Actress <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/celebrities">Olivia Colema</a>n insists she’d be paid more if she were a man.
The 50-year-old British star spoke candidly about the perceived gender <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/gender-wage-gap">pay gap</a> in <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/hollywood">Hollywood</a> as a guest on CNN’s “The Amanpour Hour.” 
“Don’t get me started on the pay disparity, but male actors get paid more because they used to say they drew in the audiences,” the actress said. “And actually, that hasn’t been true for decades but they still like to use that as a reason to not pay women as much as their male counterparts.”
Amanpour asked if she herself was being underpaid even though she’s an Oscar-winning actress.
“I’m very aware that if I was Oliver Colman, I’d be earning a f*** of a lot more than I am,” Coleman replied. “I know of one pay disparity, which is a 12,000% difference.”
<blockquote class="instagram-media" style="background: #FFF; border: 0; border-radius: 3px; box-shadow: 0 0 1px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.5),0 1px 10px 0 rgba(0,0,0,0.15); margin: 1px; max-width: 540px; min-width: 326px; padding: 0; width: calc(100% - 2px);" data-instgrm-captioned="" data-instgrm-permalink="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C44SPXiCw6o/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" data-instgrm-version="14">
<div style="padding: 16px;">
&nbsp;
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; align-items: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 40px; margin-right: 14px; width: 40px;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 100px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 60px;"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 19% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: block; height: 50px; margin: 0 auto 12px; width: 50px;"></div>
<div style="padding-top: 8px;">
<div style="color: #3897f0; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: 550; line-height: 18px;">View this post on Instagram</div>
</div>
<div style="padding: 12.5% 0;"></div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: row; margin-bottom: 14px; align-items: center;">
<div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(0px) translateY(7px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; height: 12.5px; transform: rotate(-45deg) translateX(3px) translateY(1px); width: 12.5px; flex-grow: 0; margin-right: 14px; margin-left: 2px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; height: 12.5px; width: 12.5px; transform: translateX(9px) translateY(-18px);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: 8px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 50%; flex-grow: 0; height: 20px; width: 20px;"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 2px solid transparent; border-left: 6px solid #f4f4f4; border-bottom: 2px solid transparent; transform: translateX(16px) translateY(-4px) rotate(30deg);"></div>
</div>
<div style="margin-left: auto;">
<div style="width: 0px; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-right: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(16px);"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; flex-grow: 0; height: 12px; width: 16px; transform: translateY(-4px);"></div>
<div style="width: 0; height: 0; border-top: 8px solid #F4F4F4; border-left: 8px solid transparent; transform: translateY(-4px) translateX(8px);"></div>
</div>
</div>
<div style="display: flex; flex-direction: column; flex-grow: 1; justify-content: center; margin-bottom: 24px;">
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; margin-bottom: 6px; width: 224px;"></div>
<div style="background-color: #f4f4f4; border-radius: 4px; flex-grow: 0; height: 14px; width: 144px;"></div>
</div>
&nbsp;
<p style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; line-height: 17px; margin-bottom: 0; margin-top: 8px; overflow: hidden; padding: 8px 0 7px; text-align: center; text-overflow: ellipsis; white-space: nowrap;"><a style="color: #c9c8cd; font-family: Arial,sans-serif; font-size: 14px; font-style: normal; font-weight: normal; line-height: 17px; text-decoration: none;" href="https://www.instagram.com/reel/C44SPXiCw6o/?utm_source=ig_embed&amp;utm_campaign=loading" target="_blank" rel="noopener">A post shared by CNN (@cnn)</a>
</div>
</blockquote>
<script async src="//www.instagram.com/embed.js"></script>
The actress is best known stateside for her portrayal of Queen Elizabeth in the hit Netflix period drama series “The Crown” during season 3 and season 4, a part that earned her a Golden Globe Award and Primetime Emmy Award for Outstanding Lead Actress. She also won a BAFTA for her work on the critically acclaimed ITV crime drama series “Broadchurch.”
Coleman won an Oscar for her portrayal of Anne, Queen of Great Britain in “The Favourite” (2018). She also received Academy Award nominations for her performances in the dramas “The Father” (2020) and “The Lost Daughter” (2021).
The topic of pay disparity between different sexes and races has been a hot topic in Hollywood for some time. Recently, actress Taraji P. Henson made similar comments about black female actors not being paid their worth.
“I’m just tired of working so hard, being gracious at what I do, getting paid a fraction of the cost,” Henson said during an appearance on Gayle King’s SiriusXM show in December 2023, as The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/the-color-purple-actress-cries-while-claiming-shes-underpaid-in-hollywood-the-math-aint-mathing">reported</a>. 
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1700760801843000&amp;usg=AOvVaw2PQrVSrJfhxNb4LcARqniG">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
“I’m tired of hearing my sisters say the same thing over and over. You get tired. I hear people go, ‘You work a lot.’ I have to,” she said. “The math ain’t math-ing. And you start working a lot, you have a team. Big bills come with what we do. We don’t do this alone. It’s a whole team behind us. They have to get paid.”
“They play in your face. And I’m just supposed to smile and grin and bear and just keep going,” Henson added. “Enough is enough.”

