All Things 2019 Women's World Cup Thread

Donate To GopherHole
KillerGopherFan said:
Regarding the gender pay gap in men’s and women’s soccer, I have to agree that it should be equal pay.

The men should take an immediate pay cut down to whatever they’re paying the women.
Click to expand...

This is the thing that I find most confusing about Rapinoe's stance on visiting the White House. She has arguably at least two issues (the pay equity and possible LGBT concerns) that are very near and dear to her and she has an opportunity to have an audience with the President of the United States. That is an opportunity of a lifetime, to be able to have a few minutes with the most powerful man in the country to explain your concerns and maybe make some positive changes for a huge number of people in the country.

I think if she declines, she is doing a massive disservice to several causes that are very important to her. She has the chance to come out of this situation smelling like a rose and looking like a strong leader, making a strong statement on a number of fronts. I really don't know what declining the offer, if one is offered, does for anyone. Not a clue what that would accomplish.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
This is the thing that I find most confusing about Rapinoe's stance on visiting the White House. She has arguably at least two issues (the pay equity and possible LGBT concerns) that are very near and dear to her and she has an opportunity to have an audience with the President of the United States. That is an opportunity of a lifetime, to be able to have a few minutes with the most powerful man in the country to explain your concerns and maybe make some positive changes for a huge number of people in the country.

I think if she declines, she is doing a massive disservice to several causes that are very important to her. She has the chance to come out of this situation smelling like a rose and looking like a strong leader, making a strong statement on a number of fronts. I really don't know what declining the offer, if one is offered, does for anyone. Not a clue what that would accomplish.
Click to expand...

You continue to be a complete joke. Why do you even keep posting on something you want to take zero responsibility to begin understanding? Maybe you should think/reflect on all the people turning down white house visits.

Also evidently not once in a life time since they got to visit the white house after their last WC win...
 

KillerGopherFan said:
Regarding the gender pay gap in men’s and women’s soccer, I have to agree that it should be equal pay.

The men should take an immediate pay cut down to whatever they’re paying the women.
Click to expand...

Or they should trade salaries after that effort vs Mexico.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
This is the thing that I find most confusing about Rapinoe's stance on visiting the White House. She has arguably at least two issues (the pay equity and possible LGBT concerns) that are very near and dear to her and she has an opportunity to have an audience with the President of the United States. That is an opportunity of a lifetime, to be able to have a few minutes with the most powerful man in the country to explain your concerns and maybe make some positive changes for a huge number of people in the country.

I think if she declines, she is doing a massive disservice to several causes that are very important to her. She has the chance to come out of this situation smelling like a rose and looking like a strong leader, making a strong statement on a number of fronts. I really don't know what declining the offer, if one is offered, does for anyone. Not a clue what that would accomplish.
Click to expand...
Hate trumps intelligence/common sense.
 

bottlebass said:
You continue to be a complete joke. Why do you even keep posting on something you want to take zero responsibility to begin understanding? Maybe you should think/reflect on all the people turning down white house visits.

Also evidently not once in a life time since they got to visit the white house after their last WC win...
Click to expand...

You seem awfully fired up about this situation. Okay, let's try this; remove anything LGBT from the equation.

They are about to go to mediation (I believe?) regarding their argument for equal pay. She/they could spend 5-10 minutes laying out their argument for equal pay; Trump could find it ultimately extremely reasonable, and Trump comes out openly on their side and helps move the needle in their direction.

This isn't a desirable outcome?

And in regards to the visit to the White House, it IS their first chance since the legal issue regarding equal pay has come to the forefront.

And because of this, yes, I guess I DO think this is different than other groups/teams that have accepted or declined WH visit offers. They have a golden opportunity to make a meaningful difference in the lives of a lot of people.

I'm still hopeful that they take this route. I would have a massive amount of respect for her and the team if they accepted and used the chance to really corner Trump, demand a few minutes of his time, and lay out their case. What a tremendous opportunity, for everyone involved.
 


There are only two things Rapinoe and everyone who agrees with her wants from the most divisive president in American history: his defeat in 2020 and an electoral disaster for the Republican Party. And they will take Trump's election defeat before the GOP electoral disaster.

