The End of an Era? Victoria Secret Angels fired.

[CriticalGaming]

OK, but it's entirely a subjective value judgement that the men's work is "harder" or "better" than the women's. Part of Rapinoe's argument was that they were successfully selling out stadia.

Not at all. Men have to work harder strictly because their pay directly relies on it. Whereas the women's team gets paid either way. No matter how you look at that, people perform differently when there is direct motivation to do so. Because the women get paid regardless, they have no reason to risk injury or to push themselves harder than they normally would otherwise if their paid was strictly motivated by winning. Which is the case with the Men's team. Winning means more money outright and therefore the motivation and the drive to win is higher. Which is why the court ruled or dismissed that the two teams didn't fall under EPA.

It's also why they can't bring the same basic case to court over the WNBA vs. NBA. Because the two jobs have obviously very different stakes on the line. And watching a WNBA game you will immediately see that the game is not the same versus an NBA game. Performances are not equal, the game is played differently (because women play it differently, despite the rules being the same technically), and therefore the divisions are not equal. Neither is the audience performance. NBA is built off the ticket sales, the TV deals, the merchandising, and that is something the WNBA can never and will never catch up to.

 

[Silvanus]

Not at all. Men have to work harder strictly because their pay directly relies on it. Whereas the women's team gets paid either way. No matter how you look at that, people perform differently when there is direct motivation to do so. Because the women get paid regardless, they have no reason to risk injury or to push themselves harder than they normally would otherwise if their paid was strictly motivated by winning. Which is the case with the Men's team. Winning means more money outright and therefore the motivation and the drive to win is higher.

It's already been pointed out that this isn't uniformly the case. Some of the female players are on a pay-for-play structure. And when the male team loses, they still get paid, whereas the female members of the team get nothing for a loss against a team outside the top 8.

So, to follow your logic, that would mean that the female players who are on a pay-to-play structure must work harder than the male players, since they have to win to get money at all.

 

[CriticalGaming]

It's already been pointed out that this isn't uniformly the case. Some of the female players are on a pay-for-play structure. And when the male team loses, they still get paidl whereas the female members of the team get nothing for a loss against a team outside the top 8.

What's the percentage of that? Are these full time team members, or girls trying to make the team much the way the NFL handles pre-season games. Temporary hires.

See I have to talk in general terms because i hate sports and do my best to avoid it, so all I can speak on is the stuff i've looked at in passing due to things like this thread. I would imagine though, that it still doesn't equal the same thing because those pay-for-play girls are trying to become contracted players.

And even if it was the problem Megan Rapinoe acted like she was personally hurt and getting paid less. I would understand her argument a lot easier if she was one of these pay-for-play female players on the team, as I still think it's a bad look for on of the best paid players being the spokeswoman to stand out about this. Nor can i find her making any statements about the pay-for-play players on her team. Everything i can find is her directly relating the pay problem to herself.

 

[Agema]

Not at all. Men have to work harder strictly because their pay directly relies on it...

Pro footballers are primarily paid by their regular league club. Seriously, check out how much a pro footballer gets paid by their clubs. A top league European player is likely on about $50,000 (equivalent) a week at the low end, and getting towards $200,000 a week at the high end. No pro footballer gives a shit about $100k a year to turn out for the national team either way (except perhaps tiny countries like Luxembourg or Iceland which don't have populations to support enough top level pros in the national team). It's little more than a courtesy.

To that you can add endorsements, which although heavily weighted to the really big names, are still worth millions a year. And particularly in the sense of endorsements, there's a huge motivation to bust a gut for the national team: performance means fame means wide open marketing wallets.

Arguably, the biggest reason to not bust a gut for the national team is that injuries hit them where they are really earning their money from: club level. It's well noted many top pros seem a bit lacklustre on national games, because the last thing they want is their team place with Barca, Inter or Man U threatened by months in physio.

 

[Silvanus]

What's the percentage of that? Are these full time team members, or girls trying to make the team much the way the NFL handles pre-season games. Temporary hires.

According to ESPN, 16 are on the "salary". That would mean 10 are pay-to-play. And no, they're members of the main squad.

See I have to talk in general terms because i hate sports and do my best to avoid it, so all I can speak on is the stuff i've looked at in passing due to things like this thread. I would imagine though, that it still doesn't equal the same thing because those pay-for-play girls are trying to become contracted players.

No particular reason to think they are, as far as I can tell. They're not more lowly ranked or anything.

And even if it was the problem Megan Rapinoe acted like she was personally hurt and getting paid less. I would understand her argument a lot easier if she was one of these pay-for-play female players on the team, as I still think it's a bad look for on of the best paid players being the spokeswoman to stand out about this. Nor can i find her making any statements about the pay-for-play players on her team. Everything i can find is her directly relating the pay problem to herself.

If Rapinoe is salaried, she makes 100k. But it's easy for a male player on pay-to-play to earn above that in bonuses etc. If even getting onto the world cup team nets a male player almost 70k, they're almost 3/4 of the way there before we even get to bonuses etc. It's a bit naive to think that won't go well above 100k.

 

[CriticalGaming]

If Rapinoe is salaried, she makes 100k. But it's easy for a male player on pay-to-play to earn above that in bonuses etc. If even getting onto the world cup team nets a male player almost 70k, they're almost 3/4 of the way there before we even get to bonuses etc. It's a bit naive to think that won't go well above 100k.

Then you also have to look at viewership number then. Because im pretty sure the world cup brings in more viewers alone than an entire female league season. Not to mention merchandising.

This is the same argument that the WNBA tried to used. They do not do the same work because they do not bring in the same money. I dunno about soccer but the WNBA looses money more often than not and exists off the NBA keeping it going.

Hell pay isnt even equal on the men's teams. Kobe bryant got paid more than anybody else on the team? Why? They all play basketball right?

You and i both know the answer to that. Does Renaldo get paid the same as Steve from the US team? Messi? Do Messi and Renaldo get paid the same? They are both stars of the sport?

There is no equality here and there is no equal job. A sports star does not have the same role in the sport as a bench player.

 

[Silvanus]

Then you also have to look at viewership number then. Because im pretty sure the world cup brings in more viewers alone than an entire female league season. Not to mention merchandising.

Don't really consider any of this relevant.

This is the same argument that the WNBA tried to used. They do not do the same work because they do not bring in the same money. I dunno about soccer but the WNBA looses money more often than not and exists off the NBA keeping it going.

By that metric, the Kardashians must work harder than documentary film-makers who go to live warzones because they get better viewership.

Hell pay isnt even equal on the men's teams. Kobe bryant got paid more than anybody else on the team? Why? They all play basketball right?

Then we have more inequities to right, then, don't we? Other inequities existing isn't a reason to ignore this one.

You and i both know the answer to that. Does Renaldo get paid the same as Steve from the US team? Messi? Do Messi and Renaldo get paid the same? They are both stars of the sport?

There is no equality here and there is no equal job. A sports star does not have the same role in the sport as a bench player.

We're not talking about bench players, though. We're talking about active world cup athletes. You just keep assuming (incorrectly) that they're not doing the same job as the salaried members of the team.

 

[Revnak]

Isn’t this probably connected to the fact that their biggest investor/founder was basically Epstein’s biggest fan?

 

[CriticalGaming]

Then we have more inequities to right, then, don't we? Other inequities existing isn't a reason to ignore this one.

But this isn't an inequity in the first place. It's a soccer player butthurt that she doesnt make as much as the men, when her side of the field doesn't generate the income to justify it.

We're not talking about bench players, though. We're talking about active world cup athletes. You just keep assuming (incorrectly) that they're not doing the same job as the salaried members of the team.

Not players on the team are not necessarily equal. There is a reason why teams have franchise players or star players, as every team has different levels of talent on it. Not to mention that teams in most sports have some sort of salary cap of budget. You have players that are decent enough to be on the team or play roles for the team, but not good enough to hold the team up, or perform at a level that brings success.

The same way sales people don't get paid the same. You get paid for performance, the more you sell the more you get paid.

