U.S. Women's Soccer Suit Highlights My Issues With Pay-Equality Movement

[ClassicRocker]

Part 1:

For reference: USWNT= US women's national team USMNT= US men's national team

Read the whole thing before you start throwing hate.

5 members of the USWNT soccer team are suing the league for equality of pay.

Hope Solo, one of the best US women's soccer players and the major spokesperson of the campaign said:

"We are the best in the world, have three World Cup Championships, four Olympic Championships, and the USMNT [men's team] get paid more just to show up than we get paid to win major championships,"

This part is actually quite true, the USWNT frequently outperforms the USMNT in their respective leagues and the USMNT is better paid.

So if the women are better than the men, but get paid much less, it must simply be an issue of gender right?

This is only true if you twist the definition of "better" in a very specific way.

The only real glimpse we get into how much "better" the women's team is than the men's is right before Olympic games when the USWNT hosts a scrimmage against the U-17 MNT. The last time they played (2012) the U-17 MNT beat the USWNT 8 to 2.

I guess now would be a good time to mention that the "U-17" in U-17 MNT stands for "Under 17" Yes they played against children and lost (quite badly).

When people watch a sport they're there to see a spectacle. They want to see the fastest, strongest, most skilled players out there giving it their all for our entertainment and their paychecks. I'm all for opening up male teams to female players across all sports, but even a female player as good as Solo would be on a minor-league team in the men's section. She is being paid more than what her fair market value would be on a men's team.

This story does not speak to the level of "inequality" that exists in the U.S., but rather the amount of "equality" that already exists. Why do you think the US women's team is so good? Because we're the only country with the pocketbook and will to set up outstanding programs for women's sports.

Part 2: How does this relate to the equality movement as a whole?

What I am speaking to specifically is the notion that women get paid something like 77 cents on the dollar for what they're calling "equal work". Let me break down their statistically sound and highly sophisticated method of determining this:

1. Look at average full-time male and female pay on a yearly basis (30hours/week and greater)

2. Compare them side by side

That's it... No adjusting for education level, hours worked, field of study, or even actual occupation.

Chart for reference to following data source: bureau of labor statistics

Here are some facts:

1. Full-time male workers work an average of 58.8 hours/week (including holidays/Saturdays/Sundays worked)

2. Full time female workers work and average of 54.6 hours/week (including holidays/Saturdays/Sundays worked)

Here is a chart that will explain the educational divide fairly well:

Look at the male-heavy fields and female-heavy fields. With the exception of nursing there is not one major dominated by women would typically land you an upper-middle class job.

Now, because this is an unbiased take I would like to be clear in noting that even after these things are considered, and gender becomes the only factor there is still a wage gap. On average that wage gap is in the 4-5% range.

[Spiorad_Aisce]

There are a lot of truths and facts that can be thrown at this argument from both sides that are logical but for me the fundamental point right at the heart of it is that men and women should be paid equally for the SAME work.
Your argument about the US MNT and WNT doesn't hold up because they are not doing the same work. A flyweight boxer and a heavyweight boxer should not be judged equally entering a boxing match against each other because the heavyweight should win early in the first round but if they were on same card and the flyweight was world famous, they would get top billing and most money.
Football/soccer is technically the same but gender different and as someone said there is a revenue element, the US WNT will always draw a bigger crowd unless the US MNT was playing the one of the top football/soccer nations. Why - The US WNT has been far more successful than the US MNT and women's football/soccer is much more popular than men's in US.
The crux of my argument is if men and women were both asked to do same thing and had equal capabilities for the task, they should be paid exactly the same but in the case of the US WNT an argument could be made for them to be paid more because they are more successful and a bigger draw.

[ClassicRocker]

They're clearly not "better" players though like they've stated. Did you read the part where they got beat by the under-17 men's team 8-2?
The MNT is full of higher caliber players you take an exception female player like Solo and she'd be on a minor league men's team.

[Sara413]

For me it boils down to this: the women's team is bringing in far greater revenue than the men's team. Their pay should reflect that.

End. Point.

[Waffles731]

That is how capitalism is supposed to work.
Keu Word Supposed.
Unregulated and monitored capitalism just sucks and in some ways is eeriely similar to how communism works in practice

[ClassicRocker]

They're using projections for a single year (2017) to get that data that says the WNT will have more revenue. Also you have to consider that the men's revenue will spike massively during world cup years. Compare them on an average basis so that the cup-year revenue gets spread out, or check the MNT figures from 2014 and it won't even be close.

