My topic for the debate tomorrow will be considering the discrepancy between the prize money in men's professional sporting events and those in women's. The organizing bodies of tournaments in several sports currently offer ‘uneven’ prize funds, paying the champion of the men’s competition more than the women’s. The most obvious and high profile example is the Wimbledon Championship hosted by the All-England Tennis and Croquet Club, but some other examples are the purses in the US opens of Golf (Men = $6.3 million, Women = $3.1 million), and Professional Basketball where the average female player’s salary is less than $60,000 and the men’s is over $4 million. Do you think this discrepancy is fair?
Reasons for it being fair:
The discrepancy is fair because people seek out the highest level of performance, in many sporting events that is provided by men. Therefore they should receive the most lucrative prizes.
Rewards come from consumers: if women’s golf or tennis or basketball were more popular than men’s, they’d be paid more than men.
Reasons for it being unfair:
The fact that the sporting world looks down on women’s events may lead to sexist tendencies in our society
The market has been conditioned historically by the preferences of biased male sports administrators and media executives. Do we really know that sports fans prefer men’s sports, or do we only know that they watch them?
1 comment:
Um.. there is the big difference betwwen men's reward and women's. I bet meny people are more excited at men's sports. Sponser invest much more money to the popular one. It's natural. However women can't help for their athletic ability because it is inborn ability. I can't find the good solution.
Post a Comment