Olivia Coleman

‘The Crown’ Actress Insists She’d Be Paid ‘A F*** Lot More’ If She Were A Man

'The Crown' Actress Insists She'd Be Paid 'A F*** Lot More' If She Were A Man

Celebrities

Entertainment

Gender Wage Gap

Hollywood

Television

World

The Office of Personnel Management, the agency which manages the civilian <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/diversity-equity-and-inclusion-dei" target="_blank" rel="noopener">workforce</a> for the federal government, announced a proposed <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/biden-administration" target="_blank" rel="noopener">ban</a> on using previous salary history for setting payment offers, a move which officials contend will narrow the <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/gender-wage-gap" target="_blank" rel="noopener">gender wage gap</a>.
The new proposed <a href="https://public-inspection.federalregister.gov/2023-09564.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">rules</a> would prohibit federal entities from considering salary history for employees in the General Schedule pay system, which currently incorporates 1.3 million members of the federal workforce. Agencies would instead need to rely on factors such as payment precedent for other employees with the same level of skill and experience.
“These proposed regulations are a major step forward that will help make the federal government a national leader in pay equity,” Office of Personnel Management Director Kiran Ahuja said in a <a href="https://www.opm.gov/news/releases/2023/04/opm-releases-proposed-regulations-to-prohibit-use-of-previous-salary-history/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">press release</a>. “Relying on a candidate’s previous salary history can exacerbate preexisting inequality and disproportionally impact women and workers of color. With these proposed regulations, the Biden-Harris administration is setting the standard and demonstrating to the nation that we mean business when it comes to equality, fairness, and attracting the best talent.”
The Office of Personnel Management contended in the release that “implementing salary history bans can narrow the gender wage gap” and reduce “disparities for workers of color compared to white workers.” The federal gender pay gap for the civilian workforce was 5.6% as of last year.
Research has shown, on the other hand, that women <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/equal-pay-day-2021-where-do-women-actually-stand" target="_blank" rel="noopener">tend</a> to earn less than men because of factors such as the types of careers they choose, the number of hours they work, and the decisions they often make to exempt themselves from the workforce in order to raise children or care for elderly family members. Recent decreases in wage disparity may be attributable to the increased proportion of women entering fields historically preferred by men.
The proposed rules referenced an executive order from President Joe Biden to achieve “diversity, equity, inclusion, and accessibility” in the federal workforce, as well as a strategic <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/11/Strategic-Plan-to-Advance-Diversity-Equity-Inclusion-and-Accessibility-in-the-Federal-Workforce-11.23.21.pdf" target="_blank" rel="noopener">plan</a> which includes an “equity roadmap” calling for “policies that do not rely solely on prior salary history” to establish payment schedules. “Even with decades of progress building a federal workforce that draws from the full diversity of the nation, many underserved communities remain under-represented in the federal workforce, especially in positions of leadership,” the plan said.
<a href="https://onelink.to/dwapp" target="_blank" rel="noopener noreferrer" aria-describedby="sk-tooltip-9096" data-saferedirecturl="https://www.google.com/url?q=https://onelink.to/dwapp&amp;source=gmail&amp;ust=1683889239589000&amp;usg=AOvVaw0YVszuCUxjiJugNbMwvMfx">CLICK HERE TO GET THE DAILYWIRE+ APP</a>
The diversity, equity, and inclusion movement, also known as DEI or DEIA, acquired a larger <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/technology-firms-send-diversity-czars-packing-in-bid-to-become-more-profitable" target="_blank" rel="noopener">foothold</a> in the public and private sectors after the social justice movement which spread across the nation three years ago. The Biden administration <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2023/02/16/executive-order-on-further-advancing-racial-equity-and-support-for-underserved-communities-through-the-federal-government/" target="_blank" rel="noopener">operates</a> under a “whole-of-government approach to racial equity and support for underserved communities” and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/turned-government-funded-racism-into-an-art-biden-creates-army-of-equity-bureaucrats-across-the-federal-government-with-latest-executive-order" target="_blank" rel="noopener">mandated</a> earlier this year that members of the Cabinet must create “agency equity teams” to ensure federal workforces are sufficiently diverse.
Biden has announced on several other occasions that he would make critical nomination decisions based on the race and sex of the appointees. White House Press Secretary Karine Jean-Pierre recently <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/musk-rebukes-white-house-over-plans-to-choose-new-federal-reserve-vice-chair-with-diversity-in-mind" target="_blank" rel="noopener">said</a> that officials would “look at a highly diverse group of world-class economists” when selecting the next vice chair of the Federal Reserve because of the administration’s commitment to “diversity and representation.”