The last thing Trump is going to get from Rapinoe is an opportunity for a photo op that will allow him to bask in the glory of the U.S. women winning yet another World Cup. The notion that a three minute conversation with Trump is going to persuade him to support progressive proposals hated by his army of right wing Christian Evangelicals is ridiculous.

If Rapinoe does go to the White House it will be to speak to the world wide press about the reasons she despises the Trumpster and the Republican Party. She will be cheered on by every left winger in America.
 
Last edited:

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
This is the thing that I find most confusing about Rapinoe's stance on visiting the White House. She has arguably at least two issues (the pay equity and possible LGBT concerns) that are very near and dear to her and she has an opportunity to have an audience with the President of the United States. That is an opportunity of a lifetime, to be able to have a few minutes with the most powerful man in the country to explain your concerns and maybe make some positive changes for a huge number of people in the country.

I think if she declines, she is doing a massive disservice to several causes that are very important to her. She has the chance to come out of this situation smelling like a rose and looking like a strong leader, making a strong statement on a number of fronts. I really don't know what declining the offer, if one is offered, does for anyone. Not a clue what that would accomplish.
Click to expand...

IMO, there isn't anything she wants, there isn't anything Trump has really done on LGBKTBOTKT. Trans in the military? Is that a huge issue for rapinoe? gay wedding cakes?

They blindly hate Trump. That's it. Just read any Howie post.
 

Cruze said:
There are only two things Rapinoe and everyone who agrees with her wants from the most divisive president in American history: his defeat in 2020 and an electoral disaster for the Republican Party. And they will take Trump's election defeat before the GOP electoral disaster.

The last thing Trump is going to get from Rapinoe is an opportunity for a photo op that will allow him to bask in the glory of the US. women winning yet another World Cup. The notion that a three minute conversation with Trump is going to persuade him to support progressive proposals hated by his army of Christian Evangelicals is ridiculous.

If Rapinoe does go to the White House it will be to speak to the world wide press about the reasons she despises the Trumpster and the Republican Party.
Click to expand...

Broke here with a clear illustration of just how we got where we are today.
 




WARNING for snowflake lefties: This article is from Daily Wire. It includes statistical analysis, and not just opinion. I’ve included the text of the article so your feelings aren’t hurt by clicking on DW.

Personally, I don’t give a sh!t b/c I hate soccer, men’s or women’s.

https://www.dailywire.com/news/49244/walsh-womens-soccer-players-say-they-deserve-equal-matt-walsh

I'm not much of a soccer fan because I prefer watching sports, personally, but I was still happy to hear that the U.S. women's team won the World Cup over the weekend. I am far less enthused by the "gender pay gap" discussion that their victory inevitably generated, however.

The players on the women's team, along with the fans in the stadium, various presidential candidates, and a chorus of other feminists, have all insisted that female soccer players are the victims of a sexist wage gap. After all, they are paid less than male players, and misogyny is the only conceivable reason for this disparity. It is time, we are told, to rectify this injustice.

But is there any truth to these claims? Are women in soccer underpaid? If there is a gender pay gap, could there be a reasonable, non-bigoted explanation for it? Let's take a look at the facts.

First, we should clarify a crucial point. You've probably heard that the women should be paid more because they're better and they earn more revenue. Both of those claims are extremely misleading. It's true that the women's team is more successful against women than the men's team is against men. That does not mean that the women are actually better players. Keep in mind that the U.S. women's team lost to a bunch of 13- and 14-year-old boys a few years ago. If they couldn't beat adolescent boys, they can't beat grown men.

As for revenue, historically U.S. men's soccer has generated more revenue than U.S. women's soccer. That gap has closed in recent years, and now the women generate slightly more than the men — though this only takes into account ticket sales, not TV deals and merchandise. But the pay gap in U.S. soccer is not nearly as large as advertised. The highest-paid female soccer players in this country are paid almost the same as the highest-paid male soccer players. The pay gap in U.S. soccer only widens among the lower-tier players. The top stars are already on a very similar pay scale, as The New York Times notes:

According to figures provided by U.S. Soccer, since 2008 it has paid 12 players at least $1 million. Six of those players were men, and six were women. And the women hold their own near the top of the pay scale; the best-paid woman made about $1.2 million from 2008 to 2015, while the top man made $1.4 million in the same period. Some women in the top 10 even made more than their male counterparts over those years.


