Discussion in 'football' started by Gromit, Jan 15, 2019.
Fuck me, you're thick.
Join the dots? I doubt he can keep his crayon art inside the lines.
Youre the one who can't answer a simple question.
I asked do you believe they should.
You answer I believe they can't.
That wasn't what I asked.
Yes, of course they should, but teh patriarchy and dicks like you
It took 12 hours for one single person to support equal pay for women in football.
And this is Urban a supposedly feminist safe space.
They really do have a uphill struggle.
Care to explain how patriarchy is to blame exactly? Over say women's general lack of interest in football perchance.
It's very simple, let me, a woman, explain. Fuck off Gromit, and when you get there gather yourself and your collection of ' Ooooh aren't I funny' threads up and fuck off some more. There, we've no time for football because we're still to busy telling arseholes like you (the patriarchy) to fuck off. HTH.
We don't want people like this thanks
Yours, the patriarchy.
This thread is what you guys have made it with your negatively. I just asked the leading question but instead of acknowledging the issue and suggest solutions you'd all just rather attack someone and blame.
noun: leading question; plural noun: leading questions
a question that prompts or encourages the answer wanted.
If it's a leading question, you've no interest in solutions. 3/10, and I'm being generous.
Thanks, generally didn't know that; but as the Grand Slams are the biggest events my point still stands.
I didn't want to do this, but you've left me no choice.
FUCK OFF GROMIT.
I'd say they should, with the important condition that I'd like to see the amounts being far closer to what the women earn. Top women football-players seem to get up to about 50,000 if they get paid by both a club and by, say, England. Not enough. Men players get as much as 15,000,000. Far too much.
BTW elite (men) rugby players seem to get 600,000 to 1000,000
(Exact numbers are hard to come by, so I may be wrong)
How is that not enough? It's a lot more than most people earn. There seems to be a weird idea that fairness is somehow involved here. It isn't.
Half an hour.
One argument being that professional sportsplayers often are ending their highly paid careers just when some people are beginning to get a bit more. 60 grand for ten years is 600,000. Then they may have to retrain, restart their studies or settle for lots less.
The other argument being that how I think things should be is just that. It's not something that I would expect to happen. I think I should win the lottery. Not based on notions of fairness!
Separate names with a comma.