Joe Biden and Kamala Harris

White House Makes New Move To Purge ‘Gender Pay Gap’ From Federal Government

White House Bans Considering Salary History When Hiring To Purge 'Gender Pay Gap' From Federal Government

Biden Administration

Diversity Equity and Inclusion (DEI)

Women

In what is being called an “equal pay” agreement between the U.S. Soccer Federation and the U.S. men’s and women’s national teams, the men’s team will soon begin subsidizing the women’s team’s bonuses with their own international prize money.
The landmark agreement was reached after years litigation between U.S. Soccer and members of the U.S. Women’s National Team (USWNT), who claimed they were unfairly paid differently than the U.S. Men’s National Team (USMNT). The women made this claim even though each team had their own separate collective bargaining agreement about their pay structure.
To achieve “equal pay,” <a href="https://www.nytimes.com/2022/05/18/sports/soccer/us-soccer-equal-pay-deal.html">according to The New York Times</a>, “U.S. Soccer will distribute millions of extra dollars to its best players through a complicated calculus of increased match bonuses, pooled prize money and new revenue-sharing agreements that will give each team a slice of the tens of millions of dollars in commercial revenues that U.S. Soccer receives each year from sponsors, broadcasters and other partners.”
According to the new agreement, U.S. Soccer will play each player $18,000 for most matches and up to $24,000 for wins at certain major tournaments. Top players may also receive more. U.S. Soccer also said it would give upward of 90% of the money it receives from FIFA for World Cup competitions and split that money between the men’s and women’s players, which could “result in a shared prize pool of more than $20 million as soon as next year,” the Times reported.
Most of that revenue comes from the men’s team&#8217;s World Cup revenue, The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-why-womens-soccer-team-isnt-paid-much-mens-ashe-schow">reported</a>. The women’s soccer team brings in less money because it has fewer viewers than men’s soccer overall. This changes when the women’s team makes it to the World Cup, something the U.S. Men’s team hasn’t done.
The Washington Post <a href="https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2019/07/08/are-us-womens-soccer-players-really-earning-less-than-men/">reported</a> in 2019 that &#8220;Overall, from fiscal 2016 to 2018, the women’s games generated about $900,000 more revenue than the men’s games. In the year following the 2015 World Cup win, women’s games generated $1.9 million more than the men’s games.&#8221; The outlet noted, however, that the calculation leaves out fiscal 2015, which included a men&#8217;s World Cup cycle. Extending the calculation to include the men&#8217;s World Cup cycle and the women&#8217;s World Cup, the men&#8217;s team brought in $10.8 million more for U.S. Soccer, the federation told the Post.
But the revenue question is more complicated than that, the Post reported. While the men may have brought in more gross revenue, their net revenue was less than the women&#8217;s team, due to a number of factors such as salaries, bonuses, and expenses changing in recent years.
Prior to the new agreement, the women’s team received a higher percentage of revenue than the men’s team, though the revenue is lower. CBS <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/questions-of-equal-pay-brought-to-light-after-womens-world-cup-win/">reported</a> in 2015 that the men’s team received 9% of the revenue generated by the 2010 World Cup — which amounted to $348 million. The women’s team received 13% of the 2015 World Cup revenue, but because the women’s team brought in less revenue, they only received $10 million. Now the women’s team will get some of the hundreds of millions of dollars that men’s team brings in World Cup revenue.
The women’s team also received a base salary and benefits, which the men’s team did not.
U.S. Soccer President Cindy Parlow Cone told the Times that the new contracts would affect the larger mission of the organization.
“There’s no denying that money that we have to pay our national teams is money that’s not reinvested in the game,” he told the outlet. “And people can take that perspective. But the way I look at it is that our job is to try to figure out how all three groups can work together to grow the pie so that everyone is benefiting.”