[cavmanier]

Yeah from what I understand the women had a world cup this year which =💰💰 The women's world cup generated around 17 million from advertising. The men didn't have a world cup this year, but their recent world cup generated about 529 million. So the men generated about 31 times what the women did when comparing the year they generate the most money. When looking at revenue paid to players the numbers aren't available for the women yet but their recent world cup they received 13% apparently while the men earned 7%. In a way the men are paid low compared to women regarding revenue. But yeah the reporters that talked about this probably didn't understand that. Obviously the media wants a story that will headline so they can sell ads just like the soccer players.

[JuicyBrain]

I completely agree with you.

[Raven1990]

@cavmanier obviously the media and these girls who supports feminism doesn't know anything about football and the revenue associated with that, everybody knows that men's football generates more revenue than women's football any place in the world

[Curmudgeon]

ARE they? Like the WNBA, some sports simply have greater attendance, even if the women's performances may be stellar.

[cavmanier]

@Curmudgeon Yeah the highest paid or "best" woman player in the wnba only makes around 100k (it's over 500k for the lowest paid rookie in the mens league), but the nba subsidizes the woman's league to say in business. I don't think the investors have done that to be nice as much as seeing the woman's league a business with growth potential. I don't think many female athletes or celebrities make less do to being a woman. Their profit depends on the market and how they capitalize. Britney Spears or whoever is popular atm doesn't necessarily make less than Justin Timberlake because of their sex.

[ksoma]

All other "pay gap" myths aside, my argument for why they should not is simple: Women's sports have a smaller audience because less people are interested, and thus they attract less ad dollars.

Women's sports leagues are important. They need the option to do that if they want, just as people who want to watch need the option to be able to see them perform. That said? Putting more women's sports on TV won't get them more money, because they do not have the same audience numbers as male sports. You can not mandate what people want to see, and you can not force them to watch, for example, the WNBA in the same numbers as the NBA. If people don't want to watch it, they won't, and so channels choose to put on other things, because they attract more views.

On the other hand? I say give it to them. Let them have equal pay to male counter parts. And then watch as their leagues and teams fall apart, and they no longer have a game to play. Watch as they try to shift the blame to ANY possible thing, other than the simple economics that say an organization worth far less, trying to pay out the same wages of an organization worth far more, is doomed to fail.

[funnybanana]

Holy crap, are people really trying to compare men and women in football (soccer)? Jesus Christ, there is no possible comparison. I respect the US for having such a great WNT, way better than most of the WNT in Europe. But come on, be reasonable, any person who at least understands a tiny bit of the game knows about the difference of quality. This doesn't happen only in football, but in other sports too. The US MNT may not be that great, but put them against the WNT and they would win 20-0. Even if we're only talking revenue, men move billions of euros (dollars, doesn't matter). There is no possible comparison. In Europe, most WNT are a joke (Germany is great), so there isn't really any competition for the US WNT anyway. Be happy that you can make a living out of a football career, because for someone used to watching the best football on Earth (Men - Europe), women's football can be boring as hell. And don't get me wrong, I'm glad women's football exists. I'm just replying to anyone who even considers comparing women to men in football. In the US, this debate is already pretty stupid. In Europe people would die laughing if they read some of the bullshit that's written on some of these comments. I'm speechless.

[JuicyBrain]

I don't know much about this case and I know even less about soccer. I know that sports are really a showbiz. Even if the men's team sucked, if they had 10 times as many viewers as the women, then they have much more money to spend than for the women. If the women are by far the best but nobody is interested in watching them play then of course they'll have less to share.
With that said, the opposite should be true also. If the women's league bring in more money, then they should be paid more than their male counterpart.
It's showbiz. If it was a tv show, whoever had the show that everybody watches would get paid more. So is there a gap between the two? Yes. Is the reason why there is a gap sexist? I don't think so unless you count not being interested in watching women play soccer sexist.

I am all for equal pay though. By that I mean that people should be payed for their merit while their gender should be overlooked. A woman who does half the work a man does should be paid half as much

[Dubhlann]

No actually the USWNT had a higher viewership than the USMNT. So... yeah... show biz, the USWNT deserve more.

