Sports Pay Gender gap...
-
@stargazer said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@taniwharugby I agree, but I must admit they're very good at comparing apples and oranges.
Precisely.
However, comparing apples with apples; my niece is a bit awesome on a dirtbike and at the nationals, riding the same bikes on the same tracks as fast or faster than men having paid the same entrance fee, will receive a quarter of the prize money.
-
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
-
@no-quarter said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
-
The captain of the best national team in world soccer earns $10.7M NZD per year. I'm outraged that Kieran Read earns only 12% of this. The highest paid soccer player earned 75 times what Read did. That's an outrage and i demand more money comes in to rugby to pay Read the exact same amount.
Perhaps they should compare Netball to NBL contracts? Although i doubt that will raise quite the same click-worthy headlines.
Well done Stuff, you are a pretty decent tabloid these days.
-
@mariner4life said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
The captain of the best national team in world soccer earns $10.7M NZD per year. I'm outraged that Kieran Read earns only 12% of this. The highest paid soccer player earned 75 times what Read did. That's an outrage and i demand more money comes in to rugby to pay Read the exact same amount.
Perhaps they should compare Netball to NBL contracts? Although i doubt that will raise quite the same click-worthy headlines.
Well done Stuff, you are a pretty decent tabloid these days.
These days? I think they've been like this for a good decade now.
-
While we are on the topic of Stuff.
Wouldn't snubbed mean not making the top 20?
-
@hooroo said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
While we are on the topic of Stuff.
Wouldn't snubbed mean not making the top 20?
Stephen Jones has endorsed this list. It's ok, move along everyone.
-
@taniwharugby saw that "article" earlier.
Had a couple of thoughts:
- How many times can you squeeze in a contrast and pretend it's a comparison?
- The new women's professional leagues in Aus are most likely funded by the revenue generated by the men's side of the sport. Netball doesn't have a men's league to fund them.
Sport is a business. Want more money? Sell more product.
-
@antipodean Yeah, I'm not suggesting there is no problem. No doubt that happens in several sports and that should change.
If you remove all the comparisons to other sports blah blah in the article posted above, it actually could have been a good, relevant story. Of course, @taniwharugby picked the most controversial bit of the article, responding as these click-bait editors intended. However, if you read the full article, then it's obvious the essence of the story is not about the few leading Silver Ferns earning $130,000 a year, nor about the frontline ANZ Premiership players who earn between $60-80,000, and even less about how those wages compare to All Blacks salaries.
It's really about the players on low wages who don't earn enough to live and need part-time jobs to pay the bills, but can't hold down those part-time jobs due to the current competition format that requires them to play matches on Sundays, Mondays and Wednesdays. This forces several players, including new talent, to chose between playing netball and work careers, with netball regularly losing players because - obviously - these players need to think about their future and if their jobs outside sport pay better, then that's what they're going for. That's clearly not good for netball in NZ, including the Silver Ferns.
The main question for Netball NZ is how to generate more money (sponsors) so they can pay those players adequate wages, to keep them in the sport.
-
-
@no-quarter said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
Not sure whether your post is serious or not, but I don't think that's the case at all. It's just the way the stuff article is written (see my previous post).
(I also think that many anti-feminists have the wrong comprehension of feminism, which is essentially about fair (equitable) treatment of women. I'm all for feminism in that sense. But that's another discussion that I won't engage in here.)
-
@stargazer said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@no-quarter said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
Not sure whether your post is serious or not, but I don't think that's the case at all. It's just the way the stuff article is written (see my previous post).
(I also think that many anti-feminists have the wrong comprehension of feminism, which is essentially about fair (equitable) treatment of women. I'm all for feminism in that sense. But that's another discussion that I won't engage in here.)
I think what @No-Quarter is referring to is the moronic ones who insist on making issues where there are none. The kind of dumb bitches who would throw a gesture like opening a door like a gentleman back in a blokes face.
-
@stargazer I think you do @taniwharugby a misservice.
The article seemed to me to be a predominantly click bait vehicle. It should have been about what you wanted it to be ... but it wasn't.
-
@stargazer righto, I carefully picked out the headline, so controversial of me!...ferald and stuff have been beating the pay thing for a while, this week it is the silverferns compared to ABs not the Black Ferns.
-
@booboo said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@stargazer I think you do @taniwharugby a misservice.
The article seemed to me to be a predominantly click bait vehicle. It should have been about what you wanted it to be ... but it wasn't.
