TheRedArchive

~ archived since 2018 ~

  • Subreddits

      Popular

    • /r/askTRP
    • /r/TheRedPill
    • /r/MarriedRedPill
    • /r/MensRights
    • /r/MGTOW
    • /r/PurplePillDebate
    • /r/WhereAreAllTheGoodMen
    • Other

    • /r/AllPillDebate
    • /r/AlreadyRed
    • /r/altTRP
    • /r/AntiFeminists
    • /r/askFDS
    • /r/askMRP
    • /r/askRPC
    • /r/becomeaman
    • /r/BlackPillScience
    • /r/Chadfish
    • /r/Divorce_Men
    • /r/EverydayMisandry
    • /r/ExRedPill
    • /r/FemaleDatingStrategy
    • /r/FeminismStopsWhen
    • /r/GEOTRP
    • /r/LeftWingMaleAdvocates
    • /r/MalePsychology
    • /r/Male_Studies
    • /r/MenSupportMen
    • /r/MGTOW2
    • /r/MuslimRedPill
    • /r/newTRP
    • /r/PussyPass
    • /r/PussyPassDenied
    • /r/RedPillBooks
    • /r/RedPillParenting
    • /r/RedPillWives
    • /r/RedPillWomen
    • /r/RedPillWorkplace
    • /r/RPChristians
    • /r/seduction
    • /r/ThankTRP
    • /r/TheRedPillStories
    • /r/trpGAME
    • /r/TRPOffTopic
    • /r/TrueBlackPillMGTOW
    • /r/WhereAllTheGoodMenAre
  • Blogs

      Popular

    • Dalrock
    • Heartiste
    • Illimitable Men
    • Return of Kings
    • Rian Stone
    • The Rational Male
    • Woujo
    • Other

    • Artful Prudence
    • A Voice for Men
    • Alpha Game
    • Black Label Logic
    • Caleb Jones
    • Captain Capitalism
    • Corporate Machiavelli
    • Days of Game
    • Deep Strength
    • Dicipres
    • Donal Graeme
    • Female Misogynist
    • Free Northerner
    • Gaming My Wife
    • Good Looking Loser
    • Hawaiian Libertarian
    • In Mala Fide
    • KillToParty
    • Kill Your Inner Loser
    • Krauser PUA
    • LaidNYC
    • Married Man Sex Life
    • NO MA'AM
    • Omega Virgin Revolt
    • Pook's Mill
    • Random Xpat Rantings
    • Red Pill Theory
    • Red Pill Wifery
    • RedPillDad
    • RedPillDoctor
    • Seasons of Tumult and Discord
    • Sigma Frame
    • The Feminine Woman
    • The Futurist
    • The Masculine Principle
    • The Modern Man
    • The New Modern Man
    • The Obsidian Files
    • The Power Moves
    • The Private Man
    • The Red Pill Room
    • The Red Quest
    • The Rules Revisited
    • The Spearhead
    • Troy Francis
    • Wintery Knight
    • Young Man Red Pill
  • Books
  • Dictionary
  • @TRParchive
  • Please help TheRedArchive stay alive

...and all of the sudden, no one cares about “equal pay” anymore...

greatdanev

July 31, 2019
3644 upvotes
/r/MensRights
https://i.redd.it/7u3gtcxilnd31.jpg
Download the post

Want to save the post for offline use on your device? Choose one of the download options below:

PDF TXT EPUB
Share
Share Tweet Reddit Email
Post Information
Title ...and all of the sudden, no one cares about “equal pay” anymore...
Author

greatdanev

Upvotes 3644
Comments 447
Date July 31, 2019 2:59 PM UTC
(6 years ago)
Subreddit Posted in /r/MensRights
Original Link https://old.reddit.com/r/MensRights/comments/ck9lyy/and_all_of_the_sudden_no_one_cares_about_equal/
Archive Link https://theredarchive.com/r/MensRights/and-all-of-the-sudden-no-one-cares-about-equal-pay.1205147
https://theredarchive.com/post/1205147

Comments

[–]Dez_Champs 575 points576 points577 points 6 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

Man the fucking media spree they had about equal pay after they won was relentless and now the truth comes out.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (25 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]__pulsar 103 points104 points105 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Plus the women CHOSE a pay structure that guaranteed them a base salary, but made their potential bonus earnings less than they could have been if they didn't take a salary.

The men's team doesn't get paid a salary so their bonus potential is higher.

[–]Jex117 69 points70 points71 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Sounds like you want to get lectured on how "society trains women to accept poor negotiations."

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 43 points44 points45 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Or put another way, "I think women are mush headed children who can't do math, and that's why I'm a feminist"

[–]SirYouAreIncorrect 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That is not really a "poor negotiation" is it about Acceptable Risk.

For example me personally i would much rather have Fixed Salary than work 100% on commission, even if the Fixed Salary might end up being less than the commission based pay, mainly because that while I might make more on commission, I also might not. It is a risk, one I am not willing to take

[–]fgrsentinel 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also remember that the women's team also gets a stupid number of benefits, none of which their male counterparts get.

[–]mrmensplights2 points 6 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Actually, pretty damn good negotiators. They knew they'd lose money and had less draw so they negotiated for a base salary. Now they get paid more than the men despite losses.

And this entire campaign itself could be considered very shrewd negotiation in it's own right.

[–]fgrsentinel 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Unless, of course, the men's team uses the results in their next contract negotiation. After all, even if the men are fine with no guaranteed pay, there's still the fact that the women's team has heavy benefits and if the men's team decides to demand similar benefits or a pay increase with this in mind, the USSF has two options: it can either cave and give the men's team what they want or refuse to sign and find an entirely new team of professional soccer players willing to work for less than the woman's team with fewer benefits.

[–]fgrsentinel 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Their negotiations also means that if they don't win a single game or have any practice sessions, they still make $100,000 a year with full benefits. The men's team doesn't get any benefits (even health benefits) and is paid for every training/practice session they take part in, along with the games they play. I don't know how much the men's team earns per training/practice, but they probably have to work like hell to ensure they do well enough to earn any decent money.

[–]Quintrell 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Which is true in just about any industry

[–]dorballom09 32 points33 points34 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Never saw a game of womans soccer and after this false claim, I think ive lost all my appetite for female soccer

[–]Dez_Champs 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Womans Hockey could use our support if your looking to watch any womans sport.

[–]NolanHarlow 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nah. I'm good on women's sports for a while.

Until other female athletes step up and tell people like the USNWST to shut the fuck up, then they're all complicit, as I see it.

[–]chadwickofwv -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why would anyone want to watch the women's teams when men's teams exist? It can make sense in sports where they aren't wearing pads head to toe, because it is quite entertaining to watch boobs bounce around. It isn't entertaining to watch a bunch of women who couldn't compete with high school boys.

[–]fgrsentinel 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Just remember that over the last decade or so, the woman's team has lost the US Soccer Federation millions. They're paid more than they bring in some years, which means that it's almost certain the money earned by the men's team is being used to subsidize them.

[–]__removed__ 32 points33 points34 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I think tennis is close. Women's tennis can be as interesting as men's, sometimes.

There's equal pay in tennis.

No, seriously, men and women champions take home the same prize money.

The women's Wimbledon Championship match was over in 55 minutes.

The men's Wimbledon Championship match took 4 hours 57 minutes.

Simona Halep got paid $3,257,366 per hour.

Novak Djokovic got paid $602,777 per hour.

[–]armed_renegade 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Well yes, because the Men have to play a best of 5 sets. While women have to play a best of 3.

[–]Red_means_go 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's total bs right there!

[–]Mythe0ry 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I like tennis. But if you watch the final set of a lot of womens matches (3) they are flagging and straining. The men's third set usually looks like they've hit a stride. I don't think the audience or the athletes would enjoy a change on either side.

[–]__removed__ 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Exactly.

Tennis has had a big push for equal pay since Billie Jean King lead the way in the 70's. I think the Grand Slams started giving equal prize money in the 2000's.

As an avid fan, it was interesting that the debate started again after this year's Wimbledon. You couldn't have had a more different women's final vs men's final.

Simona Halep just played out of her mind against Serena. Nothing Serena could do. Match over in 55 minutes.

Exact opposite, Djokovic and Federer played one of the greatest matches in the history of Wimbledon. They played the first ever 5th set tiebreak. Almost 5 hours.

ESPN and other analysts actually discussed women playing best of 5 this year. The Women's match was so quick, it was obvious they had more in the tank and it's a shame fans who paid big bucks for a Wimbledon Championship got such a quick match.

It's like in the 70's women fought for equal pay.

Now in 2019 people are fighting for equal work.

[–]hajamieli 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

there's not many sports where Women's division is as or more exciting than Men's divisions

It could be made into some kind of soft porn just like men's soccer is for women. I bet that'd get a lot of viewers.

[–]techtesh 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Imagine women's soccer..... But in bikinis

[–]zulhadm 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Women’s indoor volleyball is my jam - most exciting Olympic sport.

[–]chadwickofwv 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup, and only because women's volleyball players tend to be smoking hot, and they wear very revealing clothes. I love it too!

[–]Drmadanthonywayne 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If we’re being honest, the only really popular women’s sports are the ones where they wear skimpy outfits. Beach volleyball, gymnastics, and figure skating come to mind.

[–]Dutch_Windmill 113 points114 points115 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Fuck the MMS they're so dishonest

[–][deleted] 20 points21 points22 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The main media stream 😎

[–]HappyCakeDayisCringe 22 points23 points24 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Some women on Dan lebatard tried arguing they still should get paid the same the men's league and should be doing MORE for the women LMFAOOO

[–]theoracleofosiris 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It’s quite typical for feminist issues.

[–]TracyMorganFreeman 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

We should have every major company do this so people will STFU about the wage gap.

[–]pacmatt27 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Those that have are finding that they're underpaying men.

[–]fgrsentinel 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think that's the point: it's easier to hide behind the wage gap myth when you make it a broad generalization of the entire economy without any context or comparison within a specific profession. It's much, much harder for it to hold water when internal audits of the finances of multiple major companies reveal that, oops, women are being paid more for men for the same work in the same job with the same experience.

[–]techtesh 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Crude idea insulate the 2 organisations from each other and let them be independent from each other and from govt money.. Lets see what happens

[+]Okichah -9 points-8 points-7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Hollywood accounting means that multi-billion dollar movies dont make a profit on paper.

Truth is truth. And it surely doesnt come from a corporate spokesperson’s mouth.

I’m not sure how the soccer players negotiate their salaries. But nobody should fault them for wanting a fair share. And if their employers judge differently then they can negotiate as well.

[–]wheredoiputmypenis 251 points252 points253 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Reminds me of the “outrage” that female Google employees made less than males, so Google ran the numbers and found the exact opposite. They were underpaying men by a large magnitude.

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 69 points70 points71 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Bet that did not figure prominently into their search algorithms...

[–][deleted] 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But they didn’t care if men were underpaid. They only cared that women were paid enough. But they still try to tell us feminism is about equality.

[–]NolanHarlow 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm sure they corrected it though, after the results came out.

L.O.L. I'm kidding. Ain't no fucking chance.

[–]antonytrupe 15 points16 points17 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

source?

[–]sakura_drop 47 points48 points49 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Here. The actual article is buried down the page a bit, so here 'tis.

[–]JotunR 29 points30 points31 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

https://www.washingtonpost.com/technology/2019/03/04/google-asked-about-pay-equity-learned-it-was-mostly-underpaying-men/?utm_term=.9a9f1f088a8f

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

it's almost like feminists narratives are based on false premises...