It isn't a hard concept and it isn't unfair either.

 

[Revnak]

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE EPSTEIN MODELS!

 

[Trunkage]

FIRST THEY CAME FOR THE EPSTEIN MODELS!

Working for Epstein or victims of?

Because one of those I'm not going to care about

 

[Silvanus]

But this isn't an inequity in the first place. It's a soccer player butthurt that she doesnt make as much as the men, when her side of the field doesn't generate the income to justify it.

Income generated by the show doesn't translate to salary, though. And why should it?

Not players on the team are not necessarily equal. There is a reason why teams have franchise players or star players, as every team has different levels of talent on it. Not to mention that teams in most sports have some sort of salary cap of budget. You have players that are decent enough to be on the team or play roles for the team, but not good enough to hold the team up, or perform at a level that brings success.

The same way sales people don't get paid the same. You get paid for performance, the more you sell the more you get paid.

It isn't a hard concept and it isn't unfair either.

So you're just assuming that those who are salaried are better players than those who are pay-to-play, then, and they're salaried because they're being rewarded for performance? Where did you get that idea? A minute ago you weren't even aware that pay-for-play players existed on the USWNT!

 

[Revnak]

Working for Epstein or victims of?

Because one of those I'm not going to care about

Both.

 

[Trunkage]

Both.

Well, now you're just making it hard to genealise

 

[Buyetyen]

Didn't take long for this thread to devolve into some MRA pity party shit.

 

[BrawlMan]

Didn't take long for this thread to devolve into some MRA pity party shit.

It's Critical Gaming, so nothing surprises me. He has a habit of ignoring people's plights and troubles that are different from his. Or oblivious to other people's walks of life suffering or trials at times. Nor never getting the full picture and assuming everything is fine until someone or a group of people bring up very valid points.

 

[Jarrito3002]

It's Critical Gaming, so nothing surprises me. He has a habit of ignoring people's plights and troubles that are different from his. Or oblivious to other people's walks of life suffering or trials at times. Nor never getting the full picture and assuming everything is fine until someone or a group of people bring up very valid points.

Like the whole paragraph in he middle sounded like he has a real axe to grind with Megan Rapinoe and wanted to dismiss pay disparities of male and female athletes. Plus referring to her as millionaire Megan and dropping SJW ironically.

I wanted to discuss this Victoria Secret topic but it feels like a smoke screen for those weird internet comments made to disparge and being assclowns to woman athletics.

 

[McElroy]

Can't find the original photo she referenced, but my guess is that Rapinoe wasn't referencing the slant in "Asian" eyes, but how ^.^ is used in East Asia as the smiling emoji instead of (so smiling with your eyes closed makes you look Asian, especially if one's ethnically mixed like the person she tweeted at). Utterly benign and harmless. Now all these headlines turn it into "mocking Asian people for their eyes". People on social media getting mad about it just reflects on their garbage priorities. If this is anti-racism, I'll rather have racism. Alternatively everyone in the Twitter thread just see this as a twisted game, but I fear they are being serious.

I don't have much to say about VS, but it reminds me of an eyeglasses/sight/optometry company over here that has recently at least tried a similar inclusive approach, but they've clearly picked ugly people to model their glasses. I don't mean they were made ugly, in fact they are very presentable in the ads, but just plain bad genes.

 

[Agema]

So as far as I can tell, Victoria's Secret is merely a few years behind fashion, because the move to more realistic bodies and "plus size" models was pioneered 10+ years ago and has been growing apace for the last few.

Being behind in fashion can't be good for its image.

I do however understand the frustration that some people are losing some of their lightweight porn from everyday life, though: it makes them feel so much more dirty to have to go onto the Playboy website to get their fix.

 

[Seanchaidh]

I do however understand the frustration that some people are losing some of their lightweight porn from everyday life, though: it makes them feel so much more dirty to have to go onto the Playboy website to get their fix.

Heh, well... it's not like there's a shortage, anyway. Just more thicc and athletic presence, which apparently makes the traditional man's eyes bleed or something. Or threatens their sense of who it is normal to find attractive. (Why? Who cares?)