The really significant pay gap, and the one that gets most of the press, is in the World Cup payouts. FIFA, the international soccer organization, will give about $400 million to male players in the World Cup, while female players will make around $30 million. When you hear that male players make 10 times what female players make, this is the figure that justifies the claim.

Megan Rapinoe has specifically condemned FIFA for this pay gap, and the FIFA president was booed over the issue after the World Cup in France. The fans in France weren't chanting "equal pay" because they want equal pay just in U.S. soccer, where the pay for top stars is already close to equal. They want it internationally, where the pay is definitely not close to equal. But that inequality, as Forbes explains, is entirely due to the astronomical disparity in revenue:

As Dwight Jaynes pointed out four years ago after the U.S. women beat Japan to capture the World Cup in Vancouver, there is a big difference in the revenue available to pay the teams. The Women's World Cup brought in almost $73 million, of which the players got 13%. The 2010 men's World Cup in South Africa made almost $4 billion, of which 9% went to the players.

The men still pull the World Cup money wagon. The men's World Cup in Russia generated over $6 billion in revenue, with the participating teams sharing $400 million, less than 7% of revenue. Meanwhile, the Women's World Cup is expected to earn $131 million for the full four-year cycle 2019-22 and dole out $30 million to the participating teams.


So that is $6 billion v. $131 million. The women aren't even in the same universe, in terms of revenue. If the women were paid the same total as the men — $400 million — they would be making nearly four times more than they generate. The men make 7% of their revenue. The women apparently want 400% of theirs. That's absurd, obviously, to say the least.

Megan Rapinoe, humble as always, will settle for just a meager quadrupling of their prize money. But $30 million quadrupled is $120 million. That would be close to 100 percent of their revenue. Again: The men only make 7%. Already, the women are earning around 20%. Indeed, if we want to be "fair" and "equal," we must conclude that the women are overpaid. Or else the men are underpaid. Either way, on an international scale, if there is a gender pay gap, women are the beneficiaries of it.
 

GopherJake said:
Curious why you would use the adverb "blindly" here.
Click to expand...

You know exactly why Section 2 used "blindly" in his post. In his mind right wing hatred of Obama and everything he said and did was rational and well deserved even if the GOP had previously supported such policies and beliefs.

And to Section 2 left wing hatred of the Trumpster because he spent the last two and half years trying to undo long standing and much loved progressive policies and regulations is deservedly described by right wingers as irrational and without justification.

Hypocrisy. It is pretty much impossible to find anything right wingers say or do that isn't hypocritical based on how they behaved during the eight years of the Obama administration.
 
Last edited:


Ogee Oglethorpe said:
You seem awfully fired up about this situation. Okay, let's try this; remove anything LGBT from the equation.

They are about to go to mediation (I believe?) regarding their argument for equal pay. She/they could spend 5-10 minutes laying out their argument for equal pay; Trump could find it ultimately extremely reasonable, and Trump comes out openly on their side and helps move the needle in their direction.

This isn't a desirable outcome?

And in regards to the visit to the White House, it IS their first chance since the legal issue regarding equal pay has come to the forefront.

And because of this, yes, I guess I DO think this is different than other groups/teams that have accepted or declined WH visit offers. They have a golden opportunity to make a meaningful difference in the lives of a lot of people.

I'm still hopeful that they take this route. I would have a massive amount of respect for her and the team if they accepted and used the chance to really corner Trump, demand a few minutes of his time, and lay out their case. What a tremendous opportunity, for everyone involved.
Click to expand...

It's a photo op. Nothing more. There is no meaningful conversation taking place. I'd be willing to bet the president is actually there for maybe 20 minutes, most of which is a short speech and then some photos/handshakes.

(And that has nothing to do with who occupying the White House. It's always been that way.)
 



