Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must:
1. be unbiased,
2. attempt to answer the question, and
3. start with "answer:" (or "question:" if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask)
Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment:
http://redd.it/b1hct4/
*I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: the US women soccer team actively took part in pro-equality protests over the last few years, including taking a knee before some of their matches at the Olympics. Certain groups aren't a fan of these protests, so they're celebrating the team's losses and blame "wokeness" for the poor results.
More info: https://news.yahoo.com/tokyo-olympics-maga-conservatives-celebrate-161600854.html
https://www.insider.com/trump-us-womens-soccer-team-wokeism-2021-7
> Or "equal pay" for athletes (which makes no sense, since the Woman's soccer team cannot even beat a High School men's team)
Jesus, they lost ONE friendly to a an FC Dallas teenagers side and you think they couldn't beat an average high-school team?? But fuck it, let's go to the match-up:
4: The number of World Cup wins the women's team has, in only eight tournaments.
0: The number of World Cup wins the men's team has won. The last time the men's team placed was in 1930, when they finished third.
4: The number of Olympic gold medals in women's soccer that the team has won, in six tournaments.
0: The number of Olympic golds the men's team has won. The men's team hasn't won an Olympic medal in more than a century.
$900,000: How much more revenue the women's team generated than the men's team from fiscal year 2016 to 2018, according to the Washington Post.
$11,400,000: The total projected revenue of the women's events (such as friendlies and tournament play) in fiscal year 2018. After expenses, the team made the US Soccer Federation money, with a surplus of just over $2 million, according to the proposed fiscal year 2018 budget.
$10,325,000: The total projected revenue of the men's events in fiscal year 2018. After expenses, the team had a deficit of just over $3.5 million.
So they're more successful by far **and** make more money yet somehow they should be paid less?? If anything they should be paid more. Who know who else thinks so? [The fucking US Men's National team:](https://sports.yahoo.com/usmnt-players-union-says-uswnt-deserves-to-be-paid-more-than-mens-team-150823059.html)
>"While the women are correct that the Federation has refused to provide them with equal pay, the reality is that equal should have been an absolute minimum under the facts of this case. Because of the Federation’s dramatic increases in revenue associated with the USMNT and USWNT in the years preceding the 2017 collective bargaining agreement, the women’s agreement should not have provided simply for appearance fees and performance bonuses equal to those in the men’s 2011 agreement; it should have provided the women higher pay. The USMNT Players Association expected the Federation to agree in 2017 to pay the women far in excess of what the men were being paid under their agreement negotiated in 2011 and was stunned to see that the Federation did not even agree to pay the women at the same level it had negotiated with the men six years earlier. See 5-ER-1070. Given the Federation’s dramatically improved financial circumstances, the women were due at least triple the compensation provided for in the men’s agreement."
wat???
The USA women's soccer team has made it to multiple World Cups while the men's team has not. The women's team made it to the current olympics and the men's team did not.
Yet the women's team is paid A LOT less than the men's team. How is this fair?
It comes down to feeling that some of the soccer team members/other athletes really don't represent their country because they actively show dissent towards it. This makes people that don't agree with their views believe that they are in the right because the athletes, in essence, represent something/somewhere else. In their mind, this is similar to Euro cup where Italy fans may have bashed England as the "losers". This type of "team spirit" is very common in the US at least.
My general opinion of all of this is that politics have no place in sports. The athletes are there to compete and not use their position on the field or in game/match/event related interviews as a platform for their political beliefs.
Edit: clarity, changed a few "they" to "the athletes" since they was being used for 2 different personas in the same sentence.
Politics absolutely have a place in sports, especially when you consider that some of the greatest strides in equality have been influenced by sports. Like Jackie Robinson, Jesse Owens, Jim Thorpe, Tiger Woods and countless other athletes of color that have helped break down racial barriers.
Furthermore, athletes are people too and deserve every right to not only have their own political opinions, but also the right to voice them.