[JuicyBrain]

@Dubhlann Then if the USWNT got more revenue, they definitely should be payed more than the men.

[Tanuron]

Its pretty simple in many ways really too. Male soccer have always been bigger, in everyway. Popularity, commercial, lisenses etc. So naturally a more popular product in a way would bring in more money, so naturally too they would get better paid. Not to mention soccer in general the pay is all over the place, is nothing set in stone there really. Female porn stars for example earn a lot more than the male ones overall, but of course again like there, the demand and the popularity.

And the 77 cent to every dollar is probably the biggest retarted thing ever. Like they take on average and dont calculate to anything and think that is proof of unequal pay,. Man talk about brain error. Like obviously, women get pregnant for one, do they usally work then?, nope. And even if kinda cliche or stereotypical, but no doubt is a common thing for the woman to be home and take care of the kids while the husband work stil. She may get various child support and what not, but naturally wouldn't earn as much as a full time working guy who support his family. So obviously males overall would be earning more in total. Goes without even saying. So how on earth anyone with a brain can actually say its "proof" of the wage gap and all that, can't possiblly have a working brain.

[FakeName123]

Meanwhile in Reality 2003 the germans women national team after all the hype from the won World-Cup played against the youth-team of VFB Stuttgart who were alle aged 14-16 with the game-length being 3x15 minutes (instead of 2x45minutes normally) and they cancelled it within the second third, because it was going to be a humiliation

Use google translate: https://archive.is/xwxq6

Former record-nationalplayer Lothar Matthäus gone so far and said that Women have no chance down to the 4th german league. Birgit Prinz, starplayer, said that 17 years old sprint faster than women in the athletic field.

Hence, a lot of women players themselves say that they can't catch up on the athletics and also prefer to watch the men play, because its faster and more physical.

Also the US team had a skim-game against the u-17 as well and lost it 2-8: forums.bigsoccer.com/.../

But hey, they still want the same pay for worse performance. Or maybe they want the same pay for worse spectators. This is the so-called equality certain women talk about these days. "Fuck capitalism, we want socialism. I don't care if our wages get payed by performance as well as demand of the product. I have a vagina, I deserve this."

41.media.tumblr.com/.../...hyi63u1tvgy3mo1_400.jpg

[Anonymous]

This -particular- case is actually going to be quite an interesting one.

A few relevant, or interesting but not relevant points, some noted by you:
- While the USWNT has had greater performance vs. other women's teams than the USMNT has against men's, there's no question the USMNT are far 'better' at soccer. TBH I actually think this is irrelevant, but it's being brought up in support of the women when actually if anything it supports the men (who are 'better' and effectively playing in a higher tier of competition). But who cares? Because that's not how pay works.
- How pay works #1: the women's team get paid salaries. The men's team get paid per game and are left free to play. The women receive maternity leave and other benefits, the men do not. This was negotiated by the union representing the women's players.
- How pay works #2: the 'market price' for full time or near full time services of a high level professional male soccer player is much higher than that of a female soccer player who would be unable to crack the men's leagues. Don't doubt it, if any of these women were good enough to be a starter for Real Madrid, they would be. So the 'market salary' for the men is much higher.
- How pay works #3 and the one that makes the whole thing an actual interesting case: The US women's soccer team generates more revenue than the men's team. USWNT generates profit while the USMNT is operating at a loss.

And that one is the kicker. It really doesn't matter what the USMNT is paid. USWNT could arguably lobby for higher pay, or a higher cut of revenue. Their success against other female teams combined with marketing around them has built that revenue stream up.

Not really a pay equity case I don't think, beyond the fact that the USMNT operates at a loss because it has to match market rates for men's players, while the USWNT can probably pay above market and still be profitable... so there's some room for negotiation on how to divvy up those profits.

[ClassicRocker]

There's the issue of low overhead for the WNT as well. They don't build stadiums for the WNT to compete in. I'm sure they have one for their own home and excellent practice facilities, but they build the stadiums for the MNT and the WNT just kind of piggybacks on existing infrastructure.

[Opinion Owner]

If have to see that. Pretty sure the women's team has straight up more revenue and lower player costs so any reasonable division of shared costs is still going to make the USWNT more profitable. It's an unusual case.

[Anonymous]

Wouldn't this just be the usual demand and supply? I don't particularly care about soccer and I am not at all invested in the American teams or their relative popularity.