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (286 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]datchilla -185 points-184 points-183 points 6 years ago (67 children) | Copy Link

Why? They won the World Cup twice while men haven’t placed once. Sports in their current state should be a meritocracy, we don’t need anymore participation trophies

[–]Schnazzmizzlez 62 points63 points64 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Mens sports is actually competitive, any city wide boys team ould beat the USA women's side..

[–][deleted] 53 points54 points55 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Any middle school team could beat the best women's team.

Dallas U15 (middle school in my area includes 8th grade) beat the best women's team that won the world cup that year. By a blowout.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (42 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]MrExpress 32 points33 points34 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I think its meritocratic not meritorious.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]redshirted 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I wish more people did this. Its confusing to read someone correcting a mistake when its already corrected in the parent comment

[+]datchilla -50 points-49 points-48 points 6 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

So you’re disagreeing that sports should be merit based to say you want them to be merit based?

Oh yeah that’s right, I’m in /r/mensrights

[–]miketrance32 points 6 years ago [recovered] (36 children) | Copy Link

My first comment was a sarcastic play on the feminists constant demand for equal pay even for unequal work. Sorry to burst your bubble there champ, but you didn’t exactly provide me with some revelation. That was a joke, clearly lost on you, but easily picked up by over 400 people.

It’s okay, maybe you’ll win next time.

[+]datchilla -29 points-28 points-27 points 6 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

Oh no, I understood that you're combining multiple people's different political views to make a straw man weak enough to argue against.

All I'm saying is, if you want a team made up of the best women, you'll have to pay what they ask. If you personally don't understand why there's a women's team, then make that point.

It's just cute that you argued against a meritocracy while also saying you wanted merit based sports. No you don't, you want everyone to be in one league. And the only reason you want that is because you think women play at such a low level that they wouldn't stand up against even entry level professional men's players.

Sadly, when it comes to national teams the best of the best would prefer to not waste their time and health when they can focus on the next season. So the women would probably do a lot better than you think they would seeing how women's professional leagues are even more underfunded than their national teams.

I'm all for hearing the same argument three times, but maybe you can think up something a little more clever next time around. Thanks for being brave enough to share your opinions, I wish more people were like you.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (25 children) | Copy Link

https://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-4389760/USA-women-s-team-suffer-5-2-loss-FC-Dallas-U-15-boys.html

Explain this while you’re at it.

[–]datchilla -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

If your argument relies on the dailymail, then you don't have a very strong argument.

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (23 children) | Copy Link

Lolz fine. How about this one.

https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-boys-squad-beat-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/

[–]datchilla -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (22 children) | Copy Link

Of course, this match against the academy team was very informal and should not be a major cause for alarm. The U.S. surely wasn’t going all out, with the main goal being to get some minutes on the pitch, build chemistry when it comes to moving the ball around, improve defensive shape and get ready for Russia.

Weird, wasn't that source suppose to prove your point?

[–]miketrance18 points 6 years ago [recovered] (8 children) | Copy Link

Women don’t stand up to entry level male players, in fact the very woman’s team we are talking about lost to a bunch of male CHILDREN under 15 years old in a score of 5-2. They are so far under skill level of the men’s team it’s not even funny. Therefore the game they are playing is at completely different levels, and this alone more than justifies ANY salary discrepancies.

You stating that you don’t like my argument isn’t actually refuting my argument. You also contradicted yourself by saying that wanting a combined league isn’t meritocratic, when in fact it is the very definition of the word. Let the BEST players on ONE team and pay them accordingly.

Maybe someday you’ll actually be able to refute my argument and explain to all of us here how you can simultaneously argue that women should have their own protected leagues where men aren’t allowed to play yet pretend that you are for a meritocracy. Something tells me you don’t understand what the word merit means, hint it doesn’t have to do with genitals.

[+]datchilla -8 points-7 points-6 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's not about refuting your argument, it's about showing you an argument that answers all the questions in a better way than yours.

"hey miketrance, god exists until you prove otherwise."

"hey miketrance, the earth is flat until you prove otherwise."

Do you see the flaws in those statements?

[–]miketrance12 points 6 years ago [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

What? Stop shifting the goal posts. This argument is all about equal pay is it not? Since we are talking about equal pay we naturally should make sure the work is equal. It’s not off topic AT ALL.

[–]datchilla -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If asking you to prove your point, before I attempt to disprove it, is moving the goal posts then you don't have a strong point.

So far all your knowledge about women's soccer is based off one article that from the looks of it, you didn't care to read entirely. If you're not reading your own sources then why should I go find more sources for you not to read, then argue with me about?

This is your chance to make a strong argument.

[+]SpeaksToWeasels -9 points-8 points-7 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Did the male team beat the school children? What is the mertic for rating one of worst performing "World Cup" teams?

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The male team can undoubtedly beat the school children. The easiest metric would be to have them play each other in a best of five series, winner take all

[–]Bammer1386 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"Worst performing world cup teams"

So they consistently qualify for a tournament consisting of the best 32 countries on the planet, consistently have gotten out of the group stages, placed 3rd, made a quarterfinal, etc. Sure, not qualifying in 2018 was an epic letdown, but when you say they are one of the worst performing world cup teams, its just a disingenuous way of saying "consistently one if the top 20 teams in the world in a sport that is globally competitive." On top of that, bashing the mens team because you support the womens teams' claim is like kicking your dog because the neighbor ran over your lawn gnome with his lawnmower.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also, are you agreeing that we should abolish all women’s sports, and end lowered standards for women in employment in the interest of merit?

[–]Tickerbug 21 points22 points23 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not really about the top teams of a sport, it's about the popularity of the sport. The teams might make it to the finals but if not enough people are watching to begin with there is not enough money to hand out to match the other sport.

Oh well, the team managed to scam a bunch of rich soccer managers with a social-media mob. Now that the mob is gone and the dust has settled I wonder if the managers are going to try getting back some of the money they lost with their contracts as leverage.

[–]Samisseyth 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

In the sports world, if no one cares that you won, you’re still a loser. Pay is based on how many people you bring. That revolves around tickets, pay-per-view, accessory sales, etc. Which the women’s sports fails at spectacularly.

[+]jameswalker43 -19 points-18 points-17 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

some things may be difficult to grasp but let’s keep in mind you never know the whole story

[–]Currently_sharting 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

What does this mean? Ticket sales, viewing numbers on tv and streaming, Merch sales, etc are all numbers you can review objectively.

[–]shlomotrutta 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sports in their current state should be a meritocracy, we don’t need anymore participation trophies

Then let's take the female soccer professionals by their word: Make them play with and against men, make all soccer leagues and tournaments mixed, and see how much they earn then.

[–]RogueThief7 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

  • Wins the women’s World Cup

  • Women’s teams consistently loose to underage male non-professional teams in grudge matches.

Meritocracy? So female professional athletes should be paid less than non-professional teenage male athletes? I.e. Nothing?

I don’t exactly disagree with you but don’t you think that’s a bit harsh?

[–]pacmatt27 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not really. They're not as good. They're already paid unfairly high and complain that they don't get enough. If they really want, we can make it truly equal and see how they like that.

[–]RogueThief7 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I mean, you could have percieved the humour and sarcasm in my comment... But then again, Poes law and shit.

[–]nforne 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not about being paid well just for winning.

In 1966, the (men's) World Cup winners, England, were given a bonus of just £1,000 each (the equivalent of £13,000 today). Why so little? The answer is simple if you understand basic economics: supply and demand. According to the Bank of England:

Players are being paid increasingly high wages because the clubs are making more money than ever. As a result of globalisation and technological advances such as the pay TV market, football has become more popular and so more profitable. The rights for the first seasons of the Premier League in 1992-97 sold for less than £200 million. The TV rights for 2016-19 are in comparison worth more than £5 billion.

If people lost interest in football, clubs would not be able to make such high profits. The demand for players would drop and so would their wages.

Yes, they're talking about club football, but the principle is the same. People wanting "equal pay" are missing the obvious fact that the public are not as passionate about women's football.

Ticket prices are a good indicator of supply and demand. In 2018 England fans were reportedly paying up to £12,000 for a black market ticket to their semifinal against Croatia. https://www.dailystar.co.uk/news/latest-news/715588/England-world-cup-semi-final-tickets-cost-croatia

But in 2019 you could watch THREE women's world cup matches from just €25, and get a semifinal AND final package from only €50.

The women's world cup players want to be rewarded for the popularity of the men's game.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Neagor 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

When did the US Men's team win the World Cup?

[–]GoldenStandard 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Just in case you're being polite, no, the USA have men's team have never won the World Cup.

[–]Ibuygolddiggers 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ibra says hes a ferrari against fiats

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Neagor 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Are you still talking about the World Cup? Because I don't remember them ever winning it. Some other user said they won once, in 1930, I'm more inclined to believe that.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Neagor 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Their highest result ever was in 1930 when they ended up in 3rd place.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_at_the_FIFA_World_Cup

[–]WikiTextBot 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

United States at the FIFA World Cup

The United States men's national soccer team has played in several World Cup finals, with their best result occurring during their first appearance at the 1930 World Cup, when the United States finished in third place. After the 1950 World Cup, in which the United States upset England in group play 1–0, the U.S. was absent from the finals until 1990. The United States has participated in every World Cup since 1990 until 2014, but they failed to qualify for the 2018 competition after a loss to Trinidad and Tobago in 2017.

The World Cup is an international football competition contested by the men's national teams of the members of Fédération Internationale de Football Association (FIFA), the sport's global governing body.


[ PM | Exclude me | Exclude from subreddit | FAQ / Information | Source ] Downvote to remove | v0.28

[–]jonnytechno 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And then they lost to a team of school boys

[–]techtesh 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Did they win against mens team..... Oh they lost to a bunch of 15 yo boys

[–]Ibuygolddiggers -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

“women $34.1 million in salaries and game bonuses and we paid our men $26.4 million — not counting the significant additional value of various benefits that our women’s players receive but which our men do not.”

did you see the game where the US womens team was celebrating after like 7+ goals?

do you even watch soccer when you say this?

[–]datchilla -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Not while I’m saying it but sometime before, sorry if that confused you.

[+]xMoody -350 points-349 points-348 points 6 years ago (217 children) | Copy Link

Except the women's team is good and the men's team is not?

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (106 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tothecatmobile 150 points151 points152 points 6 years ago (89 children) | Copy Link

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/uswnt-us-soccer-revenues-lawsuit

Or they can be paid according to the revenue they pull in.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (71 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tothecatmobile 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago (70 children) | Copy Link

What the woman actually want is a revenue sharing system, where that is what happens.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]tothecatmobile -22 points-21 points-20 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Not any more they dont.

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/uswnt-us-soccer-revenues-lawsuit

There is also other sources of revenue than ticket sales.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Except for maybe the women's division in the UFC. Nunez is this close to being the first fighter to simultaneously hold 3 belts. And she's straight stomped every legend she can find on her way there. I mean, she koed Chris Cyborg in the first round. She's a truly rare spectacle of a fighter.

In fact, sometimes women's division fights can be more popular than the men's division head liners. Rhonda famously crushed a feminist that asked her about her pay rate. She said something to the effect of "Dana pays me the big bucks because I can fill the seats and sell a few million ppv's".

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]tothecatmobile -10 points-9 points-8 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

4 years.

The mens team also lost money over the last 11 years. As that figure didn't take into account all revenue.

