2 of 10

Write now Article Tools

Men: The New Underclass?

"We don't need men anymore!"

That is according to a spirited 23 year old work colleague. She continues, "There's enough sperm on ice for us to do away with you lot altogether. Men really are a waste of space these days!"

And so arrived the new underclass: the biggest minority in the western world is now surplus to the procreational requirements of the female of the species. Our uselessness is finally and irrefutably confirmed... at least to subscribers of 'femthink'.

This year's tennis tournament at Wimbledon nicely demonstrates the rising dominance of femthink: the women's prize money matches that of the men for the first time in history, largely as a response to lobbying by Venus Williams. Last year she said, "It's really about an equality issue, about being created as equals, as human beings... We're the premier sport for women. We would like to empower women around the world by showing that we are willing to fight for equality."

So, with that strident justification, it now seems that women deserve equal prize money to men - despite playing only the best-of-three sets of tennis per match compared to the best-of-five for the men.

Why do they deserve the same prize if they play fewer games per match? Because, we are told, the female style of playing is more interesting, with better' rallies. After all, men merely serve rocket-propelled balls at each other and rarely return them. It's barely tennis we play these days, and certainly not as entertaining as the women. Anyway, the femthinkers continue, tournaments are about achieving a win and not about being paid per game or set.

So, they say, let's ignore the fact that men's matches last longer, are physically more demanding and usually significantly longer - women have a right to equal pay. Never mind the inherent inequality equal prize money creates.

The reality is that women tennis players generally earn more than men. Why? Because they play fewer sets per match, which leaves them able to play more matches such as doubles and achieve additional prize money that way. They also play fewer games than men within a match, which means their per game earnings are actually higher.

So the hysterical femthinkers, including the UK's Culture Secretary, Tessa Jowell - who put pressure on Wimbledon's bosses to equalize the prizes because such an outdated inequality was "tarnishing the image

• 1
• 2
• next page >>

Add your voice

Know something about Have women gone too far? Equality of the sexes turned upside down?
We want to hear your view. Write now!