@taniwharugby said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@stargazer righto, I picked out the headline, so controversial of me!...ferald and stuff have been beating the pay thing for a while, this week it is the silverferns compared to ABs not the Black Ferns.
I must have worded that sentence wrong, because you both understand it diffrently from what I intended. Anyhow, we agree that the story is buried in click-bait. Compare that with a much better article from Liam Napier about the Black Ferns. Particularly the part about Selica Winiata is interesting and illustrates why change in women's rugby is needed.
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/sport/news/article.cfm?c_id=4&objectid=11967416
-
@stargazer said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@no-quarter said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
Not sure whether your post is serious or not, but I don't think that's the case at all. It's just the way the stuff article is written (see my previous post).
(I also think that many anti-feminists have the wrong comprehension of feminism, which is essentially about fair (equitable) treatment of women. I'm all for feminism in that sense. But that's another discussion that I won't engage in here.)
Sorry to say @Stargazer I'm afraid feminism has progressed far beyond those respectable ideals, at this point it should probably be classified as a mental illness. I will admit there is some good feminists trying to claim it back but they are generally marked as pariahs and bullied out of any organisation.
-
@stargazer said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
@no-quarter said in Sports Pay Gender gap...:
Idiotic feminists searching for things to be outraged about, instead of focussing on real issues. The "feminist" movement is beyond a parody these days.
Not sure whether your post is serious or not, but I don't think that's the case at all. It's just the way the stuff article is written (see my previous post).
(I also think that many anti-feminists have the wrong comprehension of feminism, which is essentially about fair (equitable) treatment of women. I'm all for feminism in that sense. But that's another discussion that I won't engage in here.)
I wish you'd come get amongst in the Politics forum, we need more diversity of thought there. I have to be deliberately controversial to generate any discussion, and even then it doesn't last long.
And sadly yes my post was serious. Feminism in the west today is a joke. Focussing on equality of outcome while completely disregarding biological differences between men and women, using it as a tool to push Marxist ideas, there's absolutely no way you can take it seriously.
There's some real issues facing women in the west, like being expected to have a career and kids at the same time (which has nothing to do with sexism, quite the opposite) but there's no scope for having serious discussions about any of that due to the hard-left feminists shreiking SEXISM at every opportunity, poisoning the debate.
-
@no-quarter I have a very good feminist friend who runs her own womens advice organisation. She read Ayaan's book 'Infidel' a couple years back which had her questioning a few things. After a year of chats together she joined me at Milo's talk here in Melbourne. She is well and trully through the looking glass now. The current Iran protests show just how vacuous western feminism really is, just hope more women wake up to the madness.
-
@no-quarter I think a lot of people confuse equal with identical. I'm all for equality of outcome, with equality defined as in the English Oxford Dictionaries: the state of being equal, especially in status, rights, or opportunities.
I'm quite familiar with non-English language literature about this subject, and there it is much more obvious that sometimes it is necessary to treat people in certain circumstances differently in order to achieve an equal outcome (and that difference in treatment must be proportional to the differences in circumstances and not go further than is required to achieve an equitable and equal outcome). Somehow this seems to be lost in a lot of English language discours.
I think a lot of the discussion is confusing because people (in general) use different definitions, none the least because of the loud, American dominance in the media and people's political agenda's (from left to right, and back).
I don't agree there's anything wrong with feminism today. I'd argue that there is something wrong with a small, but very loud minority of feminists, who've gone completely overboard and extreme, which makes it very hard to hear the true feminists. I don't think they're pushing a Marxist agenda either; that just sounds like a label that conservatives have put on it to discredit them and push their own conservative agenda.
As far as women being expected to have a career and kids at the same time: have you ever asked yourself the question why there's never criticism from anti-feminists on men being expected to have a career and kids at the same time?
In my view, it is about choice - for both mothers and fathers equally - to chose to work or not if they have children, if financial circumstances permit such a choice, and to have equal rights and opportunities in doing so. IMO, biological differences are completely irrelevant in this area, or so they should be (even if women would probably choose to take care of kids over a career more often than men).So, that's a little bit of my opinion on this matter. If you wonder why I never participate in discussions in the political threads, the reason is that IMO many ferners (not all) who take part in those discussions don't know how to debate without being disrespectful, rude and name-calling. I have been reading political threads on the Fern and just don't see it as a forum where I would like to join the discussion. I probably don't like watching debates from NZ Parliament or the UK House of Commons for the same reason. I already have my debates in the real world (as opposed to the digital world); here on the Fern, I rather stick to sports.
