| Upvotes | Title | Category | Author | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|
| Upvotes | Comment on | Subreddit | Date (UTC) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2 | He ain't wrongThey collectively bargained this current deal 2 years ago. Also, they have guaranteed contracts, even if they don't play, while the men do not have those same guarantees. This doesn't scream gender inequality - it just seems like they aren't satisfied with their current CBA and need to negotiate better next time when the current deal expires. | /r/PussyPassDenied | 08/07/19 04:30 PM |
| 3 | He ain't wrongThe USSF points out that if this calculation is extended to fiscal 2015 — in order to include a men’s World Cup cycle — the men’s team brought in $10.8 million more for the federation. | /r/PussyPassDenied | 08/07/19 03:24 PM |
| 3 | He ain't wrongAs stated elsewhere, that includes a women's world cup cycle but not a men's (the 2014 men's left off, 2015 women's included). So it's not really apples to apples. https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/ Also, the current women's pay structure was collectively bargained and started in 2017 so clearly they were ok with the pay scale (which has guaranteed earnings while the men do not, among other things). Also, the men's world … | /r/PussyPassDenied | 08/07/19 02:29 PM |
| 1 | He ain't wrongconsidering they bring in more revenue for the USSF Citation needed | /r/PussyPassDenied | 08/07/19 01:52 PM |
© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter