Mind the Gap..
Wimbledon starts today.. One sporting event that I have always rather enjoyed.. It seems so civilised; the sound of the ball, the polite applause, the enunciated tones of the score commentary.
However, today I read that Wimbledon is now the last Grand Slam tournament not to pay its male and female winners the same amount.
The winner of the men's competition will be awarded £655,000, whereas the winner of the women's competition will receive £625,000.
Venus Williams told the Guardian; "For us it's not about getting paid because all the players love what we do, and that's playing tennis. For us it's about equality, it's about treating a human as a human, no matter what the sex is, and it's about women all over the world. It's a bigger picture than tennis.. it's about a premier women's sport setting an example all around the world."
Clearly this is not about financial greed, but the sheer principle of the thing! As Martina Navratilova (9 times Wimbledon Champ) says; "Whenever there is inequality it doesn't matter whether it is a penny or £100,000. It is about the principle - and the principle is wrong."
Some argue that it's because women only play a 3 set match, whereas men play 5. However, top female tennis players have consistently shown willing to play 5 set matches, but have not been allowed! Indeed, as M.N points out, perhaps men should be made to play 3 set matches also, to minimise the tedium of watching 40-0 serve games for five hours straight.. Women's games are almost always more lively anyway, due to more frequent and longer rallies.
Its things like this that make me question how far we've actually come. To quote the Guardian's article on this issue, 'It's inequality, love'.
However, today I read that Wimbledon is now the last Grand Slam tournament not to pay its male and female winners the same amount.
The winner of the men's competition will be awarded £655,000, whereas the winner of the women's competition will receive £625,000.
Venus Williams told the Guardian; "For us it's not about getting paid because all the players love what we do, and that's playing tennis. For us it's about equality, it's about treating a human as a human, no matter what the sex is, and it's about women all over the world. It's a bigger picture than tennis.. it's about a premier women's sport setting an example all around the world."
Clearly this is not about financial greed, but the sheer principle of the thing! As Martina Navratilova (9 times Wimbledon Champ) says; "Whenever there is inequality it doesn't matter whether it is a penny or £100,000. It is about the principle - and the principle is wrong."
Some argue that it's because women only play a 3 set match, whereas men play 5. However, top female tennis players have consistently shown willing to play 5 set matches, but have not been allowed! Indeed, as M.N points out, perhaps men should be made to play 3 set matches also, to minimise the tedium of watching 40-0 serve games for five hours straight.. Women's games are almost always more lively anyway, due to more frequent and longer rallies.
Its things like this that make me question how far we've actually come. To quote the Guardian's article on this issue, 'It's inequality, love'.