[–]Kravego 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (56 children) | Copy Link

Yeah, everyone on this sub likes to bitch and moan about the WNT, but they've repeatedly offered a gender neutral, performance-dependent approach and the USSF keeps refusing.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (55 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]Kravego -24 points-23 points-22 points 6 years ago (54 children) | Copy Link

I mean, you can call bullshit all you want, but the fact remains that the NWT offered a revenue-sharing system for pay for both teams.

The women's team earns more revenue than the men's team. This is something that has been repeated over and over if you knew how to read. It's been that way for the past few years. But the USSF wouldn't like any program that paid the men less than the women, so it was refused.

[–]Adelsdorfer 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Confused, why are you saying they earn more revenue while the article says theyre in the red?

[–][deleted] 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (45 children) | Copy Link

The woman’s team also already makes more than the men’s team. What don’t you understand about that? Numbers aren’t really your strong suit are they?

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It’s right in the headline of this very article. THE WOMAN’S TEAM MAKES MORE THAN THE MEN’S.

So your whole comment is total garbage. It’s already been proven the women get paid more than the men right now.

[–]ThatIzWhack 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Why don't you post some sources for the points you're making instead of being a condescending jackass?

If we knew how to read, we'd get it? Shut the fuck up. I don't see any blue text in your comments. All I see is you hammering the same point like a broken record. Context, sources, et all are important.. As you should know, especially if you're going to bat for something.

[–]Quintrell 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A revenue sharing system plus insurance benefits and a salary and maternity leave etc. In other words, not just a revenue sharing system

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Why would players of today be paid according to the revenues of 11 years ago?

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

11 years is longer than most footballers careers, do you think players would accept that they can get pay increases because the club wasn't doing so well a decade ago?

USSF report financial data every year, it would be pretty easy for them to pay the players according to how well they have been doing recently.

I mean if the men's team suddenly won the 2022 world cup, I don't think anyone would think they shouldn't get a pay increase for that because it doesn't average out to much over 11 years.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (8 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

Revenue sharing is common in football as a way to distribute ticket revenues, and broadcast revenues.

It hasn't led to the demise of anyone who uses it.

[–]twisted42 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Which independent accounting firm. Where is the raw data?

[–]tribrnl 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Do you also trust Hollywood when it comes to the profit that any given movie made?

[–]PacoBedejo 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Our they can be paid what they're willing to work for.

[–]ExcellentSauce 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Breaking news: Ussf decides womans soccer pay isn't equal, Now player pay them to be on the team.

[–]welcometothejl 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think we should start a go fund me to make this happen. They could split the profits evenly for all I care, I just want to see it.

[–]xChrisTilDeathx 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Didn’t they loose to a high school boys soccer team already?

[+]MyFingerPointeth -20 points-19 points-18 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

this is an idiotic comment to be this upvoted, I thought men's rights try to hold themselves to a higher standard than this

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]Crazed_Hatter -10 points-9 points-8 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Its idiotic because arguing about skill and that the lesser skilled of the two teams (relative to each other not to their field I might add) should not be payed anything is pretty dumb because the women should still he payed even though they arent as good as the men at soccer directly (they are much better relative to their field though)

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Equal pay for equal work. Equal work means equal results in the real world. My argument is there shouldn’t be a woman’s soccer if we really were after equality. It should be coed and the best players get to play.

All this harping about equality yet we jump through hoops to avoid the fact that equal work means equal results in every other field. If I’m a doctor my gender doesn’t matter how good of a doctor I am does. We don’t have a female only doctor league, only in areas where women can’t compete with men yet this is somehow equal? Explain that to me.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It should be coed and the best players get to play.

The men's league is co ed. Women cannot make it.

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That’s unfortunate for them then, it’s also what equality looks like. I’m not demanding to be entered into the NBA at 5’10” and I can’t shoot a basket for shit. It’s the exact same thing. We don’t get to pick and choose equality and right off the bat the fact that women get a separate league protected from superior male players but an anomaly of a woman could play on the men’s league is already discriminatory against men.

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Their field is soccer, it’s the same field.

[–]Maxx2893 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I think they like to call it a pitch.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

If they aren’t as good as the men directly by your admission, what business do they have comparing salaries? Either they are better than the men directly, or their claim of equal pay is nonsense. They aren’t doing the same work and no other job works that way. It’s like a high school all American quarterback bitching that he doesn’t make the same amount that the top NFL player does.

When you’re playing in a different league your comparison is meaningless. If they did equal work, which would be competing in the SAME league and getting the same results then the discussion of equal pay has relevance. There is no other point anywhere near as valid as this one. Woman’s soccer is not equal to men’s, therefore the comparisons are irrelevant.

If they want the higher pay I suggest being good enough to play in the men’s league. If they aren’t, I guess that’s just an unfortunate reality. Similar to the fact that my 5’10” ass can’t play in the NBA.

[–]Crazed_Hatter -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

I'm saying they may or may not have a claim for higher or equal pay. But comparing league skill is absolutely irrelevant. Comparing how much money the league makes, how many watch each league, or how successful they are within their league.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

And you’re wrong. You’re sampling the best from both sides of the coin, a classic feminist move. There are two different things and you’re going to have to choose one. First, the men’s team is a legitimate source of comparison. This would mean that the men and the women put in equal work, which by definition would mean they can compete against each other.

Second choice, the woman’s team is NOT competitive with the men’s team and therefore what the mens team makes is irrelevant because they are playing at completely different levels and this alone more than justifies any salary discrepancies.

[–]Crazed_Hatter -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I just dont understand your argument in a vacuum. If the men's league hypothetically created absolutely no profit but were orders of magnitude better than another soccer league, the soccer league that makes more money should be payed nothing?

Why should the american soccer players be payed anything if they cant beat any European teams? I just dont see how ur argument holds water.

[–]Santa1936 25 points26 points27 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

This is actually the problem with the whole argument. People don't understand economics. If the women's soccer team is better but brings in fewer viewers, it should get paid less. Pay is about economic benefit to one's organization, not skill level. I might be better than Markiplier is at fortnite or whatever (I'm not) but it doesn't matter if his channel gets more views (than my admittedly non-existent one).

[–]YeOldeVertiformCity 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The women’s team isn’t better. It’s just doing better relative to other women’s teams.

That isn’t the same.

It’s like saying that an undefeated minor league team should make more than a mediocre major league team. That isn’t how it works.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I'm gonna steal the minor league thing.

[–]Santa1936 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that's a good point, which I assume people mean when they say "better" but you never know. People can be pretty deluded about the actual physiological differences between men and women.

[+]xMoody -12 points-11 points-10 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The problem with the "economic benefit" argument is that it's thrown out the window on this sub when it comes to men making less than women in certain jobs.

[–]valenin 11 points12 points13 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I dare say that most of us who make that argument know that it’s at odds with the idea of pay-by-merit and that it’s hypocritical to support whichever one favors men at the time.

That’s kind of the point.

Because as it stands that’s exactly what the grievance studies do from the opposite side. Everyone should be paid as much as men when we’re talking about industries dominated by them, but when we’re not the system is just fine and men just can’t keep up.

If that’s the tack our opponents take, flipping it around and making them acknowledge the fallacy of the basic structure should put them in a position where they have to justify why it makes sense when they do it.

TL;DR: It’s hard to type an argument that long in Spogebob meme alternating caps.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's really not. Men understand fault and will cop to it. Women will too. The problem is feminists will gripe, crawl, scream, and throw a tantrum over what they think is equal. Then when presented with facts will either ignore, double down, or continue to tantrum until someone gets close enough to figure out wtf they're on about and realize "Ew, someone else needs to change this diaper.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (35 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Kravego -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

OK

[+]tothecatmobile -11 points-10 points-9 points 6 years ago (33 children) | Copy Link

Both teams played in the final of an international tournament this year, within days of each other.

More people watched the womens final.

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 20 points21 points22 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

You're comparing the World Cup to a regional tournament. Don't try and split hairs by saying you are comparing men to women. Compare the men's World Cup to the Women's World Cup OR men's CONCACAF to women's CONCACF for a fair, accurate comparison. Otherwise, you are being disingenuous.

[+]tothecatmobile -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

We're talking about the US mens team and the US womens team here, we can only compare what tournaments each team actually appear in.

I'll compare world cup to world cup when the US mens team appear in a final.

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

But even if the men do not make it to a final, they still generate revenue. So you can compare tournaments. It's not like they don't show up. You're trying to compare apples to oranges to support your point. You can clearly show profits that the men generate (despite not making it to the final) and what the women generate. Otherwise, your position is that the umpteen minus two teams that do not appear in the final are irrelevant and do not generate revenue.

England, Spain, and Germany did not make the last final. Are you going to tell me that those teams generated no revenue? No? Then let's compare their earnings with the women's teams. If that can be done, then you can do this with the USA. We're not stupid here, so stop with the fallacies.

[–]tothecatmobile -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

England Spain and Germany actually made the competition though.

The US did not.

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Completely fair for 2018. So both teams qualified for CONCACF, correct? Then the bit-for-bit comparison would be to either look there OR the last world cup that both qualified.

If your argument is that we should look at 2018 because the women were good enough to qualify and win, then that's fine. Let's look at it from a historical perspective. Maybe the last 12 years/3 world cups.

I'm a boxing, sumo, and kickboxing fan. I don't have much skin in the game for either side. But I hate disingenuous conversations about economics.

[–]SlurrlockHolmes 16 points17 points18 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Are you really comparing CONCACAF to the world cup?

[+]tothecatmobile -14 points-13 points-12 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

I'm comparing the US men's team to the US womens team.

And the best the men's team have done in quite a while is the final of the Gold Cup.

[–]SlurrlockHolmes 15 points16 points17 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

No, you were comparing viewership of men's CONCACAF final to the women's world cup final. Which is stupid.

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well then which US mens team game would you compare it to?

[–]Solen__ya 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm comparing the US men's team to the US womens team.

And the best the men's team have done in quite a while is the final of the Gold Cup.

You're being disingenuous with your facts. How can you compare a world cup final to a concacaf final and not expect that to make a difference?

[–]tothecatmobile -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because there is nothing else to compare.

You can't compare the men's world cup final to the womens world cup final, because the US men's team weren't in the men's final.

It's not the womens teams fault that the men aren't more successful.

[–]futmaster420 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the woman are actually lucky the men arent more successful

[–]ElfmanLV 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

So let's have the champions of both men and women's world cup receive the same pay...of percent total revenue. Oh wait lol

[–]tothecatmobile 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Players aren't paid by the organizers of the world cup though, they're paid by their respective football associations.

[–]ElfmanLV 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So why do people keep mentioning that women win more than men as a reason that women should be paid more? The whole "they perform better" argument goes out the window with that philosophy.

[–][deleted] 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Then the financial loss is even worse.

[–]tothecatmobile 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

The financial loss is over 10 years.

The womans revenue has only caught up to the mens over the last 4 years.

[–]girlwriteswhat 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

Soccer is not a popular sport in the US.

Would ANYONE be watching the US women's team if they hadn't won half (4) of the Women's World Cups (8) to date, including the most recent 2 in a row? And they came in 2nd or 3rd in the other 4 tournaments? They have literally never NOT been on the podium of the international competition.

You ever wonder if the popularity they're enjoying now is more due to national pride on an international stage than a deep and abiding passion for women's soccer? That "FIFA women's world cup mania" is what's selling tickets to US women's soccer league "friendly" games?

Keeping in mind, the men's team are international losers. Out of 21 total World Cups, the best they've done is place 3rd ONCE, in 1930, and haven't made the podium since.

And yet up until 4 years ago, they still brought in as much or more "friendly" revenue than the 4-time international champion women's team who have never not made it to the podium.