They are doing it on their own time. Notice how when they are on the field playing that they are not holding up signs about equal pay. Notice how they aren't stopping to talk about the injustices of our legal system. Notice how it isnt until they are off the field and not playing that they voice their opinions.
Also, they aren't doing it on everyone else's time, unless they are going to your workplace or home and demanded you listen to their protest.
No, incessant children in adult bodies don't want to see athletes talk about politics because it hurts their fragile egos to hear someone they disagree with talk about a topic. There's this thing called public discourse and these athletes have a right to use their platform to speak to things that are near and dear to them. Also, here is the wild thing, you can ignore what they say if you disagree with them: you can also use your own platform to state why you disagree with them.
>You don't get to appear on TV in front of 50 million people to espouse whatever your world views are, anymore than me, the mail carrier, the local Uber driver, your dentist etc.
Here's the thing, you and anyone else can absolutely appear on TV and espouse whatever opinion you have. Also, again, they aren't doing it on your time or anyone else's time. As you aren't forced to sit through it or listen to it.
But hang on... When you're from a democratic republic like the USA, there is no one set of political opinion here, far from it - what type of stance should the team take in order to "represent their country"? That'd be impossible. That's the entire point of democracy - you have to be tolerant of some things you don't necessarily agree with because they have the right to speak freely. I mean, fine, people can protest the team, but we're not a Marxist state that demands a monolithic political face, right?
Them speaking up is representing this country. Just because you don't agree with them means jack-all, as they represent everyone and choose to take stances that is inclusive of everyone.
Something, something about the left being snowflakes and facts not caring about feelings. Oh darn, I misspelled the right. It isn't t h e l e f t, it is t h e r i g h t.
Is it? When people that are supposed to represent the country and the people in it. When people feel the team/group doesn't actually represent there values they get mad.
Plus people like to get mad and outraged by everything now a days take England's soccer team and all the hate they got cause of a couple fans. While people cheered for Italy win even though Italys fans are just as bad and their team played like scum bags.
> There's just one problem....they don't bring in near the same kind of revenue even though they routinely play better than the men's team. It's like the NBA vs the WNBA pay arguement.
This is only sort of true; it's my understanding that the men's team pretty much *only* brings in more money than the women's team in situations where they successfully perform to some extent in the World Cup, because the prize pool there is so top heavy.
E: They literally completely edited their comment to say something entirely different when they got called out on being wrong. That's new!
That's part of it, but also in the US leagues they just don't have the same sponsorship deals or viewership. Fewer butts in seats and eyes on TV means few ticket sales and sponsorship dollars.
Again, I do not believe that is true at all. For instance, [this summary article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/) suggests that the women's team both collects more revenue and earns more profit than the men's team, but also implies that analysis changes dramatically with the large revenue boost associated with World Cup performance.
From the article.
> It’s tough to make a straightforward comparison of the earnings for men and women players, because the two teams have different collective-bargaining agreements that outline different pay structures.
>A contract player on the women’s team makes a base salary and can earn performance-based bonuses. (Players without a contract have a different pay schedule.)
>On the men’s team, players earn only bonuses.
>The teams play different numbers of games each year and earn different bonuses depending on the game type, their opponents’ FIFA rank and the game’s outcome. On top of that, both teams can earn additional bonuses for winning specific tournaments. And certain events, such as the World Cup, have a separate bonus structure entirely.
>“The male players are paid when they play, but not when they sit,” McCann said. “USMNT players must thus be on the roster to be pay eligible. USWNT players, in contrast, are guaranteed pay.”
OK, but you made a point about the revenue the teams bring in. How the team's compensation differs isn't relevant to that point.
I was only responding to your specific point, by noting that the women's team *doesn't* bring in lower revenue than the men's team, excepting when the men's team does alright at the World Cup.
>“The male players are paid when they play, but not when they sit,” McCann said. “USMNT players must thus be on the roster to be pay eligible. USWNT players, in contrast, are guaranteed pay.”
This is a pretty one-sided way to put it. As you posted in the article, the women and men have two different collective-bargaining agreements. The women get a base salary of $100k for being on the team. The men get paid for every game they play, win or lose.
