Wimbledon will now be paying equal prize money to men and women, according to an AP article on ESPN.com. I'm sure feminists across the world are overjoyed at this victory, but I cannot view this decision as one of equality.
Oh, it's under the guise of equality, but women should not earn the same amount as men in these Grand Slam tennis tournaments. Now before everyone jumps on my back for being a sexist, chauvinist women-hater, I remind everyone what's at the basis of the women's movement:
Equal pay for equal work.
And I feel compelled to argue the case that the women are not doing equal work.
Men play best-of-five set matches while women play best-of-three set matches. That doesn't sound quite as equal now, does it? Now, do I have a problem with women extending their matches to best-of-five for Grand Slams? No. Do it. As a matter of fact, I'd love to see that.
Maybe a few women on the tennis circuit would have a problem with that, but viewers wouldn't. Men's tennis has become routine. Everyone shows up, and two weeks later Roger Federer takes the title. Same old, same old.
But women's tennis is much more competitive than it's male counterpart. I'd love to see Serena Williams continue her dominance in five-set thrillers. Women's tennis has parity. Why not extend the matches and continue to draw in viewers. I'd watch.
So before everyone looks at this announcement by the All England Club as progressive and fair, let's call it what it really is: an attempt to adjust in a world where too many people are trying to be politically correct.
The All England Club - or someone for that matter - needs to stand up and make the point that if women are going to get equal pay, they should do equal work.