• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Equal pay women vs men in soccer

snakestretcher said:
I suspect women would be as much 'for it' as those who partake in F1, horse racing and a host of other sports where they compete on the same terms.
Click to expand...
GREAT POINT. John Force as a drag racing GOD got paid huge bank when he won the Funny Car Drag racing championship 16 times. His daughter Brittany Force also got paid huge bank when SHE won the Top Fuel Drag Racing championship...and she got paid MORE than the men she competed against...because she WON. At every competition that Forces daughter Courtney competed and won in, she got the winners purse...not a less than check because she was just a girl...she got the winning money...because she beat every other driver.

Women jockeys CAN compete against men and some have and won...but not many. Women F1, Indy, and even NASCAR drivers can compete against the men and when they win...they take home the winners check...not a reduced check because they are women.

Where women compete as equals they get paid as equals.
 
VanceMack said:
GREAT POINT. John Force as a drag racing GOD got paid huge bank when he won the Funny Car Drag racing championship 16 times. His daughter Brittany Force also got paid huge bank when SHE won the Top Fuel Drag Racing championship...and she got paid MORE than the men she competed against...because she WON. At every competition that Forces daughter Courtney competed and won in, she got the winners purse...not a less than check because she was just a girl...she got the winning money...because she beat every other driver.

Women jockeys CAN compete against men and some have and won...but not many. Women F1, Indy, and even NASCAR drivers can compete against the men and when they win...they take home the winners check...not a reduced check because they are women.

Where women compete as equals they get paid as equals.
Click to expand...

The issue here is that the USMNT is total trash heap hot garbage and a national disgrace by comparison.
 
Obscurity said:
The issue here is that the USMNT is total trash heap hot garbage and a national disgrace by comparison.
Click to expand...
COMPLETELY irrelevant with regard to the financial remunerations available to the two different organizations.
 
VanceMack said:
COMPLETELY irrelevant with regard to the financial remunerations available to the two different organizations.
Click to expand...

Totally relevant. People in the US and world don't watch the USMNT and don't give a damn because they're bad. Just because the financial structure of FIFA and the World Cup in general is slanted toward the men, does not mean the women didn't earn more.

You know they did, and I know they did, and you're being completely disingenuous if you claim otherwise, and I'll repeat it to you once you inevitably post some hot trash nonsense to try and "make your point."
 
Obscurity said:
Totally relevant. People in the US and world don't watch the USMNT and don't give a damn because they're bad. Just because the financial structure of FIFA and the World Cup in general is slanted toward the men, does not mean the women didn't earn more.

You know they did, and I know they did, and you're being completely disingenuous if you claim otherwise, and I'll repeat it to you once you inevitably post some hot trash nonsense to try and "make your point."
Click to expand...
Unless you personally and all the other people that believe they should be paid more are willing to go out of your own pockets to give them money to PAY them more...you are just pissing in the wind. The mens AND womens organizations operate from a different fund with different available resources to pay their players. There is a buttload more money available to the mens teams than the womens because the womens product is inferior....and everyone knows it, though for some inane reason refuse to admit it.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Student lawyers are paid??? Funny, my son graduated from a very prestigious law school, did all these things, and was never paid a cent. Much the opposite. He had to get student loans to get by. Summer internships, sure, he got paid, but that's not the school. He got paid by the firm where he was an intern. This was during his school vacation.

Student athletes are not always forced to take bogus courses. Some schools take the education seriously. At Duke University, for example, student athletes earn real degrees and get a real education (for free).
Click to expand...

Well it is very often not the case, I suggest John Oliver's Last Week Tonight episode on it, it shows how they are just often exploited by the schools for profit. They can't even get money from sponsorships, they are prevented from making money from their own image.

Then maybe your son should have gotten some internships then. All those other things are entirely optional parts of his education. With law students you are paying to get a law education that is what you are getting. Athletes on the other hand are treated as employees solely to generate huge profits for the school.

By your logic endentured servitude should be legal.
 