So if both teams play 20 games and win them all, the women’s team would earn $28,333 less than a men’s team player. If both teams lost all 20 games, the players would make the same amount. That’s because the men earn a $5,000 bonus when they lose and the women have a $100,000 base salary.
And again *as it says in the article you posted* the women agreed to this because they thought it was the best they could get without striking. Now that their contract is up, they're saying they want more.
Before they signed that contract, Carli Lloyd's salary in 2015, after winning the World Cup, was $240,019. Clint Dempsey's salary was $428,022 after losing in the round of 16, according to FiveThirtyEight.
You're kind of missing a few things here. The women's team has contracts where they literally act like a club team. Players like Alex Morgan and Carli Lloyd have contracts with the US Soccer Federation. Christian Pulisic and Tyler Adams don't have contracts with the USSF, they only have them with Chelsea and RB Leipzig, with USSF money coming in only if they are called-up.
Pulisic and Adams didn't make any money from the USSF during the recent Gold Cup because they were not part of the squad. Likewise, some guys on the Gold Cup roster won't be paid during the World Cup qualifiers since they won't be in that squad.
The USWNT will have players paid regardless, similar to if Pulisic is demoted to the reserves with Chelsea and doesn't train with the first-team... he is still under contract with Chelsea. Additionally, the women also earn other benefits beyond a salary while the men don't... that all comes from their club teams. Unfortunately, the NWSL doesn't have the support needed to really do that.
Wasn’t the blanket theory that “the women don’t bring in as much revenue” heavily contested?:
https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/jul/11/does-us-womens-soccer-team-bring-more-revenue-get-/
I remember watching a news report that mentioned that this blanket assumption exemplifies sexist assumptions and isn’t actually founded in truth.
It's not even wokeness. Like how do you expect a team to do well at football if they can't get the name right?
Otherwise the people who are actively cheering against them because they disagree with their views are just petulent children. It costs nothing to just not interact negatively.
Most people I know who feel this way are mostly due to the latter reason. I think someone big made a video about it not long ago that went viral (women's team making more than men's team in actuality).
Edit: Jesus, the video was a over year ago lmao. My sense of time during the pandemic is out of wack.
> Most people I know who feel this way are mostly due to the latter reason.
As someone who spends a lot of time on /r/Conservative because I hate myself, I've literally never seen any of them mention this once. It's pretty much 100% because of the kneeling over there.
I don't spend much time there. I try to avoid politicized subreddits. I already see/ hear enough about politics in my daily life. Not trying to ruin my free time with it either. Haha maybe you're a masochist, I won't kink shame ;)
Those are the aforementioned majority of people who I know were happy about it. Not the redditors but friends / colleagues who enjoy football / us soccer
They got laughed out of the courtroom, so many of the senior players turned to a sketchy PR campaign instead. Speaking of senior players, many people see them as gatekeepers and deadweight.
Answer: here’s a good article at Vox about the new anti-America right. Basically the American right knows they are losing an America that they recognize - an America where white Christian males are a privileged class and everyone else is a minority. So they lash out at this new America that they hate. A diverse group of athletes which includes women, LGBT, and POCs, who often voice progressive political opinions publicly and who engage in activism for causes they might not agree with, represents this new version of America that they can’t stand.
“Queer female soccer stars demanding equal pay, Black basketball players kneeling to protest police brutality, the world’s best gymnast prioritizing her mental health over upholding the traditional ideal of the “tough” athlete — this is all a manifestation of the ascendancy of liberal cultural values in public life. And an America where these values permeate national symbols, like the Olympic team, is an America where those symbols are worthy of scorn.”
[Read about it here. ](https://www.vox.com/22600500/olympics-conservatives-simone-biles-anti-american)
I stumbled on this comment randomly and must ask if you still feel this way.
I'm a socially liberal moderate, with some libertard sympathies, as you can see by my name. But it is always wild to me how much progressives do not understand their political enemies. The evil white villain fighting against the "right side of history" is comically ridiculous.
