You’re going to hear a talk about money in sport. You will hear the talk twice.

The
first time, just listen. Then I’ll ask you to tell me generally what the speaker is
talking about. Are you ready?

It’s about the arguments for and against equal prize money in sports. The speaker
says we should have equal prize money as it is fairer.

Now listen to the talk again. This time make some notes as you listen, if you want
to. Then I’ll ask you to tell me what arguments the speaker makes for and against
equal prize money in sports, and whether he reaches a conclusion. Are you ready?
Now tell me what arguments the speaker makes for and against equal prize money in
sports, and whether he reaches a conclusion. You have one minute to talk.

Suggested points:

1. Despite rising gender equality, there is still a big gender gap in prize money
in sports
2. It seems morally right to pay men and women the same
3. But, demand drives prize money, and there is less demand for women’s sports
4. If there was more prize money, women’s sports would be more popular
5. More prize money = more girls taking up sport, better level
6. Men have a biological advantage, men’s sport is better
7. But, sport isn’t just about physicality, tactics/excitement are important
8. Unequal prize money sends a bad message to society
9. Most sports have ensured equal prize money, eg athletics
10. The speaker says big, popular sports should do the same

script
The gender pay gap is slowly being closed across the world. Almost every country
has laws to prevent discrimination in salaries based only on gender. But enormous
disparities remain in the prize money offered to men and women in many sports,
especially the most popular ones.

Paying women the same as men for the same work (kicking, throwing, hitting a ball
for 90 minutes) seems morally right. If we want fairness and equality, then we
surely have to push things in that direction.

But I can see why there is still a lot of resistance to the idea. We live in a
capitalist society in which demand drives prices. And it’s clear that more people
go through the turnstiles for men’s events.

This brings us to the chicken and egg nature of the problem. Proponents of equal
prize money say that interest in women’s sport won’t improve until prize money is
increased to raise the level.

There is some logic to this. If a sporting career were more lucrative, more young
girls would take up the sport, especially those in developing countries, and we
could expect the level of play to go up too.

Of course, some would say men’s and women’s sports will never be on the same level.
Men’s bone density and muscle mass gives them an undeniable advantage in many of
the skills required in most sports: running, jumping, throwing and so on.

But football, and indeed almost all team sports, aren’t about running fast and
jumping high. They are about the beauty of the game, the elegance of a well-
executed move, the edge-of-your-seat excitement of a last-minute comeback… None of
these things are exclusive to men’s sports.
There is also a wider principle at stake. We can’t send the message that women are
worth less than men. Most areas of society are addressing this, as women take up
more equal roles in business, politics, the media and most professions. Sport
should be no different.

Studies have shown that a majority of sporting organisations do now ensure equal
prize money. Men and women can expect the same rewards in sports from athletics to
skiing and horse-racing to judo.

The final step to what I consider a much fairer and healthier system, would be for
the governing bodies of the most popular sports, such as football, golf and tennis,
to take similar steps themselves.