KillerGopherFan said:
WARNING for snowflake lefties: This article is from Daily Wire. It includes statistical analysis, and not just opinion. I’ve included the text of the article so your feelings aren’t hurt by clicking on DW.
[/I]
Click to expand...

I'm probably someone who you would count as one of the "snowflake lefties", but I think you misunderstand my position (and many others who think like I do) on this.

To make it clear, I'll lay it out for you:

The USWNT deserve to be paid the same percentage of their revenues as the men receive. It is a fact that they have a clause in their contract stating they can exercise an equal pay clause meaning they must be paid an equal share of their revenues as the men receive. I have no idea why they are complaining about equal pay as the clause is already in place and has been for a long time. My sense is that they are trying to draw attention to the issue because it may matter in the future for other countries where the womens teams are basically ignored. Not to mention that they negotiated the contract they are complaining about. They are paid fairly as far as I can tell. If they don't like it then they should negotiate better when the contract is up.

I also have zero problem with Rapinoe or any other member of the team voicing their opinions on politics or responding to questions about whether or not they will go to the White House when they win. The only reason anyone is complaining about her saying what she said is because they don't agree with her. And that's fine. But it would be a lot easier if people would just say "I don't agree with her so that why I don't like it", instead of trying to hide behind the "You're an athlete so you should stick to sports" line. Let's be real, the reason that most of those who don't like her speaking out feel that way is because she expressed an opinion they didn't agree with.
 

bizzle22 said:
It's a photo op. Nothing more. There is no meaningful conversation taking place. I'd be willing to bet the president is actually there for maybe 20 minutes, most of which is a short speech and then some photos/handshakes.

(And that has nothing to do with who occupying the White House. It's always been that way.)
Click to expand...

That's exactly what it usually is. No doubt. But it doesn't have to be. If I were in Rapinoe's shoes, I would talk to the team, come out in the next few days and make a public statement, "The team discussed it and we will accept an invitation to visit only if we are afforded XX minutes with President Trump to discuss a few things", something to that nature.

They're holding all the cards. They can force the issue. Trump says no, they come off looking good and Trump looking like sh*t; if Trump says yes, they get an open forum with the President that could go a long ways towards advancing their cause for equal pay.

It's a no-brainer. I just don't see how declining does anything for anyone, whatsoever.
 

bizzle22 said:
I'm probably someone who you would count as one of the "snowflake lefties", but I think you misunderstand my position (and many others who think like I do) on this.

To make it clear, I'll lay it out for you:

The USWNT deserve to be paid the same percentage of their revenues as the men receive. It is a fact that they have a clause in their contract stating they can exercise an equal pay clause meaning they must be paid an equal share of their revenues as the men receive. I have no idea why they are complaining about equal pay as the clause is already in place and has been for a long time. My sense is that they are trying to draw attention to the issue because it may matter in the future for other countries where the womens teams are basically ignored. Not to mention that they negotiated the contract they are complaining about. They are paid fairly as far as I can tell. If they don't like it then they should negotiate better when the contract is up.

I also have zero problem with Rapinoe or any other member of the team voicing their opinions on politics or responding to questions about whether or not they will go to the White House when they win. The only reason anyone is complaining about her saying what she said is because they don't agree with her. And that's fine. But it would be a lot easier if people would just say "I don't agree with her so that why I don't like it", instead of trying to hide behind the "You're an athlete so you should stick to sports" line. Let's be real, the reason that most of those who don't like her speaking out feel that way is because she expressed an opinion they didn't agree with.
Click to expand...
From your response, no I don’t think you sound like a “snowflake lefty”. I agree with pretty much everything that you said. I don’t care if Rapinoe speaks out about her politics or doesn’t visit the WH if invited. I don’t like when she expresses her political opinion on the field when she’s representing a USA sports team, especially in a foreign country and if she’s being paid.

And, I agree the women should be paid, and should have negotiated, a contract that gives them an equal share of the revenues that they generate. But if they want all women teams to be paid on par with men’s teams, the totality of women’s teams don’t generate enough revenue for that to be remotely practical b/c the women’s teams aren’t as popular internationally as they are in the US.