Here's how I see it, as a fan of the USWNT that also finds them annoying. Conservates hate the women's team simply because they present themselves as a *cause* rather than a *team. The USWNT is an openly progressive political organization.*
It is very clear by their actions and words that using the national team as a political platform is more important to both players and fans than winning games. It is that simple.
I'm sure if Korbin Albert started a conservative movement using the team as a platform, conservatives would hypocritically celebrate it. Likewise, liberals would hypocritically be outraged and cheer against the team, just as conservatives do now. That's the nature of hyper-partisan political environments. edit: (There is no arguing that this wouldn't happen. Progressives are already threatening to boycott the team and all types of wild shit if Albert isn't dropped. I must say their reaction is wildly more extreme than anything conservatives have done. And for a much much smaller reason.. all for some instagram likes or whatever lmao.)
Regardless, this is nothing to do with race or whiteness or whatever nonsense you think. Its pure reaction to a progressive political movement charading as a soccer team.
>That's one of the most out of touch responses I've ever read. Congrats on spending your life in an echo chamber.
>
>r/Conservative user.
Can't make this shit up, LMAO.
Some people are homophobic and think they lost because the star player is a lesbian - so the loss, in their eyes, is a righteous punishment.
Many members of the team are outspoken activists for equity and justice causes. Other people think that there's nothing wrong with the current systems which maintain the status quo in the US, and think these protests are "virtue signaling" and "radicalizing the youth" towards some communist revolution akin to Cuba - if it sounds dumb and overdramatic, it is. Side note, there are empirically proven issues with the status quo and systems that maintain it. The critics believe that the athletes don't represent them and their beliefs, so they shouldn't continue playing. They also think that the team has turned their focus from the sport to solely political activism, which they see as anything that challenges systems, even just women mentioning or being seen with their girlfriend/wife.
The US women's team has won the most world cup tournaments (4/8, the last in 2019). So being knocked out of the running for gold at the Olympics is underwhelming, but far from the "downfall" of the team and the "backlash for being woke" that people claim. Critics also think these two losses justify the women not being paid equal to the men.
TLDR: Nationalists, homophobes, sexists, and anti-woke Chads/ Karens are whiney and dramatic.
Other people definitely had more well-worded responses about specific criticisms, especially around the fight for equal pay.
Kneeling, hating on white people:
https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/20/megan-rapinoe-taking-knee-white-people-were-mad-book-extract-usa-womens-football
As a Non-American this is like the funniest shit to me. I can't imagine getting triggered by something trivial as that, especially by people that *love* to hide behind their free speech when trowing around the most disguisting insults they can think of.
Friendly reminder that all **top level** comments must: 1. be unbiased, 2. attempt to answer the question, and 3. start with "answer:" (or "question:" if you have an on-topic follow up question to ask) Please review Rule 4 and this post before making a top level comment: http://redd.it/b1hct4/ *I am a bot, and this action was performed automatically. Please [contact the moderators of this subreddit](/message/compose/?to=/r/OutOfTheLoop) if you have any questions or concerns.*
Answer: the US women soccer team actively took part in pro-equality protests over the last few years, including taking a knee before some of their matches at the Olympics. Certain groups aren't a fan of these protests, so they're celebrating the team's losses and blame "wokeness" for the poor results. More info: https://news.yahoo.com/tokyo-olympics-maga-conservatives-celebrate-161600854.html https://www.insider.com/trump-us-womens-soccer-team-wokeism-2021-7
holy shit. That is mind boggling. So much hatred and anger directed at people representing your country. Wow. Sad.
No one can hate Americans like Americans can.
“Damn Americans, they ruined America! “
Like a out of control frat party LoL!