In my own country the main reason male soccer players are paid more is that they get significantly higher viewership and enjoy a higher popularity.
Most sports revenues are, at the core, about entertainment and not relative performance. Winning in the less popular leagues simply won't be anywhere near as important.

As harsh as reality is this is also why female models and porn actresses (yes, colorful example) earn on average 2-7x what their male counterparts do. It isn't necessarily that they are relatively speaking better but their audience is much larger and people care more about seeing them.

So in short, if these soccer players want more money they need to promote their sport and make it more enjoyable to a larger audience. There's no puppet master trying to give men higher wages, it is simply the case of popularity, viewership etc.

[somebodysaycheese]

Ah, the women should get paid as much as the men simply because they both play soccer and the female US soccer team plays better, has more trophies and draws in a larger viewing, Now we can say that female sports aren't as popular as male sports and that is true. And that is sexism, some former basketball player made a comment last year how men didn't want to see covered up , being sweaty and serious like men. They wanted to see women in skimpy outfits showing skin acting like they play sports and many men agreed with him. Men are sexist in this sense, they do not take female athletes as serious as male athletes. Any way, I forsee female sports getting bigger after all the u are actually winning.

[ClassicRocker]

Except they don't play better. Did you skip the part where they got beat 8-2 by children?

[somebodysaycheese]

Have you watched the women's world cup and euros? Women's U. S team wins where the men's team looses. Women are drawing in larger audiences to watch them vs men and they are selling far more merchandise. Its only right women be paid equal

[ihatethiswebsite]

The soccer league for women isn't as good so only a couple teams dominate. Just like in women's college basketball UCONN always dominates because there's not much competition. Women's soccer doesn't have nearly the backing men's soccer has where there are tons of teams who play at an extremely high level.

[somebodysaycheese]

@ihatethiswebsite we aren't talking about the league but the national groups. And if we are being honest the u. s leagues are crap,

[Raven1990]

Hey Asker, are you used to follow football/soccer too?
I cannot put in words better than what you did when you criticized Solo's campaign for "equality". For those who understand football/soccer, we know that women's team sucks bad in comparison to any men's national team!! I'm not being misogynist... this is just the plain truth. Women's soocer match usually are boring and has less entertainment simply because they don't play at the same level as men, they possess less skills, less vision, less strength, less speed than a men's football match...

Ok, USA and Japan has the best national squad, they usually wins women's world cup, but that doesn't mean that a women's match like USA x Japan is better than average men's team like Uruguay x Colombia

[ClassicRocker]

I don't typically watch women's soccer, but I pay enough attention to men's soccer during the off-years to enjoy the world cup.

[QuestionMan]

When I first saw the title I thought well obviously men earn more, it's because of the popularity of male sports which gain more revenue so it makes sense to pay higher wages. That and male players are significantly better.

Great Take.

More women should go into STEM but they choose low paying jobs for some reason. Only Nursing is well paid but there are many other fields like engineering, economics, computer science and others that earn a lot of money but they simply choose not to enter them. I have no idea why.

[Dubhlann]

How do you define "popularity"? Because the USWNT had a higher viewership in the US than the USMNT.

[QuestionMan]

@Dubhlann I was referring to worldwide popularity. Since more money is earned at male championships and the earnings are redistributed to each country, it makes sense that the USMNT would have more money than the USWNT and therefore be able to afford to pay higher wages.

[Riverock]

Afaik, the men's team are paid far more than the women's team at their clubs. This won't affect that. All I know about this is that the women's team are paid less by the US federation despite bringing more money to it than they the men's teams. That seems wrong.

I agree that the different demand in both sports should equate to different pay but when women are contributing more money to an organisation, equal pay from that organisation (the men will still get paid more at their clubs btw) is the least they deserve in my opinion.

[Dubhlann]

The inequality of Women's soccer compared to Men's soccer is not just in pay either. Women's soccer is given far substandard conditions to play in.

In FIFA, For a men's match it's required that they play on natural grass which is much better playing conditions, resulting in far fewer injuries...

Those requirements are not the same for the women. 8 of the 10 venues for the Women's World Cup were played on artificial turf. FIFA cited Canada's environment as not being conducive to playing on natural turf... but anyone want to take odds on all the stadiums in Qatar (which is a DESERT with average summer temps over 100F) having natural turf?

