>women want the same compensation as men even though shit play, significantly lower revenue, lower quality opposition, lower fan bases, ticket sales, broadcasting revenue, etc
I'm all for equal pay for equal work etc but how can they think their justified to make as much as men when literally no one cares about women sports leagues, watching on TV, going to games, buying merchant, etc? If they don't have that revenue stream same as men then the clubs can't afford to compensate them well.
Same goes for the women footballers. No one cares about the uswnt except in a world Cup year (where they still make less than men with revenue)
Shit, they can't even beat the u-18 men's team Also this webm
A guy could have fucked that up, what with the waterlogged pitch.
Obviously men are better than women when it comes to sport but there are two disadvantages that women have:
1. Being part-time (I think) 2. Playing on pitches that are too big with goals that are too big
Chase Martinez
>#8
Joshua Powell
>the weak initial shot >terrible goalkeeping not blocking the shot out of a dangerous location or just catching it >No defenders following up >missing a wide open goal
So much wrong in 13 seconds, also isn't France supposed to be one of the best women's national teams?
Christian Thompson
I don't get why Americucks pay their women for representing them. Are they really that poor that they need the money? Does that happen with athletes in the Olympics? Wouldn't the money be better used put into grassroots football?
Jordan Bailey
>2. Playing on pitches that are too big with goals that are too big wait, what? Do you britbongs have kiddie-sized fields and goals for the tykes or something? I thought everyone, regardless of age or sex, played on the same fields and whatnot.
Alexander Jones
>I thought everyone, regardless of age or sex, played on the same fields and whatnot. That's true.
Aiden Thompson
Nobody's arguing that- the argument is that women are generally discouraged to work in higher paying fields (STEM) and are less likely to be promoted compared to men. Less than 5% of Fortune 500 companies have women CEOs
Nathaniel Cooper
>women are discouraged from going to Stem despite more women being accepted into Stem fields over more qualified men
>women are generally discouraged to work in higher paying fields
Where do you base that on ?
Kevin Carter
The facts I just put up there? Women traditionally are discouraged to work in less liberal arty fields so they end up working jobs that pay less (teacher, writer, etc). Nobody's saying that a man and a women working the same exact job at the same company get paid less- there's just less women working in those higher paying fields because of social norms
Blake Moore
>social norms Which are the consequence of preferences resulting from biological difference
Hudson Phillips
>the argument is that women are generally discouraged to work in higher paying fields (STEM) STOP WITH THE LIES, FAGGOT
I have my own 'STEM' company, 24 programmers. In 8 years I have yet to see a single woman apply whenever we open a new position or lay off someone. I have seen hundreds of men apply, even when there are no job offers available
During my studies, there were like 8 women at the beginning of my career. None of them bothered to make it till the end AND THAT'S NOT THE FAULT OF MEN
>Less than 5% of Fortune 500 companies have women CEOs maybe they are less qualified or able in those positions, see how well some of the recent famous women CEOs have done in their jobs
Ethan Cook
>>women want the same compensation as men
can you give one direct example of a professional women's player saying they should be paid the same as the men?
Gabriel Wilson
>discouraged What the fuck are you talking about? I bet you just looked at the discrepancy and thought, there must be some force working against women here.
>are less likely to be promoted compared to men And?
>Less than 5% of Fortune 500 companies have women CEOs And there's something wrong with that?
Alexander Campbell
B+ team
Adrian Walker
US women's national team. >fly coach instead of first class >men make 4x more >less per diem >etc
Jaxon Stewart
>The facts I just put up there? >Saying there are less women working in a field means that they're discouraged to go into that field
>Women traditionally are discouraged to work in less liberal arty fields so they end up working jobs that pay less Just a sweeping statement that has no potential to be controversial, just throw it out there.
>because of social norms Because women get free shit like drinks and men get rejected if they don't have money whereas women don't. Those are the norms. It's not because people think, look a woman, she can't do shit.