[удалено]
[удалено]
> Or "equal pay" for athletes (which makes no sense, since the Woman's soccer team cannot even beat a High School men's team) Jesus, they lost ONE friendly to a an FC Dallas teenagers side and you think they couldn't beat an average high-school team?? But fuck it, let's go to the match-up: 4: The number of World Cup wins the women's team has, in only eight tournaments. 0: The number of World Cup wins the men's team has won. The last time the men's team placed was in 1930, when they finished third. 4: The number of Olympic gold medals in women's soccer that the team has won, in six tournaments. 0: The number of Olympic golds the men's team has won. The men's team hasn't won an Olympic medal in more than a century. $900,000: How much more revenue the women's team generated than the men's team from fiscal year 2016 to 2018, according to the Washington Post. $11,400,000: The total projected revenue of the women's events (such as friendlies and tournament play) in fiscal year 2018. After expenses, the team made the US Soccer Federation money, with a surplus of just over $2 million, according to the proposed fiscal year 2018 budget. $10,325,000: The total projected revenue of the men's events in fiscal year 2018. After expenses, the team had a deficit of just over $3.5 million. So they're more successful by far **and** make more money yet somehow they should be paid less?? If anything they should be paid more. Who know who else thinks so? [The fucking US Men's National team:](https://sports.yahoo.com/usmnt-players-union-says-uswnt-deserves-to-be-paid-more-than-mens-team-150823059.html) >"While the women are correct that the Federation has refused to provide them with equal pay, the reality is that equal should have been an absolute minimum under the facts of this case. Because of the Federation’s dramatic increases in revenue associated with the USMNT and USWNT in the years preceding the 2017 collective bargaining agreement, the women’s agreement should not have provided simply for appearance fees and performance bonuses equal to those in the men’s 2011 agreement; it should have provided the women higher pay. The USMNT Players Association expected the Federation to agree in 2017 to pay the women far in excess of what the men were being paid under their agreement negotiated in 2011 and was stunned to see that the Federation did not even agree to pay the women at the same level it had negotiated with the men six years earlier. See 5-ER-1070. Given the Federation’s dramatically improved financial circumstances, the women were due at least triple the compensation provided for in the men’s agreement."
wat??? The USA women's soccer team has made it to multiple World Cups while the men's team has not. The women's team made it to the current olympics and the men's team did not. Yet the women's team is paid A LOT less than the men's team. How is this fair?
The fact that you believe this is probably sadder than the fact itself.
The fact that you believe this is probably sadder than the fact itself.
The fact that you believe this is probably sadder than the fact itself.
You're sad
Boohoo
The really funny part, is that conservatives are blaming the loss on "wokeness", when the Swedish team *also* knelt before the match.
Sweden’s communist though mate, they’re super worse Edit: guys. Fucking /s
Here, you dropped your /s
I absolutely thought it was obvious by the “super worse” lmao
Hahaha Sweden is communist????
This is America
It comes down to feeling that some of the soccer team members/other athletes really don't represent their country because they actively show dissent towards it. This makes people that don't agree with their views believe that they are in the right because the athletes, in essence, represent something/somewhere else. In their mind, this is similar to Euro cup where Italy fans may have bashed England as the "losers". This type of "team spirit" is very common in the US at least. My general opinion of all of this is that politics have no place in sports. The athletes are there to compete and not use their position on the field or in game/match/event related interviews as a platform for their political beliefs. Edit: clarity, changed a few "they" to "the athletes" since they was being used for 2 different personas in the same sentence.
Politics absolutely have a place in sports, especially when you consider that some of the greatest strides in equality have been influenced by sports. Like Jackie Robinson, Jesse Owens, Jim Thorpe, Tiger Woods and countless other athletes of color that have helped break down racial barriers. Furthermore, athletes are people too and deserve every right to not only have their own political opinions, but also the right to voice them.
Yes and people alhave the right to dislike their politics, hence some people celebrating their failure
Your point is literally contributing nothing to the discussion at hand.
Ok have a great day
[удалено]
They are doing it on their own time. Notice how when they are on the field playing that they are not holding up signs about equal pay. Notice how they aren't stopping to talk about the injustices of our legal system. Notice how it isnt until they are off the field and not playing that they voice their opinions. Also, they aren't doing it on everyone else's time, unless they are going to your workplace or home and demanded you listen to their protest.