[Josht11]

Good mytake, I thought this was bullshit when they were on about the world cup and how the USW only got $2 mil whereas Germany got $35 million it seems like bullshit but when you realise that the Womens world cup only drew in about 250 million viewers the mens got 2.2 billion so the men got 8.8 times more the eyes and the mens world cup got $3.7 billion in revenue whereas the womens got $73 million holy shit you can't expect to be paid the same when your not making that much money for the company.

[Anonymous]

This is ridiculous. When women started talking about pay equality and pay gaps in the workplace, the first thing men were so quick to jump on is that is is the WOMEN who aren't negotiating for higher salaries like men apparently do... then... omg... then, the moment these women say hey, we're winning games here, we're winning championships and Olympics... which is the equivalent of say winning cases at the law firm vs. another law firm that just shows up and does a so-so job, and yet we're being paid less for the same job. How does that work? You want to talk about job success and how we measure a job well done, I'd say in soccer that's winning games. I mean how else do you measure what a good soccer team is?

[ClassicRocker]

How about how many people watch it?

[Opinion Owner]

I would ask you this? Is women's soccer (or football) being promoted at the same level as men's, especially given their winning record? Are there just as many interviews, and video segments, and per-merchandise, and sports segments on these women as the men? Are those equal as we are talking about equity here in the first place? Where are your hard core facts and statistics on that?

[Dubhlann]

How many people watched the Women's World Cup?

In the US, the championship game of the Women's World Cup was the most watched soccer match in US history... not the most watched WOMEN'S soccer match... but the most watched soccer match EVER. It beat any USMNT match and beat the Men's World Cup final match (Germany v Argentina).

For other sports it was also very comparable. 26.7 million watched the USWNT while 28.3 million watched the NCAA Men's Basketball final.

So yeah... a lot of people were watching.

[Opinion Owner]

@Dubhlann thank you, and so that brings us back to the point that they are clearly being paid unfairly for the amount of winning they are doing as compared to the men's team. We know from a long history of sports in general, that winning the big championship in whatever equals revenue, and so why isn't that being translated into women's soccer and their pay?

[Dubhlann]

I can't speak to FIFA revenue... I know FIFA doesn't pay women's teams the same as men's teams. But speaking purely from an American point of view... The USA Soccer doesn't pay the women's team as much as the men's team even though they do better in TV ratings and actual matches. So much so that many players on the USWNT are forced to live with sponsors and barely make enough money to survive as a professional athlete.

Additionally the playing conditions the the USWNT are forced to play on are unacceptable, being forced to forfeit a match that was to be played on substandard artificial turf (Hawaii Stadium) rather than the lush natural turf that the USMNT gets.

[Opinion Owner]

@Dubhlann this should be a clear cut case for equity pay. How does one explain a losing team making more money than a winning one and the side effects of not being paid what they are clearly worth? I would love to hear the legal arguments against this.

[ClassicRocker]

Viewership and merchandise sales make more revenue. Winning games just typically gets you more viewership...

[Opinion Owner]

Oh, okay, so now, it's about the merchandise? Why did you even ask about how many people watch it if you'd not done your research? This quote was taken direction from the federation meeting: "the budget shows the federation expects the women’s team to produce more revenue than the men’s team in fiscal years 2016 and 2017." So now what's the excuse for the men's team... that they are men? There is absolutely 100% no reason that the men's team should be being paid TWICE, literally, nearly twice what the women make for the job the women's team are pulling in. It's even to the point where the men's team flies business class, while the women's has to fly economy and like the other commenter mentioned, they have no say, unlike the men on what turf they play on. You cannot explain that away in any shape or form as being equal. This case will hopefully expose the massive discrepancies between the two teams and bring the pay to where it actually deserves to be for the women's team.

[dudeman]

they are not doing the same job. women are playing against women, they couldnt do the mans job.

[oddwaffle]

Here is a another critical fact in the wage gap: women choose a different career path than men. Supposed you have 2 lawyers. There is a critical job opportunity for advancement but this job aprt of requires 100% dedication (like 2am emergency trip to Tokyo meeting) and effort. If the woman is about to have a baby or just had one then she will not take the job and might settle for a more flexible position. The man is more likely going to take it if he is about to have a kid or just had one.

These types of things pop up a lot during work. Whether its extra shifts or a more demanding position. Women tend to choose the flexible route because they priorities care for their family. Men tend to choose leaving the family for long periods for a chance of making more.

[Fugue]

I don't feel too strongly about the "wage gap", one way or another, but last I heard, the evidence showed that it was nowhere near 77/100. More like 95/100, at best. As far as the soccer teams, yhey should pay the women's team more than they are, but at the same time, the reality is that the men's team needs to attract talent with higher wages, because the global competition is a much bigger deal. The US men's team would have no chance of attracting talent if they paid them little, so that's why they pay them more than the women despite not creating as much revenue. If the women's soccer was to grow at the global level, it would be a different situation.

[Jager66]

Don't forget men prioritize higher pay when looking for a job while women prioritize other benefits. Women are also much less likely to negotiate for better pay than their male counterparts.

Feminism 101:
Woman decides to clean toilets in a hotel near home in the city for 40 hrs. a week with weekends and evenings off. gets paid 10$ an hour.

Man decides to clean toilets at an off shore oil platform at sea thousands of miles from home and family, working 84hrs. a week for 3 months at a time while living in a tiny bunk room with 3 other men. gets paid 30$ an hour.

Clearly the pay discrepancy here is because of sexism against women, because Patriarchy...

[BellePepper]

The US women's national team makes more money, they bring in more views, and they *consistently* do better than the men's team. Period. They should be paid more. There is literally zero reason to not be paying them more.

Stop trying to make this into some twisted agenda when the answer is clear.

[ClassicRocker]

I'm not sure why everyone is getting this so wrong: Women's world cup had 750 million viewers and was a record breaking year for them. The men's world cup from the previous year pulled in 3.2 billion.
Sources:

www.fifa.com/.../...illion-tv-viewers-2745963.html

www.fifa.com/.../...-billion-watched--2745519.html

[BellePepper]

Once again, I'm talking American viewers of American teams shown on American networks.

[ClassicRocker]

Oh I wasn't aware that only Americans had money to spend...

[BellePepper]

Considering that this is a topic about American teams with American players who play games shown on American networks doesn't it make sense to target American numbers?

[ClassicRocker]

Umm no... not if your basing it on the foundation that your team brings more viewership... The American Soccer market is practically irrelevant on the scale of the world cup. Even if every single person in America watched the game it wouldn't even be 10% of their viewers.

[BellePepper]

That is ridiculous since the women won last year and they were runners up the year before AND they've placed in the last 5 consecutive tournaments. The women's national team's performance has also lead to the development and implementation of the NWSL. The US also produces over 60% of international women's soccer players.

Women's soccer is big in the US and the Portland Thorns prove it.

[ClassicRocker]

I don't think you're understanding how this works. Games get viewers and sell merchandise and players salaries come out of the profits. The men's world cup had over 4x more viewers than the women's. That's where the money comes from.

[BellePepper]

You're complaining about a lawsuit that you do not even understand and then using it to push your agenda.

I am attempting to educate you.

The women are suing the US SOCCER FEDERATION which is an American organization so we are paying attention to American numbers. If you want to talk INTERNATIONAL, we would need to talk about FIFA and use INTERNATIONAL numbers.

The women's national team brought in a TWENTY MILLION DOLLAR SURPLUS to the US Soccer Federation and yet the USSF is paying them so much less than the MNT! The MNT could LOSE all 20 of their required friendly games and they would STILL make more than if the WNT WON all 20 of their friendlies!

They made over 20 million dollars more for the league than the MNT did. They brought in more viewers. They worked harder. They worked longer. They WON more. They should be compensated more.

[cavmanier]

Apparently the woman's world cup generated 31 times less revenue than the mens. The men didn't have a world cup this year though so their revenue is lower. But women were actually paid about double regarding percentage of revenue than the men during recent world cups. (men paid 7% women 13%)

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier We're not questioning how much was brought in by international sales. We're talking about the WNT being compensation by the USSF. The WNT made so much more money than projected that the USSF had a 20 million dollar surplus while the MNT ended in deficient.