Korea Republic v United States

U.S. Women’s Soccer ‘Equal Pay’ Agreement Includes Men’s Team Now Subsidizing Their Pay

U.S. Soccer Federation, U.S. Women's Soccer Team, Reach 'Equal Pay' Agreement

Women's Soccer

WNBA star Brittney Griner has been detained in Russia since some time in February after Russian Federal Customs Service officials say they found vape cartridges containing hashish oil after searching her luggage. 
The timing of the arrest came at a terrible time for Griner, coinciding with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. 
Surprisingly, Griner’s detainment has not been front-page news, with WNBA great Lisa Leslie saying in March that she was told not to make a &#8220;big fuss&#8221; over Griner’s arrest lest Griner be used as a pawn by Russia. 
&#8220;What we were told, and again this is all sort of passed along through hearsay, but what we were told was to not make a big fuss about it so that they could not use her as a pawn, so to speak, in this situation in the war,&#8221; Leslie <a href="https://www.cnn.com/2022/03/25/sport/lisa-leslie-brittney-griner-spt/index.html">said</a>. &#8220;So, to make it like it&#8217;s not that important or don&#8217;t make it where we&#8217;re like, &#8216;Free Brittney&#8217; and we start this campaign, and then it becomes something that they can use.&#8221;
But members of the WNBA are beginning to speak out on Griner’s detainment, with WNBA Players Association President and current member of the LA Sparks Nneka Ogwumike joining ABC&#8217;s &#8220;Good Morning America&#8221; on Tuesday to bring attention to the situation. 
“BG [Brittney Griner] is us. We are BG,” Ogwumike said. “That could have been us. We’re really most concerned about her health and safety. Especially her mental health. We’re hearing, in that respect, she’s ok. But we want her home.” 
“Given the nature of Brittney’s situation, when it happened, it was very important for us to be intentional about doing the best thing to ensure that we don’t compromise her coming home,” Ogwumike continued. “So, a lot of that had to do with educating ourselves about the details about what was going on, as much as we could know, but then understanding how important it was for us to be strategic about when and how we speak about her.”
Ogwumike was asked whether the lack of publicity around Griner’s detainment was a “gender issue,” to which Ogwumike stated that the only reason Griner was in Russia was because of her gender, as many WNBA players play overseas during the offseason in order to make additional money.
“When is it not? You advocate for us in so many respects,” Ogwumike said. “It’s disappointing that the question of it being a gender issue is top of mind now when it comes to this type of circumstance. But the reality is that she’s over there because of a gender issue. Pay inequity. I played in Russia for four years, I played in Poland for one year, I played in China for two years. We go over there to supplement our incomes. And quite frankly, we go over there to maintain our game.”
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
EXCLUSIVE: WNBA Players Association President <a href="https://twitter.com/nnekaogwumike?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@nnekaogwumike</a> speaks to <a href="https://twitter.com/GMA?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">@GMA</a> about efforts to bring Brittney Griner home from Russia.<a href="https://t.co/ldTRCw6tzC">https://t.co/ldTRCw6tzC</a>
&mdash; Good Morning America (@GMA) <a href="https://twitter.com/GMA/status/1513850861893603334?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">April 12, 2022</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
It’s the same sentiment expressed by Aron Solomon, chief legal analyst for Esquire Digital, who spoke with <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/shes-a-political-prisoner-wnbas-brittney-griner-remains-in-russia">The Daily Wire</a> in March. 
“I think that while Russia really sees her as being somebody great to take as a political prisoner, the reality is this is indicative of how a lot of people in the United States see women’s sport,” Solomon told The Daily Wire. “And of course, people might be thinking, ‘Why was Brittney Griner in Russia in the first place?’”
“It’s because she can’t earn the kind of living in the WNBA that our athletes should want to live,” he continued. “And there’s one great quote from about five years ago from Diana Taurasi, who’s actually a teammate of Brittney Griner’s for UMMC Ekaterinburg. She said … ‘We had to go to a communist country to get paid like capitalists.’ Which is so backwards to everything that was in the history books in sixth grade.”
On Monday, WNBA commissioner Cathy Engelbert said the league is “trying everything” they can to assist in her release. 
&#8220;This is an unimaginable situation for BG to be in,&#8221; Engelbert <a href="https://www.espn.com/wnba/story/_/id/33720397/as-brittney-griner-detention-continues-star-center-continues-our-full-support-wnba-cathy-engelbert-says-draft">said</a>. &#8220;She continues to have our full support. Certainly, we&#8217;re trying everything we can, every angle, working with her legal representation, her agent, elected leaders, the administration. Just everybody in our ecosystem to try and find ways to get her home safely and as quickly as we can.&#8221;
Joe Morgan is the Sports Reporter for The Daily Wire. Most recently, Morgan covered the Clippers, Lakers, and the NBA for Sporting News. Send your sports questions to sports@dailywire.com.

