With last Wednesday's Women's National Basketball Association draft completed, several female athletes were given a new city to familiarize themselves with, new teammates, fame and a contract offering them $44,000 per year for the first four draft picks.
When comparing this amount to the sum male athletes receive in their NBA rookie year, it's not even a fourth of their salaries. Getting paid to play the game they love is a dream come true for many, but who has the right to balance paychecks based on gender?
Several contenders such as Sylvia Fowles, LaToya Pringle and Alexis Hornbuckle, deserve equal pay for their incredible talents and skill they bring to women's basketball, which is why it is appalling that the organization has yet to increase the salaries of its athletes.
As of 2007, the yearly salary given to rookie athletes in the NBA ranged from $3 million to $1 million, while women in the bottom picks were given an insulting sum of $32,000. Given the WNBA salary statistics, this hardly seems fair considering both genders are athletes whether or not one happens to have any extra chromosome.
Most people might argue that men are paid more because the NBA has been around longer than the WNBA, which was established 12 years ago. Even though this is true, it does not mean the energy and heart that is given on the court and to the fans at every game is any different than what has been displayed in the NBA over the last 63 years.
Biological differences should not be an issue when dealing with the dedication and achievements these athletes have received. These women are playing at the highest level possible, and for their hard work they are rewarded by low income and little appreciation.
Men's basketball may be more appealing and profitable, but with recent talents such as Candace Parker and the return of Lisa Leslie playing for the Los Angeles Sparks, ticket prices are guaranteed to soar for the same reason why the Lady Vols women's basketball team is more profitable than the men's.
When people are intrigued by what they witness in a player or college team, they are more likely to follow the athletes' professional careers.
For example, many women college teams have surpassed the male college teams by captivating fans all over the world. Thinking back to the days of Lindsay Harding and how she almost led the Duke Blue Devils to a national championship while Duke's men team struggled for success. With the men's team only turning out one NBA eligible player for the draft in 2007, it seems Gail Goestenkors harvested more talent in Allison Bales and Harding, who were selected in the first round of the 2007 WNBA draft.
When Harding returned to Duke University, her name and college career had become so recognizable that her jersey was retired. Female players such as Harding exist across the globe on various teams, which is why the WNBA should reward these individuals equally.
The fact that women athletes are underpaid for their efforts does not sit well with the sport considering athletes may begin to stray away from the game to pursue other options such as playing overseas.
Women athletes playing overseas are paid around $500,000, which is a huge improvement than the salaries offered in the WNBA. Furthermore living in a society where money equals power, men with extraordinary talents would seek the same opportunity overseas if they were not awarded the amount they wanted upon request.
Basically, women athletes do not have a choice in the matter; therefore, they are thankful for what they receive, but the fact that they put in the same amount of work as men and are disregarded for their efforts does not reflect well on the WNBA. Women's basketball has come a long way since 1996, but with unfair salaries being offered to its athletes, it only shows that the sport has even more progress to make.
1 comments