So the women are bringing in literally MILLIONS of dollars and the USSF isn't coming anywhere close to paying them fairly! Like when I look at the numbers it's not just unfair, it's shockingly unfair! These women are bringing in all this extra money and it's going to pay for the men's program instead of the women's! newshour-tc.pbs.org/.../uswntsoccer.jpg

[cavmanier]

I'm not sure what that is but apparently the women collectively bargained a more conservative 'guaranteed pay' agreement with US soccer rather than a more risky 'pay to play' contract. So pay for their service was previously negotiated and arranged by both sides.

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier The WNT's contract actually expired in 2012 and it has repeatedly been made it extremely difficult to renew the contract under new terms and is actually now suing the WNT's union to maintain the outdated contract. This effectively makes it impossible for the WNT to bargain for better terms.

[cavmanier]

I'm not sure. I just saw a quote in the New York Soccer saying the womens team agreed to the conservative contract. I don't know all the details obviously but I'm pretty sure they have the same legal rights to negotiate their services as men do. Maybe the soccer situation is more complicated. I doubt someone offering products like Martha Stewart or Jessica Simpson get automatically lower product reimbursements due to being women. They have the same potential to generate profits like a man is my guess. It may have been more difficult for them to create their brands in some ways due to being female but I don't know. I think they still have lots of potential to create wealth in the free market like they've shown. By what you said the issue for the womens soccer team is they need to get control of their contract negotiations. Unfortunately if they don't, I doubt that's because of something US soccer did. The women probably got into that position from some prior negotiation.

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier Mooky's picture throws me off every time and it's cracking me up XD

Annnyway. It's super complicated and there's been a lot of pressure on the team to just go with the shitty contract because women's soccer has been in a precarious situation because the NWSL is SO new and they were basically told agree to this bad contract for the sake of the league. But now they have more bargaining power because of how much money they've brought in and how well they're doing.

[cavmanier]

I better change the pic lol

Absolutely they will have more bargaining power now. Hopefully the terms they agreed to are short term. Of course the US soccer is probably a business and wants to gain as much money as they can regardless of the persons gender, unfortunately. I dislike a lot about capitalism sometimes.

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier LOL! Then I might get in trouble!!!

honestly when I see the numbers and all the misconceptions, I don't see how this can't be a gender thing :/

[cavmanier]

No she already changed hers to avoid confusion :)

Maybe but I think business are much more concerned with maximizing their profits than like oppressing women. Maybe them thinking they can have more leverage over the women is kind of oppressive I don't know. I would have to look at the different variables closely to really have a strong opinion.

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier Awwwww understandable.

If they pay the women less, they make more. I don't know if that's specifically oppressive but I definitely think they're taking advantage of the situation and working to continue that advantage.

[cavmanier]

Of course. They want as much money as they can get. I think greed is more the issue.

[BellePepper]

@cavmanier Agreed. They see a vulnerable group and are taking advantage.

[GingerBear]

Fuckin' a.

This is EXACTLY the problem with this 'women earn 77 cents to every dollar a man makes' shit. It's the most misleading piece of bullshit. There are so many reasons for it, none of which have anything to do with gender discrimination.

Great take.

[Goldie757]

But woman's soccer is not as popular as men's soccer. That is why they are paid less, if the made the same revenue then there would be paid more.

[FakeName123]

Ding-ding. Correct. It's not as popular AND it's also nowhere near the same quality in performance.

[Dipsy]

Same with modeling, women make way more than men in modeling.
It's just that we have differences and that we should embrace those. Everyone has her or his personal strengths and they should act upon those. :)

[BellePepper]

That's not true though. Women's soccer is just as popular if not more popular than men's soccer. The women's world cup had TWICE as many viewers as the men's world cup.

[ClassicRocker]

@BellePepper

Not quite sorry unless 750 million=3.2 billion

Sources:
www.fifa.com/.../...-billion-watched--2745519.html

www.fifa.com/.../...illion-tv-viewers-2745963.html

[BellePepper]

I'm sorry I didn't realize I needed to qualify American views for American teams.

In 2014 (mens) there were 17.3m viewers
In 2015 (womens) there were 25.4m viewers

[ClassicRocker]

@BellePepper Again most of the money comes internationally why focus only on American viewers? That's like only counting one state's viewership for a baseball game.

[BellePepper]

The lawsuit is against the U. S. Soccer Federation not FIFA so it makes sense to only track the American market.

[mntwins66]

@BellePepper The American market still profits from international sales.

[BellePepper]

@mntwins66 That's true, but the lawsuit which OP is using to base his argument on is about a domestic organization and domestic payment.