I'm sorry, but what happens if and when the women's team fails to win, place or show?

If it's national pride for the US international champions that's what is currently fuelling the popularity of women's soccer in the US, do you really think the crowds are going to continue to buy as many tickets, fork over as much cash for PPV, etc, if and when the US national women's team stops winning?

Especially given they won 1991 and 1999, and that didn't catch them up to the men's team.

If I were the league, I'd be very leery of signing any contract that didn't allow for the possibility that this jump in revenue is just a flash in the pan that will go away the moment a star player or two get a catastrophic injury and the team starts losing.

[–]tothecatmobile -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

What the women actually asked for, was a revenue sharing system where both teams would be paid according to the revenue they brought it.

Seems pretty fair to me.

[–]futmaster420 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

"the Women’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $101.3 million over 238 games, for an average of $425,446 per game, and the Men’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $185.7 million over 191 games, for an average of $972,147 per game. More specifically, WNT games have generated a net profit (ticket revenues minus event expenses) in only two years (2016 and 2017). Across the entire 11-year period, WNT games generated a net loss of $27.5 million."

[–]tothecatmobile -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Why would players of today, male or female be paid according to how successful players 10 years ago?

[–]futmaster420 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

the men's team generates more revenue... doesnt matter if more people watch the woman

"the Women’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $101.3 million over 238 games, for an average of $425,446 per game, and the Men’s National Team has earned gross revenue of $185.7 million over 191 games, for an average of $972,147 per game. More specifically, WNT games have generated a net profit (ticket revenues minus event expenses) in only two years (2016 and 2017). Across the entire 11-year period, WNT games generated a net loss of $27.5 million."

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup, and equality of outcome would dictate that the woman’s team gives the men’s team some of their salary.

[–]ElectraUnderTheSea 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Also, the American female team should play against the French male team, so we can compare the best in soccer for each gender and see how big the difference is.

[–]gjoel 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

It's stacked though. There's a ton of moneys in men's football compared to women's. Which is why winning a tournament for women might not be as profitable as qualifying for one for men.

Edit: Since they're playing at completely different leagues with completely different funding they might as well be considered different sports. It's like complaining that a woman playing tennis earns less than a man playing golf. It's not really comparable.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (4 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[+]Rolten -9 points-8 points-7 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

It's almost as if things are relative to the competition they compete in and context matters...

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah so their pay should better reflect their competition and the money they bring in. Since it's relative, and women's football brings in significantly less money they should be paid less.

[–]Rolten -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Absolutely. If their reasoning is flawed, why would we join them in flawed reasoning?

It should be clear to anyone thinking logically that just because the women's world championships can be beaten by 15 year old males that that doesn't mean that they're not the best in the world compared to their peers. They're good (compared to their peers). The latter is always the context meant by anyone. No reasonable person believes that the women are good compared to any decent men's team. For some reason this sub is having a hard time with that idea.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (39 children) | Copy Link

They're "good" just like the 3rd grade spelling bee champion is "good" at spelling because he beat all the other 3rd graders.

[+]xMoody -11 points-10 points-9 points 6 years ago (38 children) | Copy Link

Are you equating the literal best female soccer players in the world to 3rd graders? And you wonder why people label this sub as a mysogyny sub

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

I'm saying that being better than everyone else that's shitty doesn't make you good.

It's like in that movie Inglorious Basterds when Brad Pitt speaks more Italian than his two companions, that didn't make him an Italian speaker. Being able to beat other female soccer teams doesn't make you good at soccer; high school boys teams have performed better than these "champions".

[–]xMoody -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

But it does make you good at soccer - in the uswnts case, it makes them the best female soccer players in the world lmfao

[–]JakeDC 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

best female soccer players in the world lmfao

They are still well below men's players.

[–]xMoody -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Its almost like they're separated by gender for a reason

Are you just trolling or are you actually this dumb

[–]JakeDC 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

Yes, they are separated because elite athletes are men and it would be mean to make women compete against them. Women need to only compete against each other because they cannot keep up with the men.

[–]xMoody -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

And literally no one anywhere in this thread has said or imolied otherwise because it's not what the conversation is about. Cmon bud, get your head in the game.

[–]futmaster420 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

doesnt matter if you are the best female soccer players in the world

if you dont bring in as much revenue as the male team you dont deserve the same pay...

its a very simple concept

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And you wonder why people label this sub as a mysogyny sub

When our best female team can beat our half-best national highschoolers, let's talk.

[–]futmaster420 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

fine, we will give them credit... they are probably more similar to a 12 year old since they could not beat a team of 15 and under boys...

[–]xMoody -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

Are you referring to the continually taken out of context meaningless match they played against the Dallas u15 club that wasn't a competitive match as recognized by both the uswnt and the Dallas fc? Sit down

[–]futmaster420 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

A professional mens team would never lose to. 15 and under female squad no matter what type of match or scrimmage it is

Keep up that denial tho

[–]xMoody 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (16 children) | Copy Link

Do you genuinely not know what a scrimmage is or are you actually this dumb

[–]futmaster420 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You are really in denial arent you??

As I said, no matter the format a mens proffesional sports team would never lose to a 15 and under female squad

Would never happen

Roles reversed... Well... We know what happened

[–]xMoody 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

The fact that your argument hinges on an imaginary scenario and factually inaccurate information proves my point. Thank you.

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

"No one tries in a scrimmage!" You literally have never played a sport in your life. Go away.

[–]xMoody -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

in what world does the literal world's best female soccer team go all out against an under 15 team? do you think when those college football teams let the little kids with down syndrome score a touchdown on them during scrimmages that they're trying their hardest and can't stop a 7 year old? jesus you're actually embarrassingly dumb

[–]jameswalker43 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

hey bro I guess I got your emotions… but please don’t offend anybody

[–]xMoody -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Why would I be mad about dumpstering a mysogynist in an argument on reddit

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

15 year old boys have significantly better records than women in track and field: http://age-records.125mb.com/

I guess those women weren’t trying either...

[–]jeff4093 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They should play each other to settle that.

[–]jacksleepshere 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

imo Avengers is shit and Me, Earl and the dying girl is good. Should the cast of Avengers give some of their money to the cast of Me, Earl and the dying girl? It doesn't matter which is better, what matters is what most are willing to pay for. The 10th fastest runner in the world probably has a 2nd job, and will definitely need to find a job after he retires. The 1000th best footballer in the world is still minted. How good you are isn't the only thing that matters.

[–]ElfmanLV 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Pretty sure Anna Kournikiva earned a shit ton when she was poorly ranked.

[–]JakeDC 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Honestly, only someone who knows nothing about sports would say this. FFS, men and women generally compete separately in athletic competitons - for good reason.

Women's soccer, like the vast majority of women's sports, is not an elite athletic product. If the USWNT played head to head against the USMNT, the women would get destroyed. It wouldn't even be close. Indeed, the USWNT embarassd itself by losing to an under 15 boys team. Australia's women's soccer team is in the same boat. These are losses to teams made up of children - which makes some sense, because watching women's soccer is not much different than watching children play soccer, including with respect to size, speed, strength, endurance, and skill. The USWNT is a great women's soccer team, but that is it, and they are certainly many rungs down from the level of good men's soccer teams, including the USMNT.

[–]xMoody -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Can't take you seriously if you're referencing the friendly non competitive match vs the Dallas u15 team as a basis of your entire argument tbh

[–]keystothemoon 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

His point is that the men's team is athletically better than the women's. To back that up he cited that they lost to high school boys. You don't like the example of the boys beating the women and won't take him seriously now. Does this mean you disagree with his main premise? Do you think the US women's team would have a chance versus the US men?

[–]HootsToTheToots 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They got beaten by an under 14 boys team plz stfu

[–][deleted] 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

So good literal children regularly kick their asses on the field.

[–]Pathfinder24 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There job is ultimately to make money.

[–]futmaster420 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

doesnt matter how good they are... more people spend money watching men... its that simple

[–]Rolten -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I can't believe this is getting downvoted.

I would hope that people on here could understand context, and that "the women's team is good [relative to their competitors]" and the "men's team is not good [relative to their competitors]". It's so painfully obvious that that's what's meant.

Lmao at people shouting that the men's team is better. Yeah, no shit. But they compete in different tournaments lmao. Only their performance compared to their peers matters. Eventually, when it comes to salary revenue matters of course and men's football earns more, but that's not what we're talking about here.

[–]xMoody -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

This is a mysogyny sub, anything that doesn't say men good women bad is buried.

[+]Rolten -7 points-6 points-5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It sucks. Some of the ideas here are good but at the same time people are so prone to flawed logic and some forms of misogyny.

Haven't found any good alternatives though. The common other "men's rights" subs are really quick to become male-hating, feminist, or just way too politically correct and "progressive" for my taste.

[–]xMoody -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

yeah when i originally subbed to this place it wasn't nearly this bad, but now it's just out of control. 90% of the top voted posts are mysogyny or filled with mysogynistic responses but the mods don't do anything about it.

[–]deividyx -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's not as bad as you make it sound, yeah there are sexist post from time to time, but the same way is on feminist subreddits so to some degree we can let it slide. As for comments... well they are kind of bad and sexist on ether sex dominated pages, it's internet it just how it is.

[–]badassite -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup! When was the last time the men's went to any leagues?

[–]SnthonyAtark -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I don’t know why this is getting downvoted. You’re right. If we had them directly compete, then men’s team would definitely win, but that’s not the point. The women’s team won both of the last women’s world cups while the men’s team in an easy division didn’t even make it.

[–]Rolten 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I don’t know why this is getting downvoted. You’re right. If we had them directly compete, then men’s team would definitely win, but that’s not the point.

It's getting downvoted because as you said, it's "not the point".

[–]KU7CAD 296 points297 points298 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

The problem here is that too many people thing equal and equitable are the same thing.

[–]ImHighlyExalted 136 points137 points138 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

Don't you know we should all end up in the same position, regardless of the amount of work we do?

[–]YerDasWilly 36 points37 points38 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

we all end up underground anyways

[–]KU7CAD 12 points13 points14 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Running with moles.

[–]SoundOfDrums 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Diggin holes

[–]JotunR 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

Like working in the mines? or dead in a mass grave?

[–]chadwickofwv 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If feminists had their way men would be in mass graves all over the world.

[–]Pocket_MonSTAR8[🍰] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

To arms, comrade!

[–][deleted] 18 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

In the future army, everybody will have the same rank and fight with the same weapon. No distinctions.

[–]tjdragon117 22 points23 points24 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And then we are gonna get our asses kicked and everyone will still blame "institutionalized racism or sexism" or something.

[–]ZimbaZumba 53 points54 points55 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Men should now ask for equal pay.

[–]p3ngwin 85 points86 points87 points 6 years ago (28 children) | Copy Link

After over half a century campaigning for "equal pay for equal work", i imagine the PC crowd, the feminists, the SJW's, etc will be angry at this latest inequality, and demand this be addressed......

.....any day now....

[–]3243f6a8885 28 points29 points30 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

"The data and statistics are sexist!"

[+][deleted] -12 points-11 points-10 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Well when the men's team does equal work to the women's (i.e. actually win something, anything) maybe they'll deserve more money

[–]pacmatt27 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

In fairness to them, they are playing against teams who are actually good.

[+]Boognish_is_life -26 points-25 points-24 points 6 years ago (24 children) | Copy Link

Are they working less than the men? Ad revenue and ticket sales don't matter if it's a marketing issue. Both teams work equally hard. If you work at a place that makes $X and I work at a place in the same position that makes $2X , I don't necessarily make more than you. It's the owner's fault for not making then more profitable.