Phoenix Mercury v Las Vegas Aces – Game Five

‘When Is It Not?’: WNBA Players Association President Suggests Lack Of Attention Around Brittney Griner’s Detainment A ‘Gender Issue’

Russia

WNBA

The verified Women’s March account on Twitter published a tweet lamenting the amount of student debt held by women, but misstated the math in the tweet.
“Women hold $929 BILLION in student debt, two-thirds of the nation’s ENTIRE $1.7 trillion student debt load,” the Women’s March tweeted. “This is a gender justice issue. <a href="https://twitter.com/POTUS">@POTUS</a> cancel student debt and put an end to this crisis.”
To start, $929 billion is 54.6% of $1.7 trillion, closer to half than two-thirds.
The implications from the Women’s March are also wrong. The tweet and the group’s history of claiming women victimhood suggest it is unfair that women hold so much debt. In reality, women are doing better than men when it comes to college debt. Women make up 59.5% of all college students as of spring 2021, The Wall Street Journal <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/college-university-fall-higher-education-men-women-enrollment-admissions-back-to-school-11630948233">reported</a>, while men made up just 40.5% of enrollment.
This means that while women make up 59.5% of students, they hold just 54.6% of the debt, while men – who make up just 40.5% of students – hold 45.4% of the debt.
There are reasons for this discrepancy, which I <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/womens-group-complains-about-women-holding-most-ashe-schow">wrote about</a> three years ago when the embattled #MeToo organization Time’s Up made a similar claim to the one being made by the Women’s March now.
Women may earn more degrees than men, but they’re still earning degrees that lead to lower-paying jobs after college. As I’ve reported numerous times before, nine of the top 10 lowest paying majors are dominated by women, while nine of the top 10 highest paying majors are dominated by men — and women in large cities actually out-earn their male peers just out of college.
A recent <a href="https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/2021-update-for-every-100-girls-part-i/">chart</a> from American Enterprise Institute scholar Mark Perry goes even deeper into the discrepancies between men and women in numerous aspects in life. Perry found that for every 100 women who earn a bachelor’s degree, just 73 men earn one. And for every 100 women who earn a master’s degree, just 56 men earn one. The numbers are slightly closer for doctorates: For every 100 women who earn one, 85 men do.
There’s a deeper issue with the Women’s March tweet, which goes to the issue of canceling student debt. In 2019, The Daily Wire’s Matt Walsh listed <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/walsh-six-reasons-why-student-loan-forgiveness-matt-walsh">six reasons</a> why student loan forgiveness is a financially and morally bad idea. One reason why canceling student debt would be a bad idea is because it would allow colleges and universities to continue increasing their prices without improving educational outcomes, as the National Review noted years ago:
<blockquote>In inflation-adjusted terms, government spending on higher education has never been higher. In has climbed by nearly $2,000 per student (in inflation-adjusted dollars) since 2001. As the Foundation for Economic Education points out, Pell Grant spending alone rose 72 percent in the few short years from 2008 to 2013. Tuition and other expenses have risen right along with that spending, driven mainly by an explosion in administrative costs. In the 1980s, there were about twice as many professors as administrators on our college payrolls; today, that number has been reversed, and there are about twice as many administrators and staff as instructors. Administrative spending has increased substantially relative to spending on instruction — and both are much higher in real per-student terms.</blockquote>
Canceling that student debt wouldn’t mean the money evaporates into thin air; the cost would be pushed onto people who didn’t agree to pay back a loan and then complain about the cost, such as working-class Americans who didn’t go to college because they couldn’t afford it. It would also be pushed on to the millions who repaid their own student debt.
As Walsh noted, “nobody forced anyone to take out these loans”:
<blockquote>If you have student debt, you agreed to it. You signed on the dotted line. You made a legal arrangement. It does not make moral or logical sense for a third party to enter the picture and say, “You don’t have to fulfill your obligations and keep your promises.” I know we are way past worrying about silly things like the Constitution, but how does the State even have the Constitutional right to appropriate funds from one citizen in order to fulfill the financial obligations of another?</blockquote>
Walsh also noted that the arguments for canceling student debt could also apply to mortgage, car, credit card, or other debt.
“If you’re struggling with student debt and you’re handed a get-out-of-jail-free card, and I didn’t go to college but I’m struggling to pay my mortgage, should I not be offered the same deal? If your debt is a public emergency, why isn’t my debt also an emergency?” Walsh wrote.
The Daily Wire’s first original film, Shut In, has made its cinematic debut, being met with rave reviews. The Daily Wire is building an alternative to the leftist entertainment industry, one gripping movie at a time. Join us in this mission and stream Shut In today by becoming a Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

