Top Four (4) Reasons Female Athletes Should Be Paid Less Than Male Athletes

The rationale and logic is straightforward, however people continue to debate whether female and male athletes should be paid the same. The argument is absurd at its very core and as explained below Female Athletes Should Be Paid Less Than Male Athletes.

1. Women Are Not As Good As Men.

The biological differences between the genders preempt a woman from competing at the same physical level as a man in todays sports world. Female Athletes are not as physically strong as their male counterparts and are thus not able to run as fast, jump as high, or hit or throw balls as far as men. A good analogy can be found in major league baseball. Similar to minor league players not being paid as much as major league players, because they are not as good and do not attract a similar crowd, women are not as good as men and thus should not be paid as much as male athletes. The day a woman competes on the same level as a man she should be paid as much as the man. Had Michelle Wie won an event at the Men's level on the PGA Tournament she would have been paid the amount that the man would have won. However, Michelle Wie can't even win on the LPGA, thus this is a separate issue. I look forward to the day, when a woman hits a homerun off Randy Johnson or dunks the ball over Shaq and I assure you that her pay will be commensurate, if not more than the men in her sport of choice. At this stage, however, in the current era of professional sports, women are not on an equal talent level with men and therefore should not be paid equally.

2. Battle of the Sexes was not Accurate

Proponents of equal pay for male and female athletes frequently point out that women have long been on an equal footing with men in regards to talent based on the infamous match between Bobby Riggs and Billie Jean King otherwise known as the Battle of the Sexes. I refer to this match as infamous because King won and the public and pundits alike immediately used it to state that women are on an equal playing field as men and should be paid accordingly. This isn't even a valid argument considering, Bobby Riggs was old enough to be Billie Jean King's father, and had not won a major tennis tournament in over thirty years. Bobby Riggs was a former men's champion who had been ranked as the World's Number 1 tennis player for the years 1941 and 1946. The Battle of the sexes match was played in 1973. Riggs was 55 years old and King was 29 years old. The Battle of the Sexes proves only that a woman in her prime can beat an over the hill, over-hyped man 20 years out of his prime. This whole concept works against the equality argument because King should have challenged someone in her age and rank demographic.

3. Simple Economics

Those who claim that women deserve as much as men in terms of athletic pay must first justify that men deserve what they are paid which is an inherently tough argument. However, if presumed to be true economics dictates the salaries. Comparing the NBA to the WNBA makes the point crystal clear. NBA teams have approximately 10x more paying fans, spending 10x more on tickets. Additionally, NBA teams have lucrative television and endorsement deals. There is no money in women's sports to pay these women. Where would the money come from to pay these women equally?

A case could be made that women's tennis events should receive the same purses as men's tennis events. As of 2007, Wimbledon in fact does have parity of the purse. Though I am happy that women are being paid equally in Wimbledon, I still don't believe it is fair. With the exception of the top few women in tennis, the men's matches garner far more fans, endorsements and general interest. Additionally, in major tennis championships men can play up to five sets as opposed to a total of three for women. Where's the parity there?

4. Not a Man / Woman Issue

Let me be clear, this is not a male / female issue. Compensation in sport should be based not on sex, but on performance. The reason Kobe Bryant makes far more than the entire roster of the Los Angeles Sparks has nothing to do with him being a man, but has to do with more people throughout the world being willing to see Kobe Bryant than the entire Los Angeles Sparks team. If a woman was as dominate as Kobe Bryant, she would play in the NBA and receive as much if not more money than Kevin Garnet because she would be an enormous draw. It may sound absurd, but it is possible and when it happens that woman will be well compensated.

The fact of the matter is if you cannot compete and win nor are you as good as your competition, you should not get as much money!