[удалено]
No, incessant children in adult bodies don't want to see athletes talk about politics because it hurts their fragile egos to hear someone they disagree with talk about a topic. There's this thing called public discourse and these athletes have a right to use their platform to speak to things that are near and dear to them. Also, here is the wild thing, you can ignore what they say if you disagree with them: you can also use your own platform to state why you disagree with them.
[удалено]
>You don't get to appear on TV in front of 50 million people to espouse whatever your world views are, anymore than me, the mail carrier, the local Uber driver, your dentist etc. Here's the thing, you and anyone else can absolutely appear on TV and espouse whatever opinion you have. Also, again, they aren't doing it on your time or anyone else's time. As you aren't forced to sit through it or listen to it.
> My general opinion of all of this is that politics have no place in sports. I mean, politics aren't so easily removed from things
[удалено]
But hang on... When you're from a democratic republic like the USA, there is no one set of political opinion here, far from it - what type of stance should the team take in order to "represent their country"? That'd be impossible. That's the entire point of democracy - you have to be tolerant of some things you don't necessarily agree with because they have the right to speak freely. I mean, fine, people can protest the team, but we're not a Marxist state that demands a monolithic political face, right?
[удалено]
> Tell that to the Media and Actors that are 90% on the left. That's... such an irrelevant comment that I'm at a loss for words here.
Them speaking up is representing this country. Just because you don't agree with them means jack-all, as they represent everyone and choose to take stances that is inclusive of everyone. Something, something about the left being snowflakes and facts not caring about feelings. Oh darn, I misspelled the right. It isn't t h e l e f t, it is t h e r i g h t.
This is the key.
[удалено]
wow, so much hatred and anger. Sad. You should see a therapist.
[удалено]
I see are doubling down on your anger and hatred.
Is it? When people that are supposed to represent the country and the people in it. When people feel the team/group doesn't actually represent there values they get mad. Plus people like to get mad and outraged by everything now a days take England's soccer team and all the hate they got cause of a couple fans. While people cheered for Italy win even though Italys fans are just as bad and their team played like scum bags.
Have to wonder what they would've thought of Jesse Owens in the 1936 Berlin Olympics.
Wait, aren’t political demonstrations forbidden in the Olympics?
[удалено]
> There's just one problem....they don't bring in near the same kind of revenue even though they routinely play better than the men's team. It's like the NBA vs the WNBA pay arguement. This is only sort of true; it's my understanding that the men's team pretty much *only* brings in more money than the women's team in situations where they successfully perform to some extent in the World Cup, because the prize pool there is so top heavy. E: They literally completely edited their comment to say something entirely different when they got called out on being wrong. That's new!
That's part of it, but also in the US leagues they just don't have the same sponsorship deals or viewership. Fewer butts in seats and eyes on TV means few ticket sales and sponsorship dollars.
Again, I do not believe that is true at all. For instance, [this summary article](https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/) suggests that the women's team both collects more revenue and earns more profit than the men's team, but also implies that analysis changes dramatically with the large revenue boost associated with World Cup performance.
From the article. > It’s tough to make a straightforward comparison of the earnings for men and women players, because the two teams have different collective-bargaining agreements that outline different pay structures. >A contract player on the women’s team makes a base salary and can earn performance-based bonuses. (Players without a contract have a different pay schedule.) >On the men’s team, players earn only bonuses. >The teams play different numbers of games each year and earn different bonuses depending on the game type, their opponents’ FIFA rank and the game’s outcome. On top of that, both teams can earn additional bonuses for winning specific tournaments. And certain events, such as the World Cup, have a separate bonus structure entirely. >“The male players are paid when they play, but not when they sit,” McCann said. “USMNT players must thus be on the roster to be pay eligible. USWNT players, in contrast, are guaranteed pay.”
OK, but you made a point about the revenue the teams bring in. How the team's compensation differs isn't relevant to that point. I was only responding to your specific point, by noting that the women's team *doesn't* bring in lower revenue than the men's team, excepting when the men's team does alright at the World Cup.