womensmarch

Women’s March Complains About Women Holding More Student Debt, Gets Math Wrong

Student Loans

Women's March

Megan Rapinoe, the outspoken and controversial star of the U.S. Women’s National Soccer Team (USWNT), bragged Tuesday morning after the women’s team settled with the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) for about a third of what the women originally demanded.
“I think the door&#8217;s already been opened, to be honest,” Rapinoe <a href="https://www.today.com/news/sports/us-womens-soccer-equal-pay-agreement-megan-rapinoe-alex-morgan-rcna17140">told </a>NBC&#8217;s Today Show, <a href="https://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-10538593/American-women-players-settle-suit-vs-US-Soccer-24M.html">according to</a> the Daily Mail. “You look at the women&#8217;s hockey team. It seems like everywhere you look, here we are performing well beyond just the constraints of our sport. I think we are really in the midst of a an incredible turning point in women&#8217;s sports”
“I think we&#8217;re all going to look back on this moment with incredible pride. If you&#8217;re not paying attention to this right now and what&#8217;s happening in women&#8217;s sports, you&#8217;re sleeping on the whole thing,” Rapinoe added. “For us as players I&#8217;m just so proud of the way we stuck together and really just kind of put our foot down. This is a huge win for us.”
The women’s team first sued the USSF six years ago after their 2015 World Cup win
The deal reached between the women’s team and the USSF on Tuesday will give the players $22 million to split, which is about one-third of the money they demanded in their lawsuit, the Associated Press <a href="https://www.bostonglobe.com/2022/02/22/sports/american-women-players-settle-suit-vs-us-soccer-24m/">reported</a>. “USSF also agreed to establish a fund with $2 million to benefit the players in their post-soccer careers and charitable efforts aimed at growing the sport for women,” the outlet added.
The USSF also committed “committed to providing an equal rate of pay for the women’s and men’s national teams — including World Cup bonuses — subject to collective bargaining agreements with the unions that separately represent the women and men,” according to the outlet.
As The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-womens-soccer-team-wants-to-appeal-pay-discrimination-ruling-that-determined-they-rejected-equal-pay">reported</a>, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner dismissed the women’s pay discrimination claim in 2020 because they had rejected to be paid using the same structure as the men’s team.
“The WNT was willing to forgo higher bonuses for benefits, such as greater base compensation and the guarantee of a higher number of contracted players,” Klausner wrote in his ruling. “Accordingly, plaintiffs cannot now retroactively deem their CBA (collective bargaining agreement) worse than the MNT (men’s national team) CBA by reference to what they would have made had they been paid under the MNT’s pay-to-play terms structure when they themselves rejected such a structure.”
It is unclear exactly how the USSF will equalize World Cup bonuses, since those are based on payments from FIFA, an international organization not included in the women’s team’s lawsuit. FIFA in 2018 earmarked $400 million for the 2018 men’s tournament, which included $38 million to the championship team from France. FIFA only earmarked $30 million for the 2019 women’s tournament, including $4 million to the U.S. championship team.
Back in 2015, CBS <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/questions-of-equal-pay-brought-to-light-after-womens-world-cup-win/">reported</a> that the men’s team received 9% of the revenue generated by the 2010 World Cup — which amounted to $348 million. The women’s team received 13% of the 2015 World Cup revenue, but because the women’s team brought in less revenue, they only received $10 million.
The women’s team also receives a base salary and benefits, which the men’s team does not.
The Daily Wire’s first original film, Shut In, has made its cinematic debut, being met with rave reviews. The Daily Wire is building an alternative to the leftist entertainment industry, one gripping movie at a time. Join us in this mission and stream Shut In today by becoming a Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/subscribe">member</a>.