[–]jakemasterj 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Can we stick to the original goalposts of "equal pay"?

[+]Boognish_is_life -7 points-6 points-5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

If we do that, they definitely deserve a raise.

[–]jakemasterj 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Play more exciting games, idk what to tell you. Cant force people to watch things they dont want to.

[–]CapoFantasma97 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Dude don't reddit while high on weed

[+]Boognish_is_life -7 points-6 points-5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Haven't smoked in 6 years. What did I say that was incorrect? Or is this just a he-man woman haters club? Hint: it is.

[–]p3ngwin 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Ad revenue and ticket sales don't matter if it's a marketing issue.

oh it does, when more people watch and pay for men's sports, it does matter, same as actors in TV and movies, the more "in demand" the actor, the higher their salary.

unless you think all movie actors, from main actors to background actors, should be paid the same, and all tv actors the same too ?

curious if you would say female tennis players need to be paid less in the GrandSlam, where currently they only play 3 sets Vs the men's 5 sets, for the same money.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-35859791

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Main actors and background actors don't do the same amount of work. Kinda like a QB doesn't do the same as a punter.

And I'm actually torn on pro tennis specifically because they play less. They don't practice less and their entire lives are engulfed in tennis, just like men's. The lone difference is two sets. So maybe, idk, 5% less?

[–]p3ngwin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Main actors and background actors don't do the same amount of work.

neither do male and female sports players.

Proven by Women's football players beaten by 15 year old boys, and tennis #1 world ranked female players beaten by out of shape #200+ ranked male players.

https://www.marca.com/en/more-sports/2017/06/27/595296da468aeb99218b464c.html

https://www.huffingtonpost.com.au/2016/05/25/matildas-beaten-7-0-by-newcastle-jets-under-15-boys-team_a_21383895/

Fact is men are stronger, and faster, so any sport means men are going to provide a more athletic performance.

[–]Steakasaurus 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

You think women's sports on average aren't viewed as much simply because of marketing? Like you think the WNBA isnt watched liked the NBA for this reason? That they sell less merch etc all because of a simple lack of marketing. I'm sorry I'm repeating myself it's just such an outrageous opinion to me.

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

You are extrapolating a fuck load. No, the wnba doesn't get watched for a number of reasons. Marketing is part of it considering I've never seen a commercial for my local team. Another part of it is the absolute market saturation of the NBA. It's fucking everywhere and I can't stand more basketball. I'm sure others feel the same. Let's face this fact as well, Americans don't go to any soccer match to see a particular player. Except for maybe Rooney or Beckham. How many soccer players can you name? A huge number of people go to NBA games specifically to watch LeBron take on Leonard. Curry v harden. That just doesn't happen in a wnba because of multiple reasons.

Finally, the size difference in the NBA and wnba is astronomical compared to the size difference of men's v women's American national soccer teams. They literally can't pay women what they pay men because the revenue doesn't exist in basketball. That is absolutely not the case in women's soccer.

The women are regularly on national TV, draw huge crowds, and bring championships to the us on a world stage. Pay the ladies.

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

This is very simple. The money comes from those buying merch and watching. The men (yes even though they aren't champions) are bringing in billions of dollars. The women (champions) are bringing in millions. The women are making roughly 13% of the revenue being generated and the men are making about 8% of the revenue generated. The simple part is this. People want fast paced intense games. The men are better and more fun to watch in general. The female champions were beaten by male children. How many people line up to watch kids play football (soccer). How much merch do they sell etc. Its primarily a skill based reason. People love watching the best. THe women simply are not the best. Best women sure. But not the best overall.
To say marketing is the reason more people watch the men is comical. Men are the primary subscribers to sports. We buy the merch, we go full hardcore into this stuff. Are there female hardcore fans? Of course. However we both know that men vastly outnumber women in this respect. It's the same in the fashion area where female models make more than male models. Men are simply not as into fashion as females are overall and that's fine. You also seem to forget that advertisers etc aren't pushing some narrative. They want money. That's their narrative. They do countless studies/samples and follow the money. If 1000 people are surveyed in an area 50/50 men to women ratio and 5% of the females say they're into X and 60% of men say they're into X then yes X will be marketed more towards men. Because men already like X more. Haven't you ever wondered why a ton of commercials for household items show the man as a bumbling idiot barely able to breath? Meanwhile the wife is damn near a super hero? Women buy the vast majority of household items and the advertisers know this. The ads didn't create this discrepancy they're simply pandering to it.

If the marketing was 50/50 for all things you would STILL see men and women drift to different areas in an asymmetrical fashion because thats life. It's been shown even in babies ffs. However I have a feeling you might be one of those people that think that what you like in life is 100% caused by your environment but that has been proven demonstrably false.

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I'd like to see the source on the revenue generated you mentioned because I'm pretty positive it's bullshit.

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's your response to what I wrote? I'm glad I didn't expound upon these ideas further. Next time do your own research before arguing with someone

As you’ll see—separate and apart from any prize money awarded by FIFA—U.S. Soccer has, over the past decade, paid our Women’s National Team more than our Men’s National Team in salaries and game bonuses, and we continue to make unprecedented investments in our women’s program. https://www.ussoccer.com/governance/board-of-directors/us-soccer-president-carlos-cordeiro/open-letter-july-29-2019-finding-common-ground

As Dwight Jaynes pointed out four years ago after the U.S. women beat Japan to capture the World Cup in Vancouver, there is a big difference in the revenue available to pay the teams. The Women's World Cup brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13%. The 2010 men's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9% went to the players. https://www.forbes.com/sites/mikeozanian/2019/03/07/world-cup-soccer-pay-disparity-between-men-and-women-is-justified/#5d242ddd6da4

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Here's a source that proves you're full of it and the entire argument this sub is making is under a false premise

https://www.cnbc.com/2019/06/19/us-womens-soccer-games-now-generate-more-revenue-than-mens.html

And this is why citing them losing to high school players is also bullshit

https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-boys-squad-beat-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/

They weren't playing at full strength because why would they? It could get them hurt in a meaningless scrimmage.

Stop looking at the world as women making more means men make less. It's not a good look. You look like a petulant child.

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Did you read my links?

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Yes, I did. I haven't read the lawsuit filed by the wnt but it seems it was filed under a false premise as well. The differing structures makes it difficult to pinpoint exact pay differences per player (which your source didn't mention). That means we can't say whether players were paid fairly, just that teams made X amount.

That does not mean pay is not important to discuss. I'm trying to figure out why a men's rights group is harping on this as if it had anything to do with men's rights and not just an opportunity to hate women who fight for more.

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The women collectively bargained so that they would get a salary. The men only get paid if they play and thats largely in the form of bonuses (I'm not linking you anymore spend 2 minutes on google). Like you really think there is this just huge fucking conspiracy to pay women less it's hilarious.

[–]Boognish_is_life 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You're such a coward dude. I've never said it's a conspiracy. I don't have all the facts and neither do you. The facts I do have show that they work just as hard and do just as much work as the men. They also win more and are therefore better than the men. And since that's the case, they deserve to be paid equally. Whether they are paid equally is not for me to say or prove. You are here trying to argue they deserve less than men because they lost a scrimmage match they didn't want or need to win? You think them throwing that game hurt their egos? No, they lost because scoring wasn't their intent. Beating kids wasn't their intent. They had nothing to gain by winning that scrimmage except taking a talking point away from a bunch of incels who don't know how to interact with women.

You really should check your priorities. This sub might get more positive attention if you pathetic boys didn't spend your time whining about women fighting for equality and focused on tackling issues that actually do affect men. Workplace injuries? Support OSHA and fight against the asshole Trump is appointing to secretary of labor. Prostate cancer and suicide? Support a healthcare system where men can get the help they need. Paid paternity leave? Vote Democrat and progressive because they are the only ones fighting for it. Stop using this as a breeding ground for hating women. It's pathetic and makes everyone who does fight for a better world for men look like shit by association.

Women's pay increasing has nothing to do with you. Change my mind.

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like do you really not understand what your first link is saying and why?

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Of course, this match against the academy team was very informal

That was the opinion of the author. The fact is they lost to children. The FACT is they aren't as good as the men. Facts>feelings. Did you even look at the collective bargaining contracts etc or are you still running on feels?

[–]Steakasaurus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your argument is like saying it's not fair that Mark Hamill didn't make as much money as Harrison Ford did in Star Wars. Harrison Ford opted for part of the revenue vs just a salary. This is exactly what the women's league wanted. THey wanted salary. Now they're mad men make more because they were paid as a percent of revenue. Top kek.

[–]JudgementalChair 95 points96 points97 points 6 years ago (17 children) | Copy Link

I love how their response to this was, "That's not true" but the USSF had all the information laid out plain as day for anyone to see

[–][deleted] 52 points53 points54 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It's the equivalent of "no u" 😂. The other side never wants to admit they were wrong. Pathetic.

[–]ARedthorn 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

There are some accounting issues.

The biggest being that the players in the report aren’t just part of the US international team- they’re in the local US league on various teams as well.

The report includes women’s pay from the international team AND the national league.

But it only includes pay from the men’s international team, because the men’s league pays for itself.

[–]cutthechatter_red2 19 points20 points21 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Not entirely accurately stated. The USSF pays for both the “international” (USWNT) and “national” (NWSL or club team) salaries for women players that participate in both. Whereas the USSF only pays the men for their time with the USMNT. It’s not apples to apples, but this really isn’t an apples to apples issue. Also, I believe the women and their reps purposely negotiated for it to be this way.

[–]ARedthorn 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Thanks for clarifying.

Regardless, the USSF’s response invited complaints that it wasn’t a fair appraisal, precisely because it did this.

I also agree about the negotiations being intentionally different.

[–]cutthechatter_red2 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

From the USSF’s perspective it is cash out to women players either way.

When Rapinoe (just as an example) is very publicly complaining that the USSF, specifically, doesn’t pay her fairly when compared to the men and the USSF shows all compensation items related to Rapinoe that it pays - isn’t it then unfair for her, and others, to say to ignore certain compensation items the USSF pays because they are misleading? Especially when her reps negotiated for the items they don’t want included in the comparison?

[–]ARedthorn 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

For the record, I want to separate out 3 points:

1- Profitability of the two leagues is, and should be a factor. If, for example, the Women’s World Cup paid the same prize money as the Men’s, it would go bankrupt and there would be no more Women’s World Cup.

Similar logic may apply here... and I support that argument.

2- Negotiated pay differences (women getting a secured salary no matter how often or well they play, while men get paid per game with bonuses for performance) are something everyone needs to get over.

Individuals on EITHER side of that could complain about the advantages of the other... so unless we want to unify the contract negotiation across all leagues... or completely fracture it to an individual-basis... there’s no improving it.

3- finally: but the USSF report is inviting criticism because it’s saying:

“Hey, we pay women more for 2 jobs than we pay me for 1!”

To which the women will say: “Uh... yeah. Exactly the point we were making, idiots. How about you tell everyone what you pay us for 1 job vs men for that 1 job.”

It not being apples to apples means it’s not a counterpoint to the original claim.

If the women’s pay is a+b...

And the men’s pay is B+C...

Women are complaining that B+C > a+b... and that B > b.

The USSF just responded with “a+b > B.” Which is true... but has nothing to do with the either complaint.

It’s a shitty argument... made even worse by several readily available good ones that they just... ignored.