Last edited:
VanceMack said:
Unless you personally and all the other people that believe they should be paid more are willing to go out of your own pockets to give them money to PAY them more...you are just pissing in the wind. The mens AND womens organizations operate from a different fund with different available resources to pay their players. There is a buttload more money available to the mens teams than the womens because the womens product is inferior....and everyone knows it, though for some inane reason refuse to admit it.
Click to expand...

Annnnd queue the inevitable hot trash.

The women's product is inferior? Typical, you clearly don't watch soccer, at all.

Pathetic.
 
It is a tricky subject, that is made even more problematic by centuries of male dominated sexism.

Take tennis. Should the female winner of Wimbledon get the same as the male? Right now both men and women get 2.25 million for winning. But women only play best of 3 sets while men play best of 5. So in this case men get paid less...

As for women's football. Playing for your country is an honour and should never be quantified by how much money you will get if you are selected. Saying that, because it is a national thing, then men and women should be paid the same base salary period. Where it could be different would be in % of TV money or other metrics that define popularity.

In the pro game, well that is a debate in it self since many male players are shafted compared to superstars and then you have the Manchester City types that pay $40k per week for a youth player.

Sent from my Honor 8X using Tapatalk
 
GreatNews2night said:
That's a very distorted and stereotypical view of soccer. Their athletes run constantly, for miles, and don't benefit from all the dead time of other American sports. And I say so, while being a fan of American Football, my absolutely #1 sport. Still, I do recognize the value of soccer, and I don't ridicule it. It's a fine sport, and very exciting when played at a high level. There is a reason why it's the most popular sport in the world: it's because when it's well-played, it's rather exciting.

Personally I find American Football more exciting, but I won't put down someone who finds soccer to be more exciting.
Click to expand...

Any sport where the viewer can fall asleep because of no action on the field for extended periods of time is boring.

This coming from a Mexican resident living with Futbol fanatics all around.

Oh, also it bugs me to see the babies fall down and cry for nothing if they get bumped. It makes me think I am watching a kindergarten class run around the field.
 
FYI, the Mens team just made it to the finals of CONCACAF and lost 1-0. Thats a pretty good performance.
 
jonny5 said:
It is a gender issue. Men generally dont like womens sports, women generally dont like sports, men are generally richer and spend more on sports. That means less revenue to womens soccer, out of which employees can be paid.
Click to expand...

Then you mean, it's NOT a gender issue, at least not in the sense of sexism. The explanations you gave are correct, and that's why there is a pay gap. It's not because women are women and men are men, and men just decide for sexist reasons to pay the women less. It's because, like you said, there is less revenue in women's soccer, for various reasons, sexism not being one of them.
 
Master Debator said:
But not as entertaining or profitable so why should difficulty be the determining factor in wages? Are you telling me the men should be getting paid exactly what they are getting paid now even if no one were watching? Because that would make your argument honest. Even if no one watched or went to the games you honestly think they should still be getting paid the same? After all the difficulty never changed, the competition is the same and as per your argument that's what should determine their wage. Do I have that right or would you like to clarify a little?
Click to expand...

As some have suggested, the US men should play the US women - think of the ratings bonanza!

The winner gets 2/3 of the prize, the loser 1/3.

Fair?

:)
 
GreatNews2night said:
Given that it's been proven that the USWNT has generated more revenue than the USMNT at this point (given recent success) it is fair to pay the women of this team, this time, more than the men (money coming from the USSF based on what they've generated in viewership, sponsorship, and merchandise). When they go back to their league and their clubs, given that these clubs generate way less money than the men's clubs in their league, then it is fair that they get paid less than the men. If the men qualify for the next FIFA World Cup and then generate way more than the women (they most likely will, given the huge money generated by the men's FIFA World Cup), then they should get paid more, again. Pay should be commensurate to how much income each team generates for the employer, the USSF in the case of the national team, and league clubs in the case of yearlong club competition. Period.

Overall and over the years, most likely the women athlete would still make less than the men, even if this time they were given higher bonuses.