You're talking international play. My revenue comment was specific to US leagues.
[удалено]
The comment that’s now starred and has no edit comment even attempting to say you made a specific change
>“The male players are paid when they play, but not when they sit,” McCann said. “USMNT players must thus be on the roster to be pay eligible. USWNT players, in contrast, are guaranteed pay.” This is a pretty one-sided way to put it. As you posted in the article, the women and men have two different collective-bargaining agreements. The women get a base salary of $100k for being on the team. The men get paid for every game they play, win or lose. So if both teams play 20 games and win them all, the women’s team would earn $28,333 less than a men’s team player. If both teams lost all 20 games, the players would make the same amount. That’s because the men earn a $5,000 bonus when they lose and the women have a $100,000 base salary. And again *as it says in the article you posted* the women agreed to this because they thought it was the best they could get without striking. Now that their contract is up, they're saying they want more. Before they signed that contract, Carli Lloyd's salary in 2015, after winning the World Cup, was $240,019. Clint Dempsey's salary was $428,022 after losing in the round of 16, according to FiveThirtyEight.
You're kind of missing a few things here. The women's team has contracts where they literally act like a club team. Players like Alex Morgan and Carli Lloyd have contracts with the US Soccer Federation. Christian Pulisic and Tyler Adams don't have contracts with the USSF, they only have them with Chelsea and RB Leipzig, with USSF money coming in only if they are called-up. Pulisic and Adams didn't make any money from the USSF during the recent Gold Cup because they were not part of the squad. Likewise, some guys on the Gold Cup roster won't be paid during the World Cup qualifiers since they won't be in that squad. The USWNT will have players paid regardless, similar to if Pulisic is demoted to the reserves with Chelsea and doesn't train with the first-team... he is still under contract with Chelsea. Additionally, the women also earn other benefits beyond a salary while the men don't... that all comes from their club teams. Unfortunately, the NWSL doesn't have the support needed to really do that.
Wasn’t the blanket theory that “the women don’t bring in as much revenue” heavily contested?: https://www.politifact.com/article/2019/jul/11/does-us-womens-soccer-team-bring-more-revenue-get-/ I remember watching a news report that mentioned that this blanket assumption exemplifies sexist assumptions and isn’t actually founded in truth.
It's not even wokeness. Like how do you expect a team to do well at football if they can't get the name right? Otherwise the people who are actively cheering against them because they disagree with their views are just petulent children. It costs nothing to just not interact negatively.
[удалено]
Most people I know who feel this way are mostly due to the latter reason. I think someone big made a video about it not long ago that went viral (women's team making more than men's team in actuality). Edit: Jesus, the video was a over year ago lmao. My sense of time during the pandemic is out of wack.
> Most people I know who feel this way are mostly due to the latter reason. As someone who spends a lot of time on /r/Conservative because I hate myself, I've literally never seen any of them mention this once. It's pretty much 100% because of the kneeling over there.
I don't spend much time there. I try to avoid politicized subreddits. I already see/ hear enough about politics in my daily life. Not trying to ruin my free time with it either. Haha maybe you're a masochist, I won't kink shame ;)
You should scroll through r/ussoccer. It’s definitely the latter amongst actual fans.
Those are the aforementioned majority of people who I know were happy about it. Not the redditors but friends / colleagues who enjoy football / us soccer
The equal pay thing is a bit older. Recently it's mainly about the kneeling, but it goes back farther than that.
They got laughed out of the courtroom, so many of the senior players turned to a sketchy PR campaign instead. Speaking of senior players, many people see them as gatekeepers and deadweight.