[–]cutthechatter_red2 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

The women chose to get paid from one source for both jobs in the last CBA. It’s one agreement. Comparing the women’s CBA to the men’s CBA means you compare a + b to B, because the men only have B (the men to not have C in this Scenario because the USSF doesn’t pay their club salaries).

It’s like saying I’ll do two jobs for the price of one and then complaining that one of your jobs is underpaid because the guy who said he would do one job for the price of one is making more “per job”.

[–]ARedthorn 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

That entirely misses the point.

The women agreed to get paid two salaries for two jobs from one source.

The men agreed to get paid two salaries for two jobs from two sources.

Comparing salary/job to salary/job tells us one thing.

Comparing salary/source to salary/source tells us another.

When someone is complaining about one, pointing out the other is meaningless.

I hate hot weather. Telling me that my shoes are nicer than yours may be true, and awfully nice of you, but irrelevant.

[–]cutthechatter_red2 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The USSF has nothing to do with the men’s second source of income, which is irrelevant to any discussion regarding the women’s complaint of pay from the USSF.

The women agreed to essentially be paid less for one job to have better pay and benefits in the other, which makes the comparison relevant.

[–]ARedthorn -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Yes. Exactly. That’s why the data is terrible.

There are 4 categories:

1: Women’s Income from USSF for League Play

2: Women’s Income from USSF for International Play

3: Men’s Income from League Teams for League Play

4: Men’s Income from USSF for International Play

If you want to see the difference in pay for League and international play, compare #1 and #2... same gender, same source of income. Only variable is the work (League vs International).

If you want to see difference in pay for gender, compare #2 and #4... same work (international play) and same source of income. Only variable is gender.

You can’t really compare any of the others.

But that’s what this report does. Only worse.

Because it compares #4 to #1+2 lumped together... which is beyond useless... and smells like lying with statistics. #4 isn’t comparable to #1, much less #1+2, so the attempt is hella suspect.

-~-~-~-

It’s like if you and I both worked 2 jobs. You work 2 jobs at CopyCo, 80 hours a week in total, for $80,000.

I work 1 job at CopyCo, 40 hours a week, for $70,000... with a second job at the sister company PrinterCo, 40 hours a week for $50,000.

Well, shit. It looks like we work the same number of hours every week, and CopyCo pays you more than me! That’s unfair!

No. Because that’s an unfair comparison. I’m including your pay and hours from 2 jobs vs my pay from 1 and hours from 2.

Same thing in the report. “Women’s total pay” in the report includes income from 2 sources: USSF league pay and USSF international pay. “Men’s total pay” in the report includes income from 1 source: USSF international pay.

Comparing those two things as if they were the same... is bullshit.

[–]ElfmanLV 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Doesn't matter, still counts as "pay". Not like the women count their base salaries vs men's base salaries. Men have shit salaries btw, because lots don't get paid if they don't play well.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The USSF helps subsidize the NWSL by also paying the salaries for any national team member on their respective club team. It was part of a three nation deal with Canada and Mexico to help promote the league and give it the best chances for success.

To show total remuneration paid by the USSF, the club salaries for those members have to be included.

[–]shagy815 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Both statements are accurate. The womens side separates league play from national team play. USSF combines them. The same organization pays both teams and all the national team players are also league players but not all league players are on the national team.

Women's league pay is higher than mens. Women's national team pay is significantly lower than the mens.

Perfect example using the same figures to prove to sides of an argument.

[–]theBrineySeaMan 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It also factors in FIFA prize money, which, if the men's team was better, would escalate their numbers dramatically. The USMNT came out calling this bullshit accounting as well.

[–]orangeLILpumpkin 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

It wasn't so much "that's not true" as much as it was "that's not true if you don't count the wages we don't want you to count".

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]sikwidit05 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Phone's at like 50%

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (36 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]mrimdman -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (18 children) | Copy Link

So are the men's. Soccer sucks.

[–]Rolten 14 points15 points16 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

Wow what a special opinion! I mean, 3.6 billion people tuned in to the last men's world cup, but yeah football is boring and sucks. Thanks for contributing.

[–]trustworthy_expert 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

13.6 million people served on the Nazi military in WWII. Large groups can still be wrong.

[–]aly_c793 points 6 years ago [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

Except that they aren't this time

[–]trustworthy_expert 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I guess let's change that figure you 3.6 billion and one. 👉😉👉

[–]Roguta 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

De gustibus non est disputandum.

[–]Rolten -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yeah that's totally comparable. Wow you sure showed me. Those 3.6 billion people gaining enjoyment from something are obviously mistaken. They are not enjoying themselves, they just think they are.

[–]trustworthy_expert 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Gee, bro, I'll bet you're fun at parties.

[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

And you brought up nazi soldiers when discussing football fans. No mate, you're fun at parties.

[–]trustworthy_expert 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Slick on the come backs, too, I see. You have a good day. 😘👌

[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

You too bby

[–]mrimdman 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Not me! 😀

I guess I just can't get excited for a tie game.

[–]Rolten -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok, good for you.

[–]IGargleGarlic -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

And you contributed... what exactly with this comment?

[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I told him his comment sucks, maybe he'll think twice next time and try and contribute.

[–]aly_c795 points 6 years ago* [recovered] (1 child) | Copy Link

go back to baseball or whatever American sport you worship and let us watch boring stupid lame soccer <3

[–]itsthevoiceman 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Baseball is also boring.

Hockey is fun to watch!

[+]tothecatmobile -8 points-7 points-6 points 6 years ago (15 children) | Copy Link

http://www.sportspromedia.com/news/uswnt-us-soccer-revenues-lawsuit

[–]Nergaal 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

That's a 2% difference, and women were paid like 10% more or so

[+]Kravego -14 points-13 points-12 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

No they weren't. You can't include NWSL salaries like the USSF did when they came out with that number.

[–]Nergaal 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

men don't have ANY salaries. if a man doesn't play at all he gets zilch. if a woman doesn't she gets her salary. that's how taxes and UBI works: you tax the richest so you give to the poorest. richest women soccer players are angry they make less than the richest men, and have zero care that the poorest men make less than the poorest women.

[+]Kravego -14 points-13 points-12 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

The man can just show up to the game, warm the bench, and get paid the same amount. That's a salary for all intents and purposes.

Try not to mix in your political bullshit when talking about completely separate issues, it does nothing for your argument.

[–]Nergaal 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

A contract player on the women’s team makes a base salary and can earn performance-based bonuses. (Players without a contract have a different pay schedule.)

On the men’s team, players earn only bonuses.

https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/?utm_term=.396d417c7b04

You can be as angry as you want if you don't want to listen to actual facts.

[+]Kravego -12 points-11 points-10 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

Those are facts, the mens team makes only bonuses. But, and here's the kicker, the bonuses apply regardless of performance. It's not a "bonus" if you get paid just to warm the bench. Regardless of what USSF calls it.

Both teams playing the same number of games and winning the same amount will net the men's team more money. That's the issue the women are fighting.

[–]Nergaal 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

And FIFA pays the winner of the men's WC more than the entire participating teams in the WWC PUT TOGETHER. Go tell the equivalent of UN in soccer how they should treat the US, then come back and rage on an internet forum.

[–]Kravego 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

FIFA has nothing to do with the current issue. It's USSF that the USWNT are suing, not FIFA

[–]cutthechatter_red2 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They certainly can. The USSF pays both international and NWSL salaries for international women players. The USSF only pays the men for their international time. The women, and their reps, specifically negotiated it to be that way during the last CBA. To exclude that money would not be telling the whole story.

[–][deleted] 160 points161 points162 points 6 years ago (46 children) | Copy Link

The solution to this problem is simple. Abolish the women's league. Have one league, open to both sexes. Equal chances. Equal pay for equal performance.

[–]Lethn 105 points106 points107 points 6 years ago (21 children) | Copy Link

You and I both know that feminists will never let that happen, competing on an equal playing field with men? Nah, fuck that, that would mean they couldn't declare themselves victims if they got their arses kicked.

[–]Shitpostradamus 35 points36 points37 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Ok fine. Have all the men say they are women and then they have to be allowed to all play in the same league. It will wipe out women’s sports totally and we can be done with all this bullshit lol

[–]Rolten -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (19 children) | Copy Link

Why feminists? I'm absolutely not a feminist but I don't want that either. I enjoyed the women's world championships and it makes a ton of sense to divide people by gender when it comes to sports.

Honestly, this type of talk is really showing /r/mensrights in a bad light. I really hope that most here are not in favour of stopping women's championships.

[–]Lethn 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (12 children) | Copy Link

Why is criticising a hateful movement going to show the sub in a bad light? Go on, explain it to me.

[–]Rolten 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (11 children) | Copy Link

I thought my comment was rather clear in addressing the fact that I didn't disagree with you because you bashed feminists. I disagreed based on the arguments that you made.

You made it sound like feminists would stop people from mixing men's and women's sports. That's not the case. I reckon the vast majority of non-feminists wouldn't want that either.

[–]Lethn 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Have you tried actually feminists about this?

[–]Rolten 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

You're focusing on the fact that I typed feminists.

I have repeatedly made clear that that is not what I was addressing: your idea is preposterous to the majority of non-feminists.

[–]Lethn 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

It was never 'my' idea I was mocking what feminists would inevitably end up doing.

[–]Rolten 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You and I both know that feminists will never let that happen, competing on an equal playing field with men

You were mocking that they wouldn't let others change a very reasonable system where men and women are split in most sports?

[–]Lethn 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Yes for fuck's sake, they wouldn't let things change either way.

[–]CasualPenguin -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

Edit: guys, you are making us look dumb. Acting as if the defense's case is fact when it hasn't been upheld is dumb. Wait and see how the court case plays out or you are just circle jerking over bullshit

As a bystander I want to say I appreciate you fighting the good fight of separating mensrights from stupidity. I haven't spent much time fighting the irrational arguments here lately, but it's nice seeing someone is

[–]jonnytechno 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Have you been to this sub before? We believe in true equality.... Egalitarianism, and that's how it works.... We're not mysoginists, we want women to have true equality & that means competing with men

[–]Rolten -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Have you been to this sub before?

Have been here for years.

We're not mysoginists, we want women to have true equality & that means competing with men

Nah that's just stupid. Anyone should realize the physical difference between men and women and that splitting them in sports makes a whole lot more sense. Systematically denying that just so that men can outperform women is a wee bit mysoginistic, even if it comes from a sense of equality.

Egalitarianism has its limits.

[–]Stumme0 points 6 years ago* [recovered] (3 children) | Copy Link

Actually I’d like to see sports integrated so they can play on each gender’s strengths and weaknesses- both mental, and physical. That would be cool!

[–]Rolten 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

I'm guessing this is a joke, but obviously men would dominate. Mentally we're comparably, physically men are just a lot stronger.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I dunno man, women can fucking run.

[–]Phrodo_00 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

That already exists: it's called regular football. As far as I know, there's no rule preventing women to participate in most "men's" leagues.

[–]UtahStateAgnostics 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The Indiana Pacers drafted a woman once but she never actually played. Technically, the NBA is for both sexes.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Great. So no need for a women's league. Abolish it and next season, all the women currently demanding "equal pay" can try out for teams which are no longer sex segregated, on an equal basis with the men.

What possible reason could feminists have to object?

[–]deerbleach 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

NHL as well

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Manon_Rh%C3%A9aume#Playing_career

[–]tothecatmobile 18 points19 points20 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The solution is even simpler, and is what the women asked for in the first place.

Revenue sharing, where each national team is paid according to the revenue they provide USSF.

