Our server costs ~$56 per month to run. Please consider donating or becoming a Patron to help keep the site running. Help us gain new members by following us on Twitter and liking our page on Facebook!
Current time: May 31, 2020, 8:22 am

Thread Rating:
  • 0 Vote(s) - 0 Average
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
  • 4
  • 5
Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
#31
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
(July 27, 2019 at 6:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote:
(July 27, 2019 at 5:13 pm)Shell B Wrote: I thought the taking in as much money argument was debunked earlier in this thread.

It was, but here's a reminder for those who may have missed it:

Quote:"From 2016 to 2018, women's games generated about $50.8 million in revenue compared with $49.9 million for the men, according to U.S. soccer's audited financial statements. In 2016, the year after the World Cup, the women generated $1.9 million more than the men."

But only about one-quarter of U.S. Soccer's total operating revenue can be attributed to gate revenues, according to the federation's financial documents. The other revenues come mainly from broadcasting and sponsorships, and it's difficult to parse out which teams contribute more to these revenues because U.S. Soccer sells sponsorships and broadcasting rights as a bundled package.

Still, there's reason to think that the recent success and popularity of the women's team is boosting revenues: Nike chief executive Mark Parker said that the U.S. women's team home jersey "is now the number one soccer jersey, men's or women's, ever sold on Nike.com in one season," according to The Washington Post.

By the only metrics that can be reliably determined, the US women's team generates more revenue than the men's team, and have done so since 2016.

Boru

I see. We are talking specifically about the U.S. teams, and what they get paid for representing the U.S. on these teams. In this specific context, it is fair to argue they deserve to be compensated far more. When extending to other pro sports, including the Women's Soccer League (not on the international level), we return to what I was saying.
[Image: nL4L1haz_Qo04rZMFtdpyd1OZgZf9NSnR9-7hAWT...dc2a24480e]
Reply
#32
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
(July 27, 2019 at 11:49 am)Aegon Wrote: Pay in pro sports is not dependent on skill. It's dependent on how much money fans are willing to pay to see them / buy their shit.

I actually sat next to a WNBA team on a flight out of Phoenix last month. I asked one of the players about it, and she got real mad because people care about income inequality but dont give a shit about their games. The NBA is actually *losing* money by owning the WNBA.

If you want to see equal pay in professional sports the best thing you can do is support women's sports by actually attending their games and demonstrating interest. How many equal pay advocates follow the WNBA? Or follow the US women's soccer players when they're playing at their domestic clubs?

It's not enough to say you want them to be paid more all while not actually demonstrating interest in them (aside from highly publicized international play.)

Based on my own (subjective) viewing experience, women's soccer is every bit as entertaining as men's soccer. I tend to have the same opinion with regards to volleyball, too. In contrast, women's ice hockey is not as entertaining as men's ice hockey (IMO), based in part on a key difference in the rules between men's and women's hockey.

I don't follow other sports, like basketball, closely enough to have much of an opinion about their relative entertainment value.

That being said, I'm struggling to find a way a government could justify paying women less than men for doing the same thing. I mean, here's the perfect opportunity to take a stand against systemic sexism, and yet they don't.

Private leagues are in a different sphere, but are no doubt are plagued by the same issues of systemic sexism.
Sporadic poster
Reply
#33
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
(July 27, 2019 at 7:37 pm)Aegon Wrote:
(July 27, 2019 at 6:02 pm)BrianSoddingBoru4 Wrote: It was, but here's a reminder for those who may have missed it:


By the only metrics that can be reliably determined, the US women's team generates more revenue than the men's team, and have done so since 2016.

Boru

I see. We are talking specifically about the U.S. teams, and what they get paid for representing the U.S. on these teams. In this specific context, it is fair to argue they deserve to be compensated far more. When extending to other pro sports, including the Women's Soccer League (not on the international level), we return to what I was saying.

But that’s not what’s being discussed.
Reply
#34
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
It's called football, not like your Handegg.