[mntwins66]

@BellePepper That domestic organization still makes international sales, even though they are based in this country. Money payed to the players isn't all from the US citizens.

[BellePepper]

@mntwins66 The vast majority is though.

[mntwins66]

@BellePepper If you think about the billions more people who watch men's soccer than women's soccer, probably not.

[BellePepper]

@mntwins66 So "billions" more people watch the men by the women are still bringing in surpluses of 20 and 17 million dollars?

[mntwins66]

@BellePepper That is definitely not the world revenue. And when you break it down the Men get payed less of a percentage of their revenue than the women.

[FakeName123]

@mntwins66

Don't even bother. She just wants to read what works in her worldview. If she would have taken a few seconds to properly read she would have figured that the entire lawsuit is about the world-cups and the US teams and thus international revenue is relevant instead of domestic ones. The US Soccer federation obviously is dependant on what to pay for the women on how much they earnt hemselves. And there the men have have multiple times the viewership and thus revenue. Not to mention that the last two attempts of domestic women leagues in the US after the millennium gone bankrupt and the NWSL is already the third attempt to make it somewhat profitable and sustainable while these greedy girls

750 people watched the ENTIRE world cup of the women: www.fifa.com/.../...illion-tv-viewers-2745963.html

The final of the men alone was watched by 3.2 billion aka more than 4 times as much in a single just care for their own $$$

[FakeName123]

WTF. Half my comment was swallowed.

... while these greedy girls just want their selfish $$$.

750 people watched the ENTIRE world cup of the women: www.fifa.com/.../...illion-tv-viewers-2745963.html

The final of the men alone was watched by 3.2 billion aka more than 4 times as much in a single game: www.fifa.com/.../...-billion-watched--2745519.html

P. S. In the domestic league women only have 1/4th attendance on average while also having only half the amount of games.

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 That's ridiculous. WNT games sell out and the Portland Thorns have sell out games.

[FakeName123]

@BellePepper

I mean even on wikipedia you find it within 20 seconds of effort:

en.wikipedia.org/.../2015_National_Women's_Soccer_League_season

Total Attendance: 454,100
Average Attendance: 5046
Teams in the League: 9
Games being played: 20 per Team + 1-2 if in the playoffs
Lowest Attendance: 953
Highest Attendance: 21,144

en.wikipedia.org/.../2015_Major_League_Soccer_season

Average Attendance: 21,574
Teams in both Conferences: 20
Games played: 34 + up to 8 in the playoffs
Lowest Attendance: 10,035
Highest Attendance: 64,358

So where is it ridiculous?

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 The 21,144 were the Portland Thorns at Providence Park. AKA the team I referenced.

[FakeName123]

@BellePepper

So? Whats your point? My point is that way more people watch the men on average and thus their revenue and with it their players salary are bigger. This is literally the 1+1 of economics.

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 So women bring in large audiences too and people like you need to stop saying they don't.

[FakeName123]

@BellePepper

Way to get past the point. If you were a spaceship you wouldn't have landed on Mars, but on Pluto.

The point wasn't that women have no audience. The point was that they earn less and rightfully so because they have a way smaller audience and thus way smaller revenue. If you want them to earn more, stop complaining and start going to games, buy trikots, etc.

[FakeName123]

buy jerseys*

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 the Thorns sell out games just like the Timbers so I fail to see how women have a smaller audience.

[FakeName123]

@BellePepper

Scroll up and see the average attendance between men and women which I posted. And stop playing dumb.

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 honey you're obviously unfamiliar with the NWSL. You should be happy I'm helping you learn more.

[FakeName123]

@BellePepper

Either you are trolling or you have the mental capacities of a first grader, because frankly - a first grader would understand something this simple.

One last time for you extra slow and idiotsafe:

1. Average men attendance of 21,574 vs average women attendance of 5046.
2. Men have more people willing to pay for watching them.
3. There is more income because more people are willing and in fact do pay.
4. Men earn more money.

I could ask my 1st grade neighbor and he would understand something this simple. Thus I must assume you are either less capable intellectually than a 1st grader or you are plain trolling.

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123

[BellePepper]

@FakeName123 The Portland Thorns bring in as many people as the Portland Timbers. What part of that do you not understand?

Even so these are NWSL and MLS numbers. Not MNT and WNT.