[–]Santa1936 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

where each national team is paid according to the revenue they provide USSF

Is this not already the case?

[–]tatanpoker09 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No, exactly what the post is about, women get paid more according to revenue provided

[–]tothecatmobile 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No.

[–]shagy815 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Performance doesn't mean physical work. Performance in this scenario should be measured by team profitability.

The real solution is to split the mens and womens organizations into 2 separate entities and let them stand on their own. Then the market decides the pay.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That works too.

[–]thetotalpackage7 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

The US Women's National Team was beat by the boys 15 and under FC Dallas U-15 boys academy team. The score was 5-2.

https://www.cbssports.com/soccer/news/a-dallas-fc-under-15-boys-squad-beat-the-u-s-womens-national-team-in-a-scrimmage/

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Well, given that the Women's National Team is now claiming it's paid less for the same work as the men's, we must assume that they improved a lot since then. Time to give them the chance to show it.

[+]Jupiter_Ginger -10 points-9 points-8 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

I love how many times this has been posted in this article, and it really just screams that nobody here has had any interaction with children ever.

Because when you're full grown adults playing a friendly little game with kids just so you have some practice running around, most well adjusted people wouldn't exactly go all out, and some may even let them win

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If they were going to let them win the score wouldn’t be 5-2. That’s taking a BEATING.

[–]Currently_sharting 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The boys team definitely had more incentive to try hard in that game. There may be some truth to your statement.

It’s also true that a 15 year old boy is bigger, faster, stronger than a grown woman in many cases. If everyone on your team is faster than everyone on the opponents team, then you don’t even need to be more skilled.

Which do you think is a bigger contributor to the loss - baseline physical capacity or women graciously gifting a victory?

[–]DLDude 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

This is the dumbest

[–]Rolten -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Reading this thread is making me really second guess what kind of people visit this sub...

[+]Ergheis -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

People drunk from jerking themselves off, saying the dumbest drunken shit

[–]Daddy_Scar 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

the teams would still have almost all men, due to the biology of both genders bodies.

edit: people who are downvoting this, why are you denying science?

[–]chadwickofwv 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Because they are too stupid to think for themselves.

[–]Daddy_Scar 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

yeah it was at -2 at one point. like what it’s just science? idiots man.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]Tecbarrett -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Surely this is the other way round for European football teams, because there is a much larger appeal for men's football.

Please correct me if I'm wrong but wouldn't say England's men's team be paid more than the England women's team and the BBC, a British company would report on that rather than the pay of the American team?

(Side note I don't really enjoy football but am all for striving towards something resembling equality)

[–]Mr_Shad0w 25 points26 points27 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It got mighty quiet out there in Misandry Land as soon as all these inconvenient facts came out.

[+]CasualPenguin -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago* (0 children) | Copy Link

What inconvenient facts swayed you?

From what I can tell this is all the info generated by the defendent* so of course it exonerates them but that doesn't make it fact, the court case will have to determine what is true

[–][deleted] 8 points9 points10 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

A man and a woman both apply for the same job, and both get hired.

The HR manager meets with the man and offers to options. He can get paid $100K/year + 5% commission or he can get $50K/year and have a 20% commission. The man thinks a bit and says that he'll take the second option.

The HR manager offers the same two options to the woman, who picks the first.

After a year of working, the man has sold $1M of merchandise while the woman has sold only $200K.

​

So the man gets paid: $50K + $1M * 20% = $250K.

The woman gets paid: $100K + $200K * 5% = $110K.

​

Notice that the woman is making $110K/$200K = 55% of what she brought in, while the man is only getting 25% of what he brought in.

​

So the woman picked her option, she sold what she sold, and she is getting a bigger percentage of the total than the man... but patriarchy wage gap is the problem???

​

(Also, notice that the company made $90K profit from the woman's efforts and $750K from the man's efforts. Who should they be hiring, more people like that woman or like that man?)

[–][deleted] 6 points7 points8 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This right here proves that feminism is about having superiority over men. Equal rights was established loooong ago. Turns out it sucks to be a man just as much as a woman!

[–]chadwickofwv 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Equal rights was established loooong ago.

This is not and never has been true. Women have always enjoyed privileges that men do not.

[–]__removed__ 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

I love the "equal pay" in tennis.

No, seriously, men and women champions take home the same prize money.

The women's Wimbledon Championship match was over in 55 minutes.

The men's Wimbledon Championship match took 4 hours 57 minutes.

Simona Halep got paid $3,257,366 per hour.

Novak Djokovic got paid $602,777 per hour.

[–]dtaylortx 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Now that's a pay gap!

[–]pwnzusauce 21 points22 points23 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Where is the outrage??

[–]nocivo 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

At least we have one more thing to show them when the next time this comes ti the news because they 12-0 an amateur team.

[–]ass-my-eat 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Who needs facts when you base your actions purely on emotion.

[–]PanderjitSingh_k 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Suddenly stats based reports from the organization itself are just allegations.

There wasn’t any doubt while the girls were crying.

[–]rabel111 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why let fact stop rich women acting like victims?

[–]cyruszane 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

There go those Facts again... dam does anyone remember when reporters would go find those facts and tell people them before publishing their stories? It used to happen, no really!

[–]retardo85 17 points18 points19 points 6 years ago (14 children) | Copy Link

not one word from msm bout this

[+]shagy815 -13 points-12 points-11 points 6 years ago (13 children) | Copy Link

Yes there is. It's on every major news outlet.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (6 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]shagy815 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

https://www.foxnews.com/sports/us-soccer-women-team-pay

https://www.cbsnews.com/news/us-soccer-says-womens-national-team-paid-more-than-the-men/

https://soccer.nbcsports.com/2019/07/29/us-soccer-uswnt-usmnt-pay/

https://www.nytimes.com/2019/07/29/sports/soccer/us-soccer-equal-pay.html

You are as stupid as the hardcore feminists who refuse to accept facts. That goes for the rest of you assholes downvoting me as well.

[–]retardo85 -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

thats the internet not TV

[–]shagy815 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

MSM is not TV only.

[–]foo-jitsoo 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Stop watching TV.

[–]jameswalker43 -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Hey dude someone needs to let you know you’re disrespecting so called savoir vivre ;)

[–]retardo85 -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

right in the butt

[+]wtfschool -12 points-11 points-10 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Shhhh, don't threaten to take his victim card away. That's what I see every time someone whines about the "msm." There's no faster way to water down your credibility than blaming the big, bad mainstream media.

[–]PurveyorofToxicWaste 9 points10 points11 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

Misandrist

[+]wtfschool -8 points-7 points-6 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

If I'm a misandrist then I must be one of those self hating misandrists, lol. I'm curious to know when this sub turned into a bunch of incels.

[–]PurveyorofToxicWaste 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Nice buzzwords.

[–]wtfschool -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Thanks :D...I picked them up from this sub.

[–]Daytosis 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Its funny that they want equal pay but when it happens, they will be getting paid less than what they do now.

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea..funny that.

It was just assumed that woman got less wasn't it? Typically no one bothered to actually check as they just relied on how the feel they are getting paid and of course a woman is never paid enough is she..

[–][deleted] 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Literally makes me sick to my stomach

[–]1lifecarpediem 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They will say that fact sheet is flawed and male biased. Always a way to spin the truth.

[–][deleted] 10 points11 points12 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

HA HA HA HA!!!
Careful, the offended Wahmans and their fat neckbeard White Knights will come after you.

[–]man_on_a_corner 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

No one feels like they are making more than enough already to be playing a sport?

[–]Felt_Ninja -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Maybe someone thinks your job pays too much as well, or mine. There's an aspect of market demand, which will dictate what players are getting paid. Women's soccer doesn't generate as much revenue as men's soccer, but the pay stipulations for the women's team (based on the chart I saw a few weeks ago) were completely off, and constituted a gamble in every way; to the point where you'd likely find mercenary players on the team by all logic, rather than players interested in playing as a team.

But now I'm confused as to who's making more/less money, and this whole thing seems to be getting spun into a PR "he said"/"she said" thing by the league. It's not the first time management has passed the buck, and it won't be the last.

Speaking from a labor negotiation standpoint, if the women's team wants to be paid equally to the men's team, the men's team needs to vocally and strategically support that. Likewise. The vice versa. It's leverage, and it's the only thing management understands if they value the labor.

Contrary to what people think, $165,000 a year, which is what I understand Megan Rapinoe's salary to be, is not a fortune by any stretch. It's more comfortable than $40,000 yearly, but considering taxes, living expenses, etc, you don't walk away with a whole lot of it. Once people stop hating anyone who makes even a penny more than them, we can begin actually being a cooperative society. Unfortunately, we've been conditioned to think anybody with more money than ourselves is the problem.

For the record, I'd support a co-ed team. It would be a better unit anyway. Nobody can give me horse shit about "well, won't sexual tensions get in the way?", because I can nearly guarantee you both the men's and women's teams currently have gay players. The fuck would anyone care, anyway? You're here to watch the game. It's not PornHub.

[–]reckie87 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's her salary only for playing on the national team. She makes a salary from her full time position as well.

[–]Felt_Ninja 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Fair enough. It's a specialized skill, and there's a direct market for it. Good for her.

[–]sonofsuperman1983 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

what do you not understand equal opportunity is not fair equal outcome is what is fair lol

[–]2Squirrels 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

If you were one of the few people who actually supported that you're stupid. I mean I knew that before the fact sheet came out but still. You're stupid.

[–]AwesomePopcorn 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The quotations on the Fact Sheet concerns me a little bit

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (3 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]LeanMrfuzzles 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because they get paid what their employers think is fair compensation for the service they provide them? They bring in millions/billions of dollars in revenue of course they get paid...

[–][deleted] 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is the dumbest comment ever. Sports bring in billions of dollars of course Lebron is going to make millions.

[–]Mongo1021 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Top athletes earn every dime.

First, they can do what few people in the world can do. They are working very few people who can do the job. Examples: — How many people can hit a fastball coming at you at 95 miles per hour? — Pull down a rebound when you’re surrounded by by dudes who are muscular and about 6’10” tall?

I could go on with any sport.

[–]69GottaGoFast69 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

And Megan Rapinoe is a self serving, self interested twat. Some people call her team leader, but the only extreme ownership she has is ownership of the spotlight at the cost of her teammates.

[–]Kidchico 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

What does this have to do with men's rights?

[–]Lupinfujiko 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

It shows the flaw in the feminist narrative.

This is important because this flawed ideology is currently being pushed by government and the media to form even more biased legislation against men.

[–]Kidchico 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

This is important

Is it, though?

[–]Lupinfujiko 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I suppose in the grand scheme of things one could say that really nothing is all that important.

In the context of what we are discussing here, it is important. Significant even.

[–]Ojo99 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I love the Daily Wire.

[–][deleted] 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–]AutoModerator[M] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Your comment was automatically removed because we do not allow links to that site.

I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please contact the moderators of this subreddit if you have any questions or concerns.

[–]ColonelVirus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

It's fucking insane how little both the US women and men get paid compared to premiership and European players...

Over here we have single players earning $400k a week... The top 10 players earn more than the whole US men's/women out together.

I guess it's just a matter of time? Not sure how popular football is or becoming in the US.

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

there's never been a lot of money in playing for your nation's team, it's not really about cash it's more a service and the pride to play for your country and in yourself, knowing you are the best in your country.

not all players agree but on the whole everyone knows this.

[–]ColonelVirus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Oh this is national team only? I thought people said something about a league? My bad.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago* (1 child) | Copy Link

I thought so but i might be wrong.

