• ZhouBoTong
    290
    The summary of opinions on this issue suggests I may be rather unpopular with this opinion, so I will include some of my thoughts supporting REAL actions that could lead to a significant reduction in the gender pay gap.

    In case anyone does not care about soccer or the U.S.A. I will give a very brief background. U.S. Women's soccer is suing over the fact that U.S. women soccer players are paid 40%-70% of what the U.S. men's players are paid. My opinion is that this is a nonsense claim that ignores the fact that this specific example has NOTHING to do with the real gender pay gap.

    First off, I do believe the world has a significant problem related to gender pay equality. The problem is systemic and cultural. The world can look to countries like Iceland, for specific examples of ideas that ACTUALLY reduce gender pay inequality. Things like required parental leave for BOTH parents when a baby is born. These types of actions can and have significantly reduced gender pay inequality.

    However, paying 18 soccer players more money is clearly not going to change anything. But some will argue that it can act as symbol. I hope to show that that would be dangerous and flawed and is likely to lead to less support for gender pay equality as it massively confuses the issue.

    Equal pay for equal work. Hard to disagree with that. The soccer player's "job" is playing soccer right? Well, is it? Is that why they are paid millions of dollars? Why aren't Professional Curlers paid nearly as much? This shows that sports stars are paid as ENTERTAINERS. Their pay is relative to the revenue they generate. Therefor, the women's team is not doing "equal" work. The constantly repeated "fact"
    that the U.S. women's team "outperforms" the men's team, shows people's misunderstanding of sports. And just to be sure, everyone is aware that the U.S. men's team would easily beat the U.S. women's team...right? That last sentence does not matter to the point I was making, but further highlights the abuse of the word "equal".

    The fact is that Women's World Cup players ALL earn a higher percent of the revenue generated by the event than their male counterparts. The Men's World Cup generates BILLIONS in revenue. The Women's World Cup might generate 100 million (the last stats I could find were from 2011 where the women's Cup generated $73 million {the Men's made 4 billion that year}).

    When the revenue from the Women's World Cup is less than 5% of the men's revenue, why is it a problem that the women make only 40% of what men do? It actually seems unfair in favor of women.

    I believe there are serious actions that need to be enacted to reduce gender pay inequality. I think sideshows like this do nothing but distract and give ammunition to those who call the entire issue a farce.

    What does everyone else think?
  • Baden
    8k


    I tend to agree in this case. Male soccer players of a similar skill to those female players also get paid considerably less than the best male players. And if it's not skill or revenue or difficulty of work that determines pay, what is it?
  • ZhouBoTong
    290
    I tend to agree in this case.Male soccer players of a similar skill to those female players also get paid considerably less than the best male players. And if it's not skill or revenue or difficulty of work that determines pay, what is it?Baden

    Woohoo! Alright. I actually started this thread because I went searching the internet for opinions that agreed with me and could only find 1 or 2 (with about a thousand on the other side). Got to confirm I am not crazy and all.

    And I think I forgot to mention the bold portion. That is an important point. The wage gap between the highest and lowest male earners is 1000% plus. This is NOT a gender issue.
  • andrewk
    2.1k
    I agree too.

    Sadly, it looks like you may not be able to get a debate on this point.
  • Hanover
    4.6k
    My two cents worth is that if the world were a Utopia and composed only of Hanovers, no soccer player would get paid because there'd be no demand.

    There'd be some other very disturbing demand surges though.
  • I like sushi
    1.2k
    This looks more like fishing for extremists. Will be interesting to see if anyone is radicalized enough to take the bait.
  • ZhouBoTong
    290
    :up:Brett

    I agree too.

    Sadly, it looks like you may not be able to get a debate on this point.
    andrewk

    This looks more like fishing for extremists. Will be interesting to see if anyone is radicalized enough to take the baitI like sushi

    Thanks all. Never have I been so happy to NOT get a debate. I really felt this was a non-issue. But when I did some googling, it seemed 90% of responses were in favor of the women suing. And most articles, just treat it like it is obvious.

    Just making sure I wasn't missing something.
  • I like sushi
    1.2k
    I think people write such hyperbolic stuff because there is certainly inequality out there. We do still hear of the occasional case of a woman being paid less than a man for the same position - or rather being offered less for the position. I imagine there are situations where sometimes women are offered more than a man for a position too, but I’d be lying if I thought it didn’t happen to women more often.

    Sadly many articles actually damage their own cause by making ridiculous comparisons.
  • Bitter Crank
    7.8k
    I don't care whether they get paid or not.
  • I like sushi
    1.2k
    I don’t care whether you don’t care of they get paid or not. I also assume thats you don’t care that I don’t care that you don’t care. Care to respond? ;)
  • Bitter Crank
    7.8k
    I, of course, do not care to respond in such a way that indicated I cared whether I responded or not.
bold
italic
underline
strike
code
quote
ulist
image
url
mention
reveal
youtube
tweet
Add a Comment

Welcome to The Philosophy Forum!

Get involved in philosophical discussions about knowledge, truth, language, consciousness, science, politics, religion, logic and mathematics, art, history, and lots more. No ads, no clutter, and very little agreement — just fascinating conversations.