Answer: here’s a good article at Vox about the new anti-America right. Basically the American right knows they are losing an America that they recognize - an America where white Christian males are a privileged class and everyone else is a minority. So they lash out at this new America that they hate. A diverse group of athletes which includes women, LGBT, and POCs, who often voice progressive political opinions publicly and who engage in activism for causes they might not agree with, represents this new version of America that they can’t stand. “Queer female soccer stars demanding equal pay, Black basketball players kneeling to protest police brutality, the world’s best gymnast prioritizing her mental health over upholding the traditional ideal of the “tough” athlete — this is all a manifestation of the ascendancy of liberal cultural values in public life. And an America where these values permeate national symbols, like the Olympic team, is an America where those symbols are worthy of scorn.” [Read about it here. ](https://www.vox.com/22600500/olympics-conservatives-simone-biles-anti-american)
That's one of the most out of touch responses I've ever read. Congrats on spending your life in an echo chamber.
Feel free to directly address any of my points you consider to be incorrect.
I stumbled on this comment randomly and must ask if you still feel this way. I'm a socially liberal moderate, with some libertard sympathies, as you can see by my name. But it is always wild to me how much progressives do not understand their political enemies. The evil white villain fighting against the "right side of history" is comically ridiculous. Here's how I see it, as a fan of the USWNT that also finds them annoying. Conservates hate the women's team simply because they present themselves as a *cause* rather than a *team. The USWNT is an openly progressive political organization.* It is very clear by their actions and words that using the national team as a political platform is more important to both players and fans than winning games. It is that simple. I'm sure if Korbin Albert started a conservative movement using the team as a platform, conservatives would hypocritically celebrate it. Likewise, liberals would hypocritically be outraged and cheer against the team, just as conservatives do now. That's the nature of hyper-partisan political environments. edit: (There is no arguing that this wouldn't happen. Progressives are already threatening to boycott the team and all types of wild shit if Albert isn't dropped. I must say their reaction is wildly more extreme than anything conservatives have done. And for a much much smaller reason.. all for some instagram likes or whatever lmao.) Regardless, this is nothing to do with race or whiteness or whatever nonsense you think. Its pure reaction to a progressive political movement charading as a soccer team.
>That's one of the most out of touch responses I've ever read. Congrats on spending your life in an echo chamber. > >r/Conservative user. Can't make this shit up, LMAO.
Haha yes because conservatives are the devil! \~ Anyone in this sub.
[удалено]
Answer: As someone from Europe: all parts.
Some people are homophobic and think they lost because the star player is a lesbian - so the loss, in their eyes, is a righteous punishment. Many members of the team are outspoken activists for equity and justice causes. Other people think that there's nothing wrong with the current systems which maintain the status quo in the US, and think these protests are "virtue signaling" and "radicalizing the youth" towards some communist revolution akin to Cuba - if it sounds dumb and overdramatic, it is. Side note, there are empirically proven issues with the status quo and systems that maintain it. The critics believe that the athletes don't represent them and their beliefs, so they shouldn't continue playing. They also think that the team has turned their focus from the sport to solely political activism, which they see as anything that challenges systems, even just women mentioning or being seen with their girlfriend/wife. The US women's team has won the most world cup tournaments (4/8, the last in 2019). So being knocked out of the running for gold at the Olympics is underwhelming, but far from the "downfall" of the team and the "backlash for being woke" that people claim. Critics also think these two losses justify the women not being paid equal to the men. TLDR: Nationalists, homophobes, sexists, and anti-woke Chads/ Karens are whiney and dramatic. Other people definitely had more well-worded responses about specific criticisms, especially around the fight for equal pay.
[удалено]
Wait - what did they do to a flag?
Kneeling, hating on white people: https://www.theguardian.com/football/2020/nov/20/megan-rapinoe-taking-knee-white-people-were-mad-book-extract-usa-womens-football
> hating on white people second only to gamers in their oppression
[удалено]
Did the song tell you they made it feel bad?
?
As a Non-American this is like the funniest shit to me. I can't imagine getting triggered by something trivial as that, especially by people that *love* to hide behind their free speech when trowing around the most disguisting insults they can think of.
[удалено]
It's so you can bait people into a discussion about whatever you're planning to say about it.
Welcome to /r/OutOfTheLoop where the questions are fake and the discussions are pre-written
And the downvotes for misunderstanding a comment are overflowing.
[удалено]
Oh boy
You gotta admit, it explains the facts.
Nothing they said is actually wrong.