As my linked article pointed out, the women are actually doing pretty well and if they negotiate a contract based on the revenues that the US team generates, there will be no issue for their lesser team members of the US women’s team. The upper tier players are doing quite well as it is.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
That's exactly what it usually is. No doubt. But it doesn't have to be. If I were in Rapinoe's shoes, I would talk to the team, come out in the next few days and make a public statement, "The team discussed it and we will accept an invitation to visit only if we are afforded XX minutes with President Trump to discuss a few things", something to that nature.

They're holding all the cards. They can force the issue. Trump says no, they come off looking good and Trump looking like sh*t; if Trump says yes, they get an open forum with the President that could go a long ways towards advancing their cause for equal pay.

It's a no-brainer. I just don't see how declining does anything for anyone, whatsoever.
Click to expand...
That would be a good idea, if they were serious about a dialogue with Trump. But they’re not. They just hate him and conservatives, and want to push an agenda based on perception rather than reality and facts. Just like the myth of 77 cents on the dollars inequality using raw Labor Dept data, which the Labor Dept says in not based on equal circumstances. It doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not b/c it supports a women’s discrimination narrative that gives them political ammunition.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
That's exactly what it usually is. No doubt. But it doesn't have to be. If I were in Rapinoe's shoes, I would talk to the team, come out in the next few days and make a public statement, "The team discussed it and we will accept an invitation to visit only if we are afforded XX minutes with President Trump to discuss a few things", something to that nature.

They're holding all the cards. They can force the issue. Trump says no, they come off looking good and Trump looking like sh*t; if Trump says yes, they get an open forum with the President that could go a long ways towards advancing their cause for equal pay.

It's a no-brainer. I just don't see how declining does anything for anyone, whatsoever.
Click to expand...

They could get the most iron clad verbal commitments in advance from him and it wouldn't mean much. Negotiating with Trump is always a fluid proposition. The meeting would give him a great deal more value as a photo op for his campaign.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
You seem awfully fired up about this situation. Okay, let's try this; remove anything LGBT from the equation.
Click to expand...

You continue to be a complete joke and the rest of your post isn't even worth reading. You literally have no idea what you are talking about.
 

jamiche said:
They could get the most iron clad verbal commitments in advance from him and it wouldn't mean much. Negotiating with Trump is always a fluid proposition. The meeting would give him a great deal more value as a photo op for his campaign.
Click to expand...

bottlebass said:
You continue to be a complete joke and the rest of your post isn't even worth reading. You literally have no idea what you are talking about.
Click to expand...

I guess I'll to parse it down as far as possible for simplification purposes.

Why would Trump have any reason to oppose the USWNT from making more money or equal pay to the men? What reason is there for him to not support that?
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
I guess I'll to parse it down as far as possible for simplification purposes.

Why would Trump have any reason to oppose the USWNT from making more money or equal pay to the men? What reason is there for him to not support that?
Click to expand...

You think she said what she said because she thinks trump is the cause of her pay or that her pay has anything to do with it? Like I said, you are a complete joke and don't even want to try to understand the issue. What does the president have to do with their pay?
 

Cruze said:
You know exactly why Section 2 used "blindly" in his post. In his mind right wing hatred of Obama and everything he said and did was rational and well deserved even if the GOP had previously supported such policies and beliefs.

And to Section 2 left wing hatred of the Trumpster because he spent the last two and half years trying to undo long standing and much loved progressive policies and regulations is deservedly described by right wingers as irrational and without justification.

Hypocrisy. It is pretty much impossible to find anything right wingers say or do that isn't hypocritical based on how they behaved during the eight years of the Obama administration.
Click to expand...

No, there was plenty of right wing hatred of Obama that was irrational and not deserved.

Your second sentence is exactly my point. It's a feeling! He's "trying" to undo "much loved'" progressive policies! That's all that matters. HAtE!

Where exactly is the hypocrisy? Most of the hatred from the left toward Trump is blind. You don't even know why you hate him. Goldberg! The results don't match up to the angst. The border is the perfect example. Talk about hypocrisy.

Obama was a mostly ineffective president, who seems like a pretty good guy, who in no way measured up to how he was viewed by lefties.
 