And In my idea, I can see women players being used tactically in a mixed game.
Reply
#35
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
(July 27, 2019 at 7:37 pm)Aegon Wrote: I see. We are talking specifically about the U.S. teams, and what they get paid for representing the U.S. on these teams. In this specific context, it is fair to argue they deserve to be compensated far more. When extending to other pro sports, including the Women's Soccer League (not on the international level), we return to what I was saying.


That's a bit of goalpoast moving on your part, then. The bill is specifically targeted at the USNT and the USWNT, and the differences in their payouts, not all women's sports teams vs. their male counterparts.

I disagree with the method, but the motive is right. Tying government spending bills to this isn't the right way. It has no chance of passing and it allows Fox News to plaster it as "Breaking News" for a cycle or two and gin up the base.
"There remain four irreducible objections to religious faith: that it wholly misrepresents the origins of man and the cosmos, that because of this original error it manages to combine the maximum servility with the maximum of solipsism, that it is both the result and the cause of dangerous sexual repression, and that it is ultimately grounded on wish-thinking." ~Christopher Hitchens, god is not Great

PM me your email address to join the Slack chat! I'll give you a taco(or five) if you join! --->There's an app and everything!<---
Reply
#36
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
Can we acknowledge that the government shouldn't be funding sports events anyway?
Reply
#37
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
They do better numbers than men's soccer. Therefore they should be paid more, not equal. I couldn't care less about who has a penis or a vagina. You do a better job, you get paid better. The women's soccer players should be paid more based on their performance.

(July 28, 2019 at 4:52 pm)Shell B Wrote: Can we acknowledge that the government shouldn't be funding sports events anyway?

I couldn't agree more, but that's an entirely separate conversation, isn't it?

There's a lot of bullshit the government shouldn't be funding. Want to talk about how much we spend on the military every year? Makes me want to throw up.
If you're frightened of dying, and you're holding on, you'll see devils tearing your life away. But if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels, freeing you from the Earth.
Reply
#38
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
I mean, the topic is a bill supporting soccer, so I think it's pertinent that we should be happy if they withhold funding.
Reply
#39
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
(July 28, 2019 at 11:03 pm)Shell B Wrote: I mean, the topic is a bill supporting soccer, so I think it's pertinent that we should be happy if they withhold funding.

Elaborate
If you're frightened of dying, and you're holding on, you'll see devils tearing your life away. But if you've made your peace, then the devils are really angels, freeing you from the Earth.
Reply
#40
RE: Equal pay for women's soccer or no Fed funding bill
In what way? Government shouldn’t fund sports. They’re proposing withholding funding. I don’t see any reason to be bothered by that.
Reply



Possibly Related Threads...
Thread Author Replies Views Last Post
  New Jersey Voters Did Pay Attention Minimalist 2 167 November 15, 2018 at 2:15 pm
Last Post: Gawdzilla Sama
  Can You Guess Which Countries Have More "Women In Parliament" Than The USA? ReptilianPeon 7 551 July 13, 2018 at 7:13 pm
Last Post: Minimalist
  Farm Bill Food Fight The Grand Nudger 20 1414 May 15, 2018 at 8:48 pm
Last Post: Fireball
  Four presidents come together to pay tribute Fierce 15 1196 April 23, 2018 at 1:09 pm
Last Post: mlmooney89
  Uber Pay Gap John V 42 1454 February 15, 2018 at 5:43 pm
Last Post: CapnAwesome
  Bill Maher's take on #MeToo Brian37 22 2386 January 23, 2018 at 4:06 am
Last Post: shadow
  How Bad Is The Senate Tax Bill? Minimalist 41 3375 December 12, 2017 at 5:14 am
Last Post: downbeatplumb
  Do you feel different about Bill Clinton's sexual past? CapnAwesome 89 7093 November 23, 2017 at 5:32 pm
Last Post: Haipule
  The GOP's turd of a tax bill Jackalope 34 1818 November 14, 2017 at 5:17 pm
Last Post: Haipule
  Unless The Senate Blocks This Piece Of Shit Bill. Minimalist 18 4652 October 8, 2017 at 7:04 pm
Last Post: Jehanne



Users browsing this thread: 1 Guest(s)