Quote (duffman316 @ Jun 13 2016 04:06pm)
your own personal experience means nothing to the discussion
here are the relevant facts if you want to talk about popularity
Viewing figures for Wimbledon 2015 finals
UK (BBC)
Wimbledon men’s final (BBC) – 9.2m viewers
Wimbledon ladies’ final (BBC) – 4.3m viewers
http://metro.co.uk/2016/03/21/novak-djokovic-is-right-male-tennis-players-do-deserve-to-be-paid-more-than-female-stars-5765546/#ixzz4BT4nKYV2the only ridiculousness in this thread are the feminists rejecting reality in favour of their own delusions about womens tennis
you can't provide a legitamite argument as to why the women should be paid as much or more than the men despite being inferior draws and inferior players so you go for the free market approach of letting the organizers plan the events however they want - but we all know you'd be stomping your feet and screaming for blood if the organizers decided blacks should be paid less than their white counter parts in this sport
So you say Belgium is my personal experience, but British statistics are relevant facts? I actually literally laughed out loud irl when I read that. Make up your mind before you speak.
There is no basis for black and white sports to be segregated, so yes that would be atrocious. I don't mind that men usually get paid more, by the way. That is a logical result from the fact that men's sports are usually indeed more entertaining because of their superior strength and stamina.
On the other hand it's pathetic that you guys bash Wimbledon for this, and that you use the sets as a reason for this. What if this decision was influenced by a sponsor that targets a female audience? In the end, sponsors and popularity are the only things that matter; definitely not how "hard work" the sports is (if that were even quantifiable).
This post was edited by howtodisappearcompletely on Jun 13 2016 03:21pm