Section2 said:
No, there was plenty of right wing hatred of Obama that was irrational and not deserved.

Your second sentence is exactly my point. It's a feeling! He's "trying" to undo "much loved'" progressive policies! That's all that matters. HAtE!

Where exactly is the hypocrisy? Most of the hatred from the left toward Trump is blind. You don't even know why you hate him. Goldberg! The results don't match up to the angst. The border is the perfect example. Talk about hypocrisy.

Obama was a mostly ineffective president, who seems like a pretty good guy, who in no way measured up to how he was viewed by lefties.
Click to expand...
Is this supposed to be your explanation for why you used the word "blindly" above? It's pretty difficult to follow your argument here. What a mess!
 

GopherJake said:
Is this supposed to be your explanation for why you used the word "blindly" above? It's pretty difficult to follow your argument here. What a mess!
Click to expand...

Oh goody! Another "definition argument". The last refuge of the logically challenged. I
f you don't know what "blind hatred" is, seek google.
 

Section2 said:
Oh goody! Another "definition argument". The last refuge of the logically challenged. I
f you don't know what "blind hatred" is, seek google.
Click to expand...
I do know what it means. It appears you don't. People "hate" him because he's a jackass. That's one reason. He is an international embarrassment on a daily basis. That's another. He is a massive hypocrite. There's another. He dismisses actual experts and follows whims and emotion. He's a loose cannon. (These last couple, traditionally you would have an issue with, but not now for some reason. Weird.) Those are reasons.

These are the most obvious and prevalent that I can think of off the top of my head. And none of them are blind. Blind means you don't have a reason. But yeah, sure, why stick to word definitions?That restricts you from saying whatever the hell you want. Your way, you get to write whatever you want and blame the reader, instead of the writer. That's a neat trick.
 

KillerGopherFan said:
That would be a good idea, if they were serious about a dialogue with Trump. But they’re not. They just hate him and conservatives, and want to push an agenda based on perception rather than reality and facts. It doesn’t matter whether it’s true or not b/c it supports a women’s discrimination narrative that gives them political ammunition.
Click to expand...

I think it's safe to say this is exactly what we're talking about here, but nobody wants to openly admit.
 


Ogee Oglethorpe said:
I think it's safe to say this is exactly what we're talking about here, but nobody wants to openly admit.
Click to expand...

I have openly admitted to Trump hatred in many posts during the last two years. How come you won't admit to eight years of Obama hatred? Is it because much of the Obama hatred was racist inspired? Trump is as white as white can be so you can't hang that label on his haters.
 
Last edited:

Cruze said:
I have openly admitted to Trump hatred in many posts during the last two years. How come you won't admit to eight years of Obama hatred? Is it because much of the Obama hatred was racist inspired? Trump is as white as white can be so you can't hang that label on his haters.
Click to expand...

So, a person is racist if their hatred is directed toward a person of darker complexion, but not if it is directed toward a person of lighter complexion?

Skin color, eye color, hair color, sex, fat, muscular, lean, short, tall, etc. Who cares??? We all have different characteristics, and I'm sure we all notice those things when we look at someone else. But, as long as we continue to focus on such shallow things, our society will never get past this nonsense.
 

Ogee Oglethorpe said:
That's exactly what it usually is. No doubt. But it doesn't have to be. If I were in Rapinoe's shoes, I would talk to the team, come out in the next few days and make a public statement, "The team discussed it and we will accept an invitation to visit only if we are afforded XX minutes with President Trump to discuss a few things", something to that nature.

They're holding all the cards. They can force the issue. Trump says no, they come off looking good and Trump looking like sh*t; if Trump says yes, they get an open forum with the President that could go a long ways towards advancing their cause for equal pay.

It's a no-brainer. I just don't see how declining does anything for anyone, whatsoever.
Click to expand...

Give it up, Ogee. Rapinoe doesn't have to go to the White House for Trump to be for equal pay. Any "meeting" between the two would be a joke and a waste of time. All the benefit would be for Trump...and clearly...Rapinoe is not a fan. She just won the World Cup. Her message will be louder with the White House visit decline. King Trump doesn't care about her concerns...so you can quit with your delusional fantasies.
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom