« Times Watch | Main | Winston Smith Lives On! »

June 25, 2007

The Gender Pay Gap in Tennis

It would appear that, contra what the Fawcett Society would have us believe, the women are paid far too much at Wimbledon.

If we are to have equality, then let's have real equality, shall we?

June 25, 2007 in Economics | Permalink

TrackBack

TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c2d3e53ef00e008cc51678834

Listed below are links to weblogs that reference The Gender Pay Gap in Tennis:

Comments

Is the Fawcett Society the trade body for tap manufacturers?

Posted by: Mark Wadsworth | Jun 25, 2007 10:53:01 AM

This whole debate is nonsense. Male and female tennis players use the same equipment & the same courts and they play to the same rules. So what justification can there be for continued sexual apartheid in tennis ? They should play each other without regard for sex, just as in all the other fields in life.

Posted by: Paul Power | Jun 25, 2007 11:10:55 AM

Paul,

That didn't work too well when it was recently (2003) tried in golf. The exceptional female player of that year, Annika Sorenstam, failed to make the cut in a fairly standard tournament - tying for 96th place out of 111.

Men and women may use the same or similar kit and play to the same rules but that doesn't make them the same.

I believe that Olympic equestrian events are one of the few major sporting challenges where men and women compete on a single platform.

S-E

Tim adds: What? They all use the same horse?

Posted by: Surreptitious Evil | Jun 25, 2007 11:54:12 AM

"This whole debate is nonsense. Male and female tennis players use the same equipment & the same courts and they play to the same rules. "
But even footballers of the same sex and playing for the same team do not get paid the same. They are not being paid just to play sport. They are being paid to attract viewers and sponsership.
"So what justification can there be for continued sexual apartheid in tennis ? "
I believe the reason is that the mens tennis attracts more viewers and interest. Further, they play more sets. Sometimes it works the other way. Female porn stars earn more than male porn stars. Should we be calling for equality within the porn industry?

"They should play each other without regard for sex, just as in all the other fields in life."
But NO OTHER fields of sport. The organisers of Wimbledon should be free to pay women more than men, less than men, or the same as men, as they see fit.

Tim adds: Porn stars? Really? I would have thought it was men paid more. Certain limits to productivity you could say.

Posted by: ChrisM | Jun 25, 2007 12:00:32 PM

Well, I admit I have no references for this claim. I remember reading it somewhere and thinking it sounded plausible. (I just googled it, but the "porn" part of the search threw up some sites that I dare not open at work). On average men are more interested in porn than women. And most men are more interested in female porn stars than male porn starts. Still, I accept the claim may be incorrect, and if someone finds figures to refute this claim, it does not affect the point I was making, which is people are often not paid for the work they do, but but the value of that work to those doing the paying. And sometimes this will be different for different sexes.

Posted by: ChrisM | Jun 25, 2007 12:25:00 PM

Thanks for the comments. To generalise my point: we have a rhetoric and practice of "equal rights" which is being applied to tennis. However the application is only partial, since full implementation would lead to the abolition of sexual segregation in sport.

We can ask why this is not being demanded. The answer is that the top female tennis players are extremely inferior to their male coutnerparts. So inferior, indeed, that there would be no professional female tennis players in this scenario.

Posted by: Paul Power | Jun 25, 2007 2:03:38 PM

"We can ask why this is not being demanded. The answer is that the top female tennis players are extremely inferior to their male coutnerparts. So inferior, indeed, that there would be no professional female tennis players in this scenario."

This about right. It can be extended to a more general principle which is that interest groups are rarely interested in mere equality for their members, they are after as many concessions and as much special treatment as they can get. (Hence the call was for equal prize money, but not for equal numbers of sets). This is not to deny that interest groups often represent demographics that may have experienced discrimination. But such groups will never wake up one day and say to themselves "Great, our work is done, we have acheived equality. Let us now disband and shut up."

Posted by: ChrisM | Jun 25, 2007 2:19:48 PM

Try running Wimbledon without all-women brackets (you can keep mixed doubles) and see how quickly and how far the ratings and ticket sales decline.

It may only drop 40%, but if that's your morning line, I'll take the over.

Posted by: ken Houghton | Jun 25, 2007 3:06:01 PM

I have heard many a time (e.g. on these pseudo-non titillating TV documentaries on the porn industry) that top female porn stars earn hundred of times as much as male porn stars.

Posted by: Mark Wadsworth | Jun 25, 2007 3:07:19 PM

Ken, I can believe that. I have no interest in watching any sort of sport, but if forced would most enjoy women's tennis (so long as Navratilova wasn't playing), for fairly blokish reasons. I would be far more sympathetic to "pay us the same, because we bring as much money in", than "pay us the same because men and women should always be paid the same". (Assuming the claim could be backed up with evidence).

Posted by: ChrisM | Jun 25, 2007 3:20:14 PM

"This whole debate is nonsense. Male and female tennis players use the same equipment & the same courts and they play to the same rules. So what justification can there be for continued sexual apartheid in tennis ? They should play each other without regard for sex, just as in all the other fields in life."

That really is a silly comment. I use the same racket as Andy Roddick and play most of my tennis on macadam. According to your argument I should therefore be paid the same as Andy Roddick does at the US Open. Only I shouldn't because I'm nowhere near as good. If men and women were to play each other all women would face pay cuts so severe that the next time you go to MacDonalds you'll probably be served by a WTA top 100 player.

Men are far better than women at tennis.
Men play more sets.
Men are naturally more competitive.
Men attract more revenue.

How can you possibly justify pay equality?

Posted by: James | Nov 14, 2009 11:17:44 AM