Portland Thorns FC v OL Reign

‘This Is A Huge Win!’: Megan Rapinoe Brags After U.S. Women’s Soccer Team Settles Pay Discrimination Lawsuit For $24 Million

Megan Rapinoe

The Biden administration <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/statements-releases/2021/10/22/fact-sheet-national-strategy-on-gender-equity-and-equality/">released</a> the “<a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/wp-content/uploads/2021/10/National-Strategy-on-Gender-Equity-and-Equality.pdf">National Strategy on Gender Equity and Equality</a>” last Friday. “This is our vision for the future of our nation—one that is bold in strategy,” <a href="https://twitter.com/VP/status/1452002385526603777">said</a> an enthusiastic Vice President Kamala Harris.
Yet a close look at the 42-page report finds that it seeks to profoundly change “social and cultural norms” about gender identity, eradicate “harmful gender norms” like masculinity and femininity, radically expand abortion funding at home and overseas, promote transgenderism and the erasure of women, fund universal pre-K around the world, promote sex education, institute new gun control laws, and prevent anyone from using the internet to “intimidate” any woman.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
President Biden and I released the first ever National Gender Strategy. This is our vision for the future of our nation—one that is bold in strategy and one that this moment calls for.<a href="https://t.co/89T8lDmkIM">https://t.co/89T8lDmkIM</a>
&mdash; Vice President Kamala Harris (@VP) <a href="https://twitter.com/VP/status/1452002385526603777?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">October 23, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
The new, <a href="https://therightswriter.com/2020/11/kamala-harris-equality-vs-equity-video-endorses-injustice-and-discrimination/">equity-focused</a> program was developed pursuant to an <a href="https://www.whitehouse.gov/briefing-room/presidential-actions/2021/03/08/executive-order-on-establishment-of-the-white-house-gender-policy-council/">executive order</a> signed by President Joe Biden on March 8. The report makes clear that it seeks profound “structural change” to the way Americans think about gender and gender identity/transgenderism. “Building back better requires not just policy reform, but also a shift in the social and cultural norms that undermine gender equity and equality,” from the administration’s perspective.
Here are a few of the most controversial and misguided aspects of the report:
Gender pay gap: The new gender equity plan calls itself “a roadmap to help our nation close pernicious gender gaps.” The report insists that, in “the United States, the wage gap remains a stubbornly persistent problem. In 2020, full-time year-round working women on average made only 83 cents on the dollar as compared to men — with women of color paid even less.” It promises, “We will also promote pay transparency, taking steps to increase analysis of pay gaps on the basis of gender, race, and other factors, and outline plans to eliminate these disparities.”
But the plan ignores the fact that millions of independent life choices lie behind those economic outcomes. Numerous surveys have shown that working mothers prefer flexibility to money or job status; one poll found that <a href="https://money.usnews.com/money/blogs/outside-voices-careers/2011/11/17/professional-women-choosing-flexibility-over-higher-pay">40%</a> of women would take a pay cut for more family-friendly hours. The Pew Research Center <a href="http://www.pewsocialtrends.org/2013/03/14/chapter-6-time-in-work-and-leisure-patterns-by-gender-and-family-structure/">found</a> in 2013 that, while fathers with children under the age of 18 work seven hours a week more than men with no children at home “mothers spend less time [three hours a week] in paid work than working-age women without children at home” – and 13 hours a week less than fathers.
In practice, mothers with children at home put in less time at the office and more time with their kids. Who is the Biden administration to say that’s the wrong choice for them?
