament, than they will exist.

the Billmeister

weak, id pay much more to watch girls play sports then dudes anyway. the only time i find any sport interesting is women's volleyball though.