The women's game is nowhere near the level of men's game when it comes to local leagues and the main reason the numbers are so high in the international stage is because of the interest of the men's game and the general prestige of the FIFA World Cup. Personally am loving seeing the women's game grow. My two favourite things in one package. *-*

It does look good for the women game though given they had such a good world Cup but they are decades behind compared the men's game when you look at viewer number, gate receipts, sponsors, etc.

Pay wise the in local leagues i bet they are not commanding anything like the men's game for the above reasons (and general all round skill depth in the game. Looking forward to seeing a Messy type player in the woman's game but it could be decades away).

[–]ColonelVirus 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yea tbh I fell out of love with men's football a while ago, probably like 5-6 years now. Almost a killable offense in the UK lol. The women's world cup though I really enjoyed... Kinds brought me back in a bit. Games felt much easier to watch and there wasn't any drama (if you exclude Colombia... Bloody animals, terrible behaviour), unlike in the men's games, which is bogged down with so much racism, match fixing, back handers, over paid players and managers and worst of all.. all the damn diving.

VAR has help a lot of on the pitch stuff though, I'm really happy to see that being used a lot more often now. I'm gonna start watching again this season, although I no longer own any subs to watch lol probably have to get a nowTV or something...

[–]datchilla 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Aren’t athletes paid based on their performance and not how many jerseys they sell or how valuable their ad time is?

[–]Deja_Siku 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

GZzt-gzZt...shocking

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Shock horror people in the Premier League get paid more than people in the arse end of League Two

[–]chambertlo 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

No one gives a fuck about women’s sports.

[–]C2074579 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yup, and no one cares. All we can do is keep pointing it out.

[–]Eppikfinn 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Women’s team is paid in base, men’s team actually makes more based on bonuses and stuff. Like if I’m making $10, and you’re making $15, and we work for 3 hours, I make $30 but you make $45. However, I get a $20 bonus, so I end up with $50. You made more than me, but I ended with more money. So it’s not really unequal, they just want the results to be equal

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

But female empowerment is worth trillions.. Right?... Right guys?

[–]RespectFurries 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Because why do they have to their “whamen”

[–]Makiwawa 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

ww

[–]DarkPandaLord 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Equal Pay = More Pay for Females

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

How did they lose millions?

[–][deleted] 6 years ago* (2 children) | Copy Link

[permanently deleted]

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

It’s all about the advertising money right?

[–]Canisluous1558 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

This is what happens when you apply feminist logic to buisness.

[–]tomatohtomato 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I guarantee you this is spin

[–]JaceLightning 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Why do they put fact sheet in quotes? Bias much?

[–]peepeeandpoopooman 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Does this mean in the USA at least, women's football is so unpopular it actually costs more money than it generates?

[–]RowRowDango 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Lol you dumbasses really taking the dailywire seriously

[–]Kingminos9 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I dont think you know how sports pay works..

[–]nick-denton 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Don’t let me disturb the circlejerk but the USMNT Players Union wants to make it equal.

The USMNT players union has a statement on yesterday's US Soccer letter on pay for the WNT/MNT that you may not have expected.

Since the mods have automod removing Tw!tter posts here’s what was posted.

https://i.imgur.com/qT2Wm7d.jpg

[–]twisted42 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

The issue here is, there is a lot of misinformation in this report. Even the USMNT came out as a group and said it is inaccurate.

[–]Lightsouttokyo 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Let’s just do away with women’s sports where there is a men’s sport as the origination It breeds intersex competition when women physically cannot compete with So let’s stop it, make one team (international events) where EVERYONE competes to make the team

[–]OGSHAGGY 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

sort by controversial

[+]jongaynor -19 points-18 points-17 points 6 years ago (10 children) | Copy Link

Did any of you read about this outside of a batshit crazy site like DailyWire? The Mens Team immediately put out a letter condemning the statement as grossly misleading and supporting the Womens team.

This was put out in advance of union negotiations by US Soccer in an attempt to soften their image. The statement itself admits that apples for apples, the women are paid less. Only when multiple leagues are taken into account (which the men do not play in) do the women receive more.

[–]chakan2 20 points21 points22 points 6 years ago (9 children) | Copy Link

Per game, a man makes more... However, the women are salaried, meaning if they don't show up they get paid... So not only are the men under paid compared to the women, they have to work harder for it.

The breakdown was over the last 8 years the USWNT got 34 mil, while the men got 26 mil.

[–]Kravego -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (8 children) | Copy Link

However, the women are salaried, meaning if they don't show up they get paid... So not only are the men under paid compared to the women, they have to work harder for it.

The men get paid just for showing up and sitting on the bench. That's basically a salary for all intents and purposes. And the salary they make is $5,000 per game regardless of outcome. If both teams play 20 friendlies and lose all of them, all players will come out with $100k.

The numbers you're using include NWSL numbers which should not be included.

[–]chakan2 13 points14 points15 points 6 years ago (7 children) | Copy Link

You understand riding the bench means showing up for work right? They still travel, which may mean up to a week away, they still get dressed, they still warm up, and they have to be game ready.

They don't do shit like take the quarter finals off because they're a little sore.

I'll take salary any day, especially if it means I get to just take days off because woman.

[–]datchilla 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You understand that if they don’t show up they can be fined?

[+]Kravego -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

I'll take salary any day, especially if it means I get to just take days off because woman.

Which just proves a lack of financial sense on your part, but go ahead.

[–]chakan2 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

So...uh...Steady (and in this case higher) income with no real obligations is somehow bad financial sense? That's an interesting perspective.

[+]Kravego -6 points-5 points-4 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

The men's income is higher. Significantly higher, even with the new CBA that went into effect in 2016. And if we're taking the idea of a woman being kept on the team despite not doing anything, then I'm going with the idea of a man showing up to each game and warming the bench.

Very little difference in effort, significantly increased earnings for the men.

[–]chakan2 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

You're clearly very bad with numbers...36 million goes to USWNT, 26 million to US Mens team. The men end up making slightly more...40 million vs 39 million due to cash prizes for various tourneys.

HOWEVER...and this is the key statistic...the Men's world cup revenue...6 Billion dollars...The women's world cup Revenue...a whopping 73 million.

In other words...the Women should be paid the same for making less than 1% of the revenue of the men.

Yea, I'm taking that salary for no responsibility all day.

[–]Kravego -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Why do you and others keep bringing up the World Cup? The World Cup has literally 0 to do with the USSF pay and bonus structure.

People are already calling for FIFA to change their practices, but the lawsuit involving the USWNT is specifically against the USSF.

[–]chakan2 3 points4 points5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

I didn't even know there was a pro women's league... That should indicate what kind of revenue they bring in.

So they get salary, don't have to show up to games that no one watches, and is subsidized by the men's league...

I did find attendance numbers, and they're dismal. Around 4000 per match... There are high-school football teams that bring in more fans.

The ONLY money numbers you can find on the women's game are from the world cup.

So again... If I can get paid to maybe show up to work and not actually be responsible for producing anything... I'm taking that all day.

[+]theBrineySeaMan -9 points-8 points-7 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

As usual this sub is would rather be outraged than think or do research. The USMNT joined to call bullshit in the numbers, which makes sense since it's taken this long to come up with accounting to make pay seem fair. The biggest point to me is that the men's club has received little prize money for world cup wins while the women have won two straight in the period so the union is factoring prize money in since it suits them. If the men had more prize money it would be accounted away as not part of the pay.

[–]KnowledgeIsDangerous -4 points-3 points-2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

That's the real story. They fudged the numbers, both the men AND women's teams know it and are calling the organization out on it.

[+]TheSupernaturalist -7 points-6 points-5 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Yeah you know it’s bad when the entire post is a screenshot of a headline so you can’t even read the article. Coming from r/all it really makes this sub look bad when in the past I’ve seen it as a place to highlight issues that uniquely affect men. All I see now is rage-bait for misogynists.

[–]Warlock45 -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Nobody cared 72 hours after the game ended which was like a week before this was posted

[–]DangerZone69 -5 points-4 points-3 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

Get this trash website out of here

[–]dtaylortx 1 point2 points3 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Even the National Enquirer got a news story right when no one in MSM would touch it.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Edwards_extramarital_affair

[+]Jaabram -21 points-20 points-19 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

To be fair, I don’t really care about professional sports wages. Whichever gender’s sport was more popular, they should get payed more. (Please correct me if I’m wrong) But, wasn’t women’s soccer more popular?

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 16 points17 points18 points 6 years ago (4 children) | Copy Link

Not in the slightest. Revenue determines the popularity contest.

[–]Jaabram 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (3 children) | Copy Link

So the men were more popular but the women made more money?

[–]guy92 -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The women have won the World Cup 3 times in a row. The men barely even qualify. They're the joke team of football

[–]NohoTwoPointOh 4 points5 points6 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Sure, but who generated more profits? Please remember that outside of a few countries, no one really gives a shit about women's football in relation to the men. Changing? Sure. I hope it does. But look at the WNBA. Should they get equal pay, too?

[–]Jaabram 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Oh

[+]badassite -10 points-9 points-8 points 6 years ago* (7 children) | Copy Link

Edit: wow you all got triggered, thanks for all the angry messages!

Don't our American men's college football teams lose a lot of money themselves and are subsidized by the universities and students paying tuition? Also don't the sports teams demand tax breaks and new stadiums constantly only to foot the taxpayers with the bill? Or is that just fake news?

[–]OGSHAGGY 7 points8 points9 points 6 years ago (5 children) | Copy Link

Fake news. Why do u think all the top colleges want good popular teams? It brings in money. Some teams do lose money, which is bad for the students at those schools because then they do have to pay more for tuition, but the top teams rake in millions

[–]badassite -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

https://www.bloomberg.com/news/features/2017-01-04/college-football-s-top-teams-are-built-on-crippling-debt

https://www.al.com/sports/2014/08/ncaa_study_finds_all_but_20_fb.html

[–]OGSHAGGY 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

Like I said, most schools do lose money, but the schools w the top programs don't. Pointing out that first article as if to say "see, schools lose money with athletics" is the same thing as saying taking out a loan go buy a house is losing money. The second article is only talking about football, and still, the top schools are making money. I guarantee top tennis schools aren't losing money on their tennis programs. Of course you're gonna go in debt when you build a huge fuckin stadium, but you pay that off long term. That's how loans work.

[–]badassite -2 points-1 points0 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

Sports teams have no place in academia. Universities are places for learning not playing with balls.

[–]OGSHAGGY 2 points3 points4 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

That's an extreme opinion. Athletes work just as hard as top students, just at something else. Everyone has their talents and strong suits and they should play to those. It can be unfair at times how much sports are weighted when it comes to scholarships, but those athletes still work hard to get there.

[–]badassite -1 points0 points1 point 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

You can work as hard as you want but the fact is you are still playing with balls and not engaging in academia. Universities are for learning not playing.

[–][deleted] 0 points1 point2 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

College sports teams don’t get subsidized. Also, the players aren’t paid at all so I’m not sure where your comparison comes in

[+]TheBananaKing -7 points-6 points-5 points 6 years ago (2 children) | Copy Link

The daily wire ffs.

Stop posting garbage sources.

[–]Familiarwobble17 5 points6 points7 points 6 years ago (1 child) | Copy Link

*Not a liberal source

[–]TheBananaKing -3 points-2 points-1 points 6 years ago (0 children) | Copy Link

They're turning the damn frogs gay!

Browse all authors
You can kill a man, but you can't kill an idea.

© TheRedArchive 2026. All rights reserved.
created by /u/dream-hunter