Men's tennis generates more revenue...

...so those who create its main product ought to be paid more.

Agree or disagree?

Chess players should be paid more.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Well yes, perhaps they should. Do male porn stars get paid more than female ones?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

I suppose the difficulty of comparing tennis to porn ~ in terms of what the OP is getting at ~ is this: is male + male porn (as a product for porn consumers) in direct competition with male + female porn for the attention of those porn consumers? And are the participants paid (more or less) depending on how well they do?

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Personally. I am inclined to agree. But I am curious as to whether 'equal earnings' makes business sense or whether my preference (and yours) actually has an ethical basis.

There are far less men in porn compared to women. *If* men do get paid more, I'm guessing it's because women are a dime a dozen in the porn industry. But a man who's not only the right size, but keep himself aroused despite the business-like atmosphere (behind the scenes, it's anything but erotic; comparable to manual labor) is a rare commodity.

As far as the OP, it only makes sense that those involved in men's tennis (or basketball, or football) get paid more than those only involved in female versions. If there was a women's sport that generated more money than the men's, but without the women being paid more, people would be outraged.

Originally posted by FMF
Personally. I am inclined to agree. But I am curious as to whether 'equal earnings' makes business sense or whether my preference (and yours) actually has an ethical basis.

I don't have numbers, but it seems there are plenty of recognizable female stars, and plenty of interest in women's matches. That is sufficient justification for equal pay to me.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
I don't have numbers, but it seems there are plenty of recognizable female stars, and plenty of interest in women's matches. That is sufficient justification for equal pay to me.

For the sake of argument, if the TV audience for men's tennis is twice the size of that for women's tennis, and the broadcaster is able to charge a lot more for advertising and sponsorship associated with - and placed in - the coverage of the men's tournament than for a comparable (or perhaps simultaneous) women's tournament, would the men players be justified in arguing for their winnings and fees to reflect the fact that more lucrative business is founded on the entertainment they provide?

Originally posted by FMF
For the sake of argument, if the TV audience for men's tennis is twice the size of that for women's tennis, and the broadcaster is able to charge a lot more for advertising and sponsorship associated with - and placed in - the coverage of the men's tournament than for a comparable (or perhaps simultaneous) women's tournament, would the men players be justified i ...[text shortened]... s to reflect the fact that more lucrative business is founded on the entertainment they provide?

They'd have to consider the public relations hit the sport would take for rolling back a politically fashionable reform. If that wasn't too bad, then maybe.

A thought that just hit me - in UFC, Rhonda Rousey proved that a woman can be a bigger draw than any man in the sport. I think it's fair that she got paid well for it, even to the point of getting more than most [or all?!] of the men.

The usual principal driving equal pay for women is 'equal pay for equal work'. In the case of athletes with varying levels of performance, one may argue that work is no longer equal-enough at some point without being a misogynist. The trouble comes when one argues that all men should out-earn all women. No longer is it just Novak Djokovic making more money than Vika Azarenka - now there are men on the tour far less known than the top women, and making twice as much.

The post that was quoted here has been removed

Females get paid more in porn, mind you. Which I think it is fair because
they take more... er... effort.

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
I don't have numbers, but it seems there are plenty of recognizable female stars, and plenty of interest in women's matches. That is sufficient justification for equal pay to me.

Surprisingly the men get equal shares in Beach Volleyball! 😲

Originally posted by BigDoggProblem
They'd have to consider the public relations hit the sport would take for rolling back a politically fashionable reform. If that wasn't too bad, then maybe.

A thought that just hit me - in UFC, Rhonda Rousey proved that a woman can be a bigger draw than any man in the sport. I think it's fair that she got paid well for it, even to the point of gett ...[text shortened]... nka - now there are men on the tour far less known than the top women, and making twice as much.

Here's an idea. How about competitors ~ regardless of whether they are male or female ~ set a tariff for their performance.

For example: $2,000 for playing in the first round; $30,000 for reaching the fourth round; $100,000 for going out in the Q-Finals etc. etc. [There would be increasing kitties for each round advanced]. And they set their own prize money for if they win ~ say, in this case, $500,000.

A lowly player might ask for $100 (nominal fee) for playing in the first round; $5,000 for reaching the fourth round; $20,000 for going out in the Q-Finals and $100,000 if they win.

The tournament organizers could shop around for talent and crowd pleasing participants and make their own calculations of income from sponsors, advertising, broadcasting, bums on seats ~ and set it against the expense of paying out winnings ~ and put it all in the context of the prestige they wish to conjure up for their event.

In this way, men and women could demand what they were worth in a competitive market.

Originally posted by FMF
Here's an idea. How about competitors ~ regardless of whether they are male or female ~ set a tariff for their performance.

For example: $2,000 for playing in the first round; $30,000 for reaching the fourth round; $100,000 for going out in the Q-Finals etc. etc. [There would be increasing kitties for each round advanced]. And they set their own prize money ...[text shortened]... event.

In this way, men and women could demand what they were worth in a competitive market.

If they make claims like that they better have stats to back them up. Even if so, they should have equal pay. Both sexes have at best ten or so years sometimes 15 to play and they better make the most of it in the short dog years they have so there should be no discrimination about who draws the most crowds.

I see plenty of matches where the camera seldom hits the crowd because there are 10 people in attendance of the third or 4th rank event. Men and women.

Originally posted by FMF
Here's an idea. How about competitors ~ regardless of whether they are male or female ~ set a tariff for their performance.

For example: $2,000 for playing in the first round; $30,000 for reaching the fourth round; $100,000 for going out in the Q-Finals etc. etc. [There would be increasing kitties for each round advanced]. And they set their own prize money ...[text shortened]... event.

In this way, men and women could demand what they were worth in a competitive market.

Bad idea on a lot of levels.

Until quite recently men did get paid more in tennis than woman, with the main reasons that they worked more. Of course this just applies to grand slams where they play best of 5 sets compared to woman's best of 3, now they're prize money is equal in all major events but the debate is basically the same. The only difference now is that it's men trying to get paid more using the same argument that was used when they were arguing against woman getting equal pay.

I personally don't really care either way but if men work more on court and generate more money why not get paid more in tennis? The argument that they should be paid the same purely because of sex doesn't work for me. Take football for example, the last world cup Germany earned around 15 times the amount the states did for winning the woman world cup, fair and justified? 100%! Sponsorship higher, ticket sales much more and a lot more expensive and adverting sales income greater.

The difference is that male and female tennis players compete at the same events and playing at the same time as each other. With that in mind the difference, if any shouldn't be that much, if they started to play best of 5 in woman grand slams I'd be completely behind them getting paid the same.

Many stars in tennis and other sports make more for product endorsements than they do for playing.

http://www.forbes.com/athletes/list/#tab:overall