That's why all the big tech/finance companies are having women initiatives to encourage women to join the field. How are you going to know what it's like to be a woman working in industries where no one else is like you- it's discouraging and you can't really deny that. That's why people are working to fix this difference- why are you neckbeards raging so hard at this
If you're going to tell me that women don't deserve to work in high paying fields and executive positions because they are worse at it than men, then you're kinda just being sexist and irrational
Xavier Bennett
>Companies perform better when they're more diverse and get more business when they represent the general makeup of the population You're just assuming that there is discrimination (ignoring the crux of this whole discussion) and saying: look how good you could be if you weren't sexist, companies!
>That's why all the big tech/finance companies are having women initiatives to encourage women to join the field. How are you going to know what it's like to be a woman working in industries where no one else is like you- it's discouraging and you can't really deny that. Initiatives make me think government. So that's why. Not because of rational self-interest.
>If you're going to tell me that women don't deserve to work in high paying fields and executive positions because they are worse at it than men, then you're kinda just being sexist and irrational It's sexist if it's wrong and you're being irrational if you think disparity=discrimination. Especially when you've wilfully ignored all the evidence people have given which explains the disparity.
I thought you were trolling but I think you're just young. College student at best.
Joshua Carter
what???
can you just give me a quote of a womens professional footballer saying "we should earn the same as the men" please? i think we both know one doesn't exist
Juan Reed
Here you go you ignorant fuck. Literally the entire uswnt is cry about this.
"When asked if the U.S. women, who have won three World Cup titles, should be paid more than their male counterparts, Lloyd was emphatic. Yeah, absolutely,” she said. “We win. We’re successful. Should get what we deserve.”
Quick Google searches will lead to more quotes. I can't be arsed.
William Roberts
I never assumed or implied discrimination anywhere. I keep saying that women don't work in high paying fields as much as men do- you're creating a separate argument and ignoring what I'm saying. All I'm saying is that women deserve promotions and high paying positions just as much as men do, which you all seem to be against. Not really going to argue with you anymore if you really think the luminarti government is forcing its feminist globalist agenda on the US
equal pay as the US men's soccer team, which gets paid shit. She's not claiming she should get paid the same as Messi
Samuel Long
That literally has never been the debate. It's always been the same pay as us national men
Christian Miller
it is an embarrassing campaign, and the only soccer media in the usa are those types of guys like who are literally fake news reporter shills, so unfortunately if you follow the american game on twitter or any website you'll hear about this. people do not differentiate though. the american women, basically their only income is playing for the national team, they do these tours and will literally play 30 matches a year solely for money making purposes. the us mens only play important matches qualifying or friendlies, there are barely any "money friendlies" for them. so should a women whose job is just to play for usa all year get paid the same IN NATIONAL TEAM COMPENSATION as some guys that might play 10 matches, if that, a year for the us? probably.
but anything other than this argument is pure retardation.
Gavin Adams
I thought since you equate the disparity with something wrong with the 'system' that you meant discrimination. You're not saying it's the sexist attitudes of employers that is preventing women who want promotions from being given them? Is it discouragement that is the cause, the general attitude in the workplace that stop women for asking for promotions? If so, what is your proof for this?
>women deserve promotions and high paying positions This isn't something which is automatically right. Less money does not automatically mean unfair. Women take shitty degrees, for example, and deserve less.
>luminarti government No-one has said anything about this. Talking about women being discouraged is pretty luminarti itself.
Gavin Wood
US men/women top athletes get paid about the same but the average women players get paid much less than men, even though they play more games. Not talking about total salary, I'm talking about what US soccer pays each individual player nytimes.com/2016/04/22/sports/soccer/usmnt-uswnt-soccer-equal-pay.html
This is despite the US Women's team making more money than the men and playing more games. They should get paid proportionally to the revenue they bring in, which is your argument, and they're not
Brody Richardson
...
Michael Wright
Imagine a Messi tier female player that gets pregnant and she loses her best years ar best or her career is over at worst.
kek
Jaxon Barnes
>This is despite the US Women's team making more money They don't. They brought in more money than the men in their WC year. Over a 4 year cycle, so the both sides take part in their major tournaments the men bring in more revenue.