Pay shouldn't be automatically equal, unless the women generate equal revenue when compared to the men.
Click to expand...

Well, this isn't too unreasonable, but it isn't going to work.

The reason the US women are pushing this NOW is because they know they exist in a bubble, and that the US men are going to get better and better when football (REAL football) fever hits the US and the best male athletes here pursue careers in the world's favorite game.

Basically, they want >equal< pay now which will be overpay later; that's kind of the whole unspoken point.

So there's no way they'll accept a deal which doesn't lock in permanent overpay.
 
Obscurity said:
The USWNT is a spectacular dynasty and is absolutely dominant and definitely generated more revenue than the disgraceful Men's Team.

They have earned better pay than their failure male counterparts.

If the men's team wants to continue making top dollar, they should git gud and not get into the World Cup on technicalities.

Truly ridiculous.
Click to expand...

Nuh-uh.
 
HumblePi said:
Finally, some solid reasoning, thank you.
Click to expand...

Well, solid in theory.

It won't happen.

The women know this is a bubble that they're trying to set in stone.

They don't want what's fair - they want permanent overcompensation.
 
This pretty much sums it up.

Women’s Soccer Negotiated the Compensation They Now Say Is Sexist

This seems unfair until you look at the differences between the revenue generated by men’s soccer and women’s soccer. Men’s soccer worldwide is the most popular sport; women’s soccer doesn’t come close. To take the starkest example: the men’s World Cup in Russia in 2018 brought in $6 billion in revenue. The women’s World Cup this year is expected to bring in $131 million. Prize money is taken out of this revenue. As a percentage of the total revenue earned, the women were in fact paid better than the men.

As Forbes noted, the last Women’s World Cup four years ago “brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13 [percent]. The 2010 men’s World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9 [percent] went to the players. The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men’s World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7 [percent] of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women’s World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.”
Click to expand...

6 billion versus 131 million - it's basic economics.
 
GreatNews2night said:
Wow, so the women got almost 25% of the revenue they generated, while the men got 7%. And this is the deal they are complaining about?
So, the Federation should say, OK, equal pay as percentage of revenue, now, let's lower the women's prize to the 7% the men got so that they can be equal.
Click to expand...
Percentage wise, I think nearly 25%, should go to the winner, if not a little more. The problem lies in that women's soccer doesn't bring in nearly what men's soccer does, not by a longshot. This isn't an "equal pay" issue at all if you look at the numbers. The women are getting a bigger piece of a much smaller pie. Until the pies are the same size, or at least close, the men will always make more. It may not feel "fair" to some but economics are what they are.
 
3leftsdoo said:
As some have suggested, the US men should play the US women - think of the ratings bonanza!

The winner gets 2/3 of the prize, the loser 1/3.

Fair?

:)
Click to expand...


The only way it could be a ratings bonanza is if the women show up. :mrgreen:
 
Was this the last team to be all female (if it was)?

Sent from my SM-G892A using Tapatalk
 
GreatNews2night said:
Then you mean, it's NOT a gender issue, at least not in the sense of sexism. The explanations you gave are correct, and that's why there is a pay gap. It's not because women are women and men are men, and men just decide for sexist reasons to pay the women less. It's because, like you said, there is less revenue in women's soccer, for various reasons, sexism not being one of them.
Click to expand...

I just dont call it sexism. But gender is certainly a core issue. Men and Women are not the same.
 
RedAkston said:
The problem lies in that women's soccer doesn't bring in nearly what men's soccer does, not by a longshot. This isn't an "equal pay" issue at all if you look at the numbers. The women are getting a bigger piece of a much smaller pie. Until the pies are the same size, or at least close, the men will always make more. It may not feel "fair" to some but economics are what they are.
Click to expand...

I wonder when Taylor Swift is going to start giving some of her millions to, say, Ted Nugent. Equal pay! :lol:
 
Did the Women's soccer team compete against and beat the Men's soccer team?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom