When it comes to tackling most problems, we elicit emotion rather than logic. This makes sense in a way because we are emotional creatures. Whether it’s the minimum wage or healthcare, our hearts start to take over and our brains take a backseat. We can’t blame ourselves: we’re only human.
This idea is quite apparent in the latest feel-good story of the #EqualPlayEqualPay campaign., Last week, the ultra talented United States Women’s National Team showcased their support for supposed equal treatment by sporting t-shirts that had the hashtag. These t-shirts were spotlighted prior to the team’s match against South Africa in Chicago. It was quite the media event aimed at combating this fictitious issue.
Apparently, the concept behind this campaign is for U.S. Soccer to offer the women the same as the men. They want the same financial compensation, the same travel accommodations and the same playing conditions as their male counterparts. Five players even filed a complaint in March by accusing the federation of wage discrimination with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.
Midfielder Megan Rapione told the New York Times that she would prefer not to champion this cause, but averred that “we’re not going to shy away from it, either.”
Picture says it all. #equalplayequalpay https://t.co/fAzBdL6LCn pic.twitter.com/I4SMJi0zOZ
— Megan Rapinoe (@mPinoe) July 8, 2016
You go girl (is that politically incorrect?)! And why not? They’re playing the same sport.
But there is a lot more to it than just playing the same sport. And it isn’t about woman-hating, either. The federation isn’t comprised of misogynistic men who feel women should be confined to the kitchen. The federation doesn’t hate women. It’s a matter of contracts and economics.
According to the Wall Street Journal, the female national soccer teams are paid differently than men “because the collective-bargaining agreements they have negotiated emphasize income- and job-security.” Immediately, we can see that the federation purposely discriminating against women should be thrown out the window.
Of course, we can move beyond agreements and contracts and enter the realm of economics.
Despite the growing popularity of women’s soccer, they, on average, have not drawn as much as the men.
Between 2011 and 2015, men played 53 home games that averaged an attendance of more than 35,000. In those same years, women played 50 games that drew an average attendance of just under 17,000. Moreover, in 2014, when the men’s national soccer team was in the World Cup, their revenues were four times that of the women’s team. Due to revenues, the men earned $9 million from FIFA for just advancing to the round of 16, while the women received $2 million for winning the World Cup.
On an international level, men’s soccer is still vastly more popular than women’s soccer. Men’s soccer generated a lot more ad revenues than women’s soccer. In 2011, the women’s World Cup garnered $5.8 million. In 2014, the men’s World Cup brought in an astonishing $1.4 billion.
Although it’s quite likely that American female soccer players will be on par with the men in terms of marginal revenue product, it’s still going to take time for the U.S. female squad to catch up. And they are starting to.
Here is an important statistic: the women’s national soccer team generated $23.5 million in revenues, while the men garnered just $21 million. This is the first time in history that the women beat out the men when it comes to revenue generation from soccer.
As long as the women’s soccer team maintains that trend then their pay will rise accordingly. It doesn’t matter if they create hashtags or wear certain t-shirts. It’s all about marginal product revenue.
When you draw, you make money. When you don’t draw a dime, you don’t make dollars. Just because you play the same sport, it doesn’t mean you’re entitled to the same pay. That’s why LeBron James (the best player in the NBA) earns more than Anthony Bennett (the worst player in the NBA) because not only does he perform at a high level, he brings in the eyeballs.
Let’s see these ladies put their money where their cleats are and not play until they receive the same pay as the men. I hope they have other skills or they will be adding to the labor pool of the low skilled jobs already diminishing due to minimum wage laws.
They should get a clue form motorsports. As far as I know, other than the WMX (Motocross) there are no top motorsport racing series for only women. Not in F1, MotoGP (and their support classes), IndyCar, MotoAmerica (and their support classes). If females want to race they will compete with the men straight-up.
The top motorcycle road racing series in the USA is MotoAmerica. There are five females that have competed regularly in the 2016 MotoAmerica series. My educated guess is that all of these females spend money to race. But so do most of the males in the “lower” classes that all five women compete in. There are no females in the top Superbike class and the one female that competed in the 2015 Superbike series could not “secure enough sponsorship” for 2016.
If there were no separate league/championship for women soccer the women of the National Team would be worse off than women in motorsports. They couldn’t “buy a ride” to kick a ball around. They would do what the men do in professional soccer; compete for a position on a team. If the women on the USWNT could make the USMNT there would be no women’s team just the USNT, no W or M needed. But they can’t. If they had to compete with the men they would be competing for positions on local team’s not national teams.