Prize Money in Tennis A Gender Perspective - Essay Example

Prize Money in Tennis; A Gender Perspective "But why the discrepancies on the grounds of gender The popularity of women's tennis is on the rise, television ratings are climbing through the roof and I believe that bringing parity to the prize-money between men and women is the next logical step." Said Martina Hingis, Tennis star, has been quoted in a news item in BBC. Sports are so habitually seen as the affirmation of male virtues - fast, strong, competitive. Women are seen as non- aggressive, non-adversarial, and non-gladiatorial. Despite having a presence in the world of sports for all these decades, women players are still rated and compared in terms of their looks and persona. Their sporting skills, sadly take a backseat. In the following passages, an attempt has been made to study the world of women in sports vis--vis the prize money in tennis, in the perspective of the neo-Marxist and feminist theories. Marxist theory equates the man as the bourgeoisie and the wife as the proletariat. He felt that the communist ideology will give space to women by bringing them into the public space. In communism, women can enter into public sphere of production and communalize the realm of private production. This then, becomes the program for emancipation of women. If we take the example of Cuba, which is a socialist dictatorship, structured along the Eastern European countries. Fidel Castro, after coming to power, brought about major changes in all aspects of Cuban society, including its sports. The other communist countries held up Cuba's success in sports as an example as a success of socialist experiment. $80 million is still invested in sport annually, which represents 2% of the Gross Domestic Product (GDP) of Cuba. The Cuban government invests a disproportionate amount of its resources in its athletes - educating, feeding, clothing them, paying for equipment, and travel. Sports in Cuba is deeply integrated with politics and political ideology borrowed from Eastern Europe ideology Sports is an integral part of the political culture, and it is available to all. Castro established a strategy both to unite the population behind common sporting goals and establish a shared national identity through sport. The liberal feminist theory states that sports increases socialization among women. It develops confidence, decreases the gender imbalance. But a lot of discrimination exists in sports. This includes categorizing sports as feminine and masculine. Feminine sports being hockey, volleyball, handball, masculine being rugby, cricket, football. Women are also not represented in major sports organizations. They do not hold decision-making positions. In 2002, women held 17 per cent of executive director/general manager positions. Legal restrictions also reduce the chances of women holding important jobs. The sex discrimination Act, 1975, in UK does not include sports in its agenda. Private sports clubs remain outside the purview of equal opportunities legislation. Liberal feminism has included these issues on the agenda of sports organizations, clubs. Organizations such as Women Sports Foundation-WSF, Women's Sports International-WSI, have put pressure on these institutions and have managed to put issues like gender equality and equity becoming part of mainstream sports agenda. The liberal feminist theory says that biological constraints are not responsible for less participation of women in sports Inspite of all this, discrimination continues. There is another theory - radical feminism, which sees the male as oppressors and the female as suppressed. Unlike the liberal feminism, which only talks about equal opportunities for women, radical feminism mentions that women are encouraged to have an acceptable heterosexual feminity in sports. For example, in international women beach volleyball, bikini bottoms should not be deeper than 6 centimeters. This has less to do with appropriate dress codes and more of objectification of women's bodies. Radical feminism has also led to an understanding of lesbian sexual orientation and homophobia in sports. Without doubt, women are hugely under-represented in sports, in media coverage, in terms of financial rewards, in sports establishments. There is a chauvinistic attitude at work in the media. A case being in point is that of the American athlete, Mary Slaney, who was given wide coverage of the Western media in the mid-eighties, as compared to her Czech contemporary, Ludmilla Kratochvilova, who was more successful on the track but her perceived lack of photogenic appeal meant that she was almost disregarded by television. While sport often appears as an institution created for and by men, ironically it is women who support and service these institutions. One can explain this, by the prevailing patriarchal order of the society, or that it is part of a capitalist economic system, which views women as a source of cheap labor, who then have little time for sports. The participation of working-class women and the marginalized sections of the society in sports have led to a more democratic order. Sport is an avenue for a working-class woman to escape the drudgery of her every day life. Non-white sports stars who have become famous have encouraged other less advantaged people of color to come out of their milieu and prove themselves in the sports arena. Sport has been the means of getting into mainstream. There is also a shift in traditional family values in the working class milieu, which did not encourage a woman to participate in sports. The financial remuneration being reasonably good has led to more working class women coming into competitive sports. Coming back to women tennis, the one who single-handedly fought for equal prize money and equality in tennis has been Billie Jean King. The six-times Wimbledon Grand Slam winner has done more for equality in tennis than anybody else. The pioneer in her own right started the first professional woman's tour, the first women's sports magazine, and the first women sports foundation. One can very well understand the scenario that existed in her time and what she had to fight for. In her own words, "Open tennis started in 1968 with prize money for the players, the men squeezed us out. The players and promoters of all the tournaments and all of the top officials were men. They didn't care if women had a place to compete or to win prize money. Therefore, there were very few places for the women to play. Nine of us, called the Original Nine, were determined to create our own women's tour." The Original Nine members included: Peaches Bartkowicz, Rosie Casals, Judy Dalton, Julie Heldman, Kerry Melville, Kristy Pigeon, Nancy Richey, Valerie Ziegenfuss and Billie Jean King. They all signed a $1 contract with Gladys Heldman, publisher of World Tennis Magazine. She joined forces with Joseph Cullman, III from Philip Morris for the birth of women's professional tennis. In 1973, Billie Jean King founded the Women's Tennis Association and finally got everyone under the same umbrella. For the first time, women's professional tennis had one voice. "The players today are living our dream and our vision. We wanted every little girl to have an opportunity to make a living playing tennis", Billie Jean King. Incidentally Billie Jean King happened to beat a man, Bobby Riggs, a 1939 Wimbledon Champion in September 20, 1973, in a match in Houston. This was touted as the 'battle of the sexes'. She proved that a woman sportsperson could survive pressure-filled situations, as well as a man, if not better. King was perceived as a "radical" heading a breakaway group. The Virginia Slims Tour was marketed with the slogan "You've come a Long Way, Baby." Things improved financially. King became the first woman athlete to earn $100,000 in prize money in a year (1971) King, who received $15,000 less than Ilie Nastase did for winning the U.S. Open in 1972, said if the prize money wasn't equal by the next year, she wouldn't play, and she didn't think the other women would either. In 1973, the U.S. Open became the first major tournament to offer equal prize money for men and women. King believes that she was born with a destiny to work for gender equity in sports and to continue until it's achieved. In the more recent past, Venus Williams, of the famous Williams sisters, has also been heavily engaged in garnering more respect for women in professional tennis, to include trying to close the gender gap in prize money. "You don't get anything free, and the chance of the Grand Slams (besides the U.S. Open) giving us equal prize money without us collectively lobbying for it, would be as good as giving an opponent a match gratis," said Venus. She says women have to stand together and let the Grand Slams know that they are serious. Winning a single men's champion in Wimbledon will net about $70,000 more than a women player. This is blamed on women playing shorter matches than the men. Women feel strongly that they deserve equal prize money as it is the case in US Open and the Australian Open. They have better calibre as players and they attract more crowds. The women Tennis Association (WTA) is trying to market itself better. It started in 2003, and its sponsorship has increased by 40%. Anne Worcester, the former director of WTA says that with the increase in entertainment value of women tennis matches, women players should be paid more. "The culture in US and Australia is more about gender equality. .The difference in prize money here at Wimbledon is 450,000 pounds. And so while those numbers are not very significant, it really -- it really doesn't reflect the role of women in today's market and the fact that you know seven years ago in Atlanta, the Olympics made women's sports even more popular, worldwide than ever before". On most aspects of the game, women's games are different than the men. Men play an average of 30 minutes per match than women. There was a time when the actual length of matches was hardly different between the sexes, which was before 1970. Yet, ironically, that was the era of the biggest disparity between prize monies. At that time men and women played matches for the same time, an average of 70 minutes. Since 1975, as the stakes have increased through sponsorship and promotion opportunities and the game becomes more competitive, the men's time has crept up relentlessly to average over 140 minutes per championship game, a good distance from the current 85 minutes for women champions. We won't even mention the fact that the men score more than four times as many aces per tournament, on average, and have a lower percentage of unforced errors. That might sound like sacrilege to women. One need not assume that a woman needs to be like a man. Equality does not come by being similar. One needs to understand that women and men are different. Women's tennis is different from men's and it is enjoyable to watch both - to observe the differences and enjoy the different styles of both the gender. Why can't women also play the best of five sets or men play the best of three The time difference would then not be so stark and the money could be exactly the same. Women will not achieve all that the men have, by just becoming like them. The real achievement comes when the feminine aspects of the women are emphasized and whatever is achieved without losing it. Each one of the sexes has a role to play and has to play it to the best of ability. Women's tennis has never been more popular in terms of increased attendance, increased television coverage, increased television rating, many times higher TV ratings than the men and just the general recognizability of its stars at the top of the game. For what other sport can you say Venus, Serena, Kim, Martina, Monica and people immediately know exactly whom you're talking about. WORKS CITED Thomas, Gail E. (Ed.), U.S. Race Relations in the 1980s and 1990s Challenges and Alternatives, Hemisphere Publishing Corporation, Texas, USA, 1990. Donovan, Josephine. Feminist Theory. A Frederick ungar book, Continuum, New York, 1992 3. Clancy Jim, Q&A WITH JIM CLANCY, Q&A Tennis Prize Money: Men vs. Women. Aired June 27, 2003 - 11:30:00. ET. Retrieved from http://transcripts.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0306/27/i_qaa.01.html Mona Dobre-Laza. the British Council, retrieved January 13, 2006. http://elt.britcoun.org.pl/elt/s_gender.htm 4. Goward Pru.Federal Sex Discrimination Commissioner. The Current Playing Field 1991-2002. 20 May 2003. Sydney. Retrieved on January 13, 2006. http://www.hreoc.gov.au/speeches/sex_discrim/TheCurrentPlayingField.htm 5. Sihera, Elaine. Why women champions are paid too much at Wimbledon. Category: Impact Dated: 08/07/2002. Retrieved on January 13, 2006. http://www.blackbritain.co.uk/columnists/details.aspxi=-658737063&c=Impact&h=Why+women+champions+are+paid+too+much+at+Wimbledon 6. King, Billie Jean. The Rise of Women's Tennis and its Contribution to the Women and Sport Movement. 2002.World Conference on Women and sport. May 16-19, 2002, Montreal, Quebec, Canada. http://www.canada2002.org/e/speakers/billie_jean.htm 7. Potier, Beth. King: Battles won, battles ahead:Tennis star and heroine accepts Radcliffe Medal with inspiring stories. HARVARD GAZETTE ARCHIVES. http://www.news.harvard.edu/gazette/2002/06.13/03-king.html 8. Women argue for better pay. Wednesday, 14 June, 2000, 16:56 GMT 17:56 UK. http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/wimbledon2000/786709.stm 9. Chappell, Robert. Brunel University, London. Cuba: Before and after the 'Wall' came down. http://www.thesportjournal.org/2004Journal/Vol7-No1/chappellCuba.asp Read More