Why should they have bowed to the stupid pressure of equal pay for men and women, when the women:

- Play less sets (3 when men play 5)
- Less competent opposition (the men players are better)

Equal work and efforts should mean equal pay.

Differing work and efforts should mean differing pay.

U sure have a stone age mentality

gyde:

U sure have a stone age mentality

And I guess you have a poor education going by your lack of points. Which state's Teachers College did you attend?

Sagamite:

Why should they have bowed to the stupid pressure of equal pay for men and women, when the women:

- Play less sets (3 when men play 5)
- Less competent opposition (the men players are better)

Equal work and efforts should mean equal pay.

Differing work and efforts should mean differing pay.

You may have a point, but what is the source of the revenue? Do the female games pull less/more revenue (sponsorships, endorsements) than the male games? That could be a factor as well.

I still can't get ma head round how less set/less time spent on court by the females can command same pay.

I wonder why Safina shld be payed as much as Federer or Murray.

debosky:

You may have a point, but what is the source of the revenue? Do the female games pull less/more revenue (sponsorships, endorsements) than the male games? That could be a factor as well.

Good point! ^{slowpoke gyde, take note how educated people give points}

I actually initially included that as a third point but removed it as it is arguable and the other 2 points are sufficient to back my points.

I state it is arguable because one can say the men's game attract more crowds due to the quality and profile of their game and another can say the women attract crowds due to sexual allure. ^{slowpoke gyde, take note how educated people give points}

But lets face it, the latter is less strong as tennis women are usually ugly with unfeminine features and only a few like Kournikova qualify to justify the latter.

I can even go further and say, higher percentage of the male tennis players will do better attracting women to watch due to their looks than female tennis players will do in attracting men.

And how does this affect your individual lives?

Cristalz:

And how does this affect your individual lives?

Injustice affects us all.

Why should they have bowed to the stupid pressure of equal pay for men and women, when the women:

- Play less sets (3 when men play 5)
- Less competent opposition (the men players are better)

Equal work and efforts should mean equal pay.

Differing work and efforts should mean differing pay.

Injustice affects us all.

@Sagamite ,
could u please find answers to these questions;
1. who pays these players - both men and women?
2. where was the preasure to pay equal prices coming from?
3. what is the sources of the revenue for paying these players?
4. have u any idea of which of the two groups - men and women generates more funds for the organisers?
5. will it be a case of robbing peter to pay paul if the women matches generate more funds than the women and the men earn more?
6. do u think everybody will see it as justice if your choice of payment is applied?
7. will it be ok to make sure women in other areas of life are paid lesser than men since both sex can never be on the same work rate?
8. in all the areas of lives where injusice are been melted to ppl, why do u choose to deal with this particular one first?

@Sagamite ,
could u please find answers to these questions;
1. who pays these players - both men and women?
I guess it will be the organisers of Wimbledon.

2. where was the preasure to pay equal prices coming from?
It came from feminists and blind, illogical, modern-wannabe supporters like gyde above who are handicapped at analysis.

3. what is the sources of the revenue for paying these players?
I guess Gate fees, TV rights and Sponsorships if my business knowledge and guts serve me right.

4. have u any idea of which of the two groups - men and women generates more funds for the organisers?
No statistics at hand to back it up but historically men's sports have and still usually generate(d) more than women's sports across ALL sports in all 3 revenue areas aforementioned above.

I am yet to see any sportswoman that beats all man in her sports in sponsorship.

5. will it be a case of robbing peter to pay paul if the women matches generate more funds than the women and the men earn more?
Your question seems abit muddled up by error hear but if I am right, you are are suggesting the women might be generating the funds. I disagree based on my argument in 4 and earlier in my response to Debosky. More so, the men do more work.

6. do u think everybody will see it as justice if your choice of payment is applied?
Logical people will. No sentiments, no blackmails, just logic.

7. will it be ok to make sure women in other areas of life are paid lesser than men since both sex can never be on the same work rate?
This question has no relevance. If I was to bless it with relevance, then if there is a job where women are statutorily under general rules required to do less work than men, then they should be paid less (and vice versa). If they are doing the same work, then it should be the same pay.

In tennis, by playing five sets in comparison to the three played by the women, the men are doing 66% more work than the women for equal pay. That aint right.


8. in all the areas of lives where injusice are been melted to ppl, why do u choose to deal with this particular one first?
Sorry, please inform me since when you have been tracking my life, without my knowledge, to know what I have done "first". 

These are the kind of arguments I don't like. 

Sagamite:

Why should they have bowed to the stupid pressure of equal pay for men and women, when the women:

- Play less sets (3 when men play 5)
- Less competent opposition (the men players are better)

Equal work and efforts should mean equal pay.

Differing work and efforts should mean differing pay.

It is completely wrong. . . . . . .i have argued this time n time again.
The excitement/entertainment i get watching men battle for 5 sets is nothing compared to women having to play just 3 sets(sometimes 2).
Women should earn less. . . . . .

just confirmed now from someone cos i tot saga didnt know what he was saying

thts some bullshit

i'll have 2 say am wit u 100% on this one. another point ithink u missed is dat the women game lacks quality i.e. i rarely see spectacularly shots like a jump smash, dive recieve or even btw d leg shots. all they offer mostly are fore hands and backhands untill more often an unforced error. i also think accepting equal pay even though playin 3 sets is defeatist i.e. its like sayin hey i cant do beta so just pay me

Blah! Not a big fan of tennis but I know more female players, which means I'd rather watch em. Thumbs up for the equal pay. Go Serena, Venus, Ivanovic, Oudin and co!!!!!

Doesn't alter my life either way.

Meritocracy!

Op your post is justified...