Universal pre-K all over the world: “We will also promote universal pre-kindergarten education, giving a head start to our earliest learners,” the report says. The Biden administration truly means “universal” daycare, as it intends to promote pre-K worldwide. To “strengthen the global care infrastructure,” the Biden administration will “leverage our role in multilateral economic institutions to promote government and private sector investment in care, including child, elder, and health care, and universal early childhood education, as well as support programs that expand access to and availability of care.” Underwriting these services for every country in the world would amount to an enormous amount of money, on top of the administration’s multi-trillion-dollar spending packages at home.
Promoting transgender identity and destroying women’s sports: The administration makes clear that its plan to help women will in fact help many males at the expense of females. The Biden administration declares itself the enemy of any traditional sense of masculinity or femininity. “We also combat discrimination and harmful gender norms that affect people of all genders: women and girls — including transgender women and girls — gender nonbinary and gender nonconforming people, as well as men and boys,” the plan says. (Emphasis added.)
Among those it pledges to support is “[t]he transgender athlete who dreams of the chance to compete free from discrimination,” the report states in a sentence fragment. Yet the plan promotes this self-contradictory policy: “We will promote equitable access to sports and school facilities for all student athletes; support athletics participation by girls, who currently participate at much lower levels than boys in elementary and secondary school sports; and promote respect for the gender identity of all students, faculty, and staff.”
The administration will appoint &#8220;diverse&#8221; judges for justice: “The [a]dministration will continue to prioritize the nomination and appointment of a diverse and representative group of people to the federal bench who are committed to ensuring equal rights under the law, including for women, girls, and gender nonconforming people.”
The plan will also try to place, among others, transgender ex-cons in the workplace. “We will also address barriers to reentry into the labor force from the criminal justice system, particularly those barriers that are unique to women, girls, and gender nonconforming people,” it says.
Abortion: The Biden administration promises nothing less than a radical transformation of abortion funding in the United States and abroad. But it does so under the pseudonym of “protecting, improving, and expanding access to health care, including sexual and reproductive health care.”
Abortion is not health care and violates the Hippocratic Oath taken by those in the healing arts, which <a href="https://www.csun.edu/~hcfll004/hippocr.html">states</a>, “I will give no deadly medicine to anyone if asked, nor suggest any such advice; likewise, I will not give a pessary to a woman to induce abortion.” Yet the report states:
<blockquote>As part of expanding access to health care, we must protect and strengthen access to reproductive health care. Reproductive health and rights in the United States are under attack, in spite of the Supreme Court’s recognition of the constitutional right to abortion in Roe v. Wade nearly fifty years ago. Over the past several decades, women in the United States have faced a growing number of obstacles to and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/media-bias-101-pro-life-restrictions-vs-pro-abortion-protections">restrictions</a> on reproductive health care, including safe and legal abortion, which have disproportionately affected and harmed women of color and others in underserved and historically marginalized communities. Most recently, Texas passed a state law that blatantly violates women’s constitutional rights, as recognized under Roe v. Wade and upheld as precedent for nearly five decades, thereby eviscerating access to abortion in our nation’s second largest state and threatening reproductive rights across the country. The Supreme Court is already poised this term to hear the greatest challenge to Roe in a generation, putting women’s fundamental rights on the line. </blockquote>
The report listed specific policies it will take to promote abortion-on-demand:
<ul>
<li>“[T]he repeal of the Hyde Amendment, because health care should not depend on a person’s income or zip code.” <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/fact-check-do-most-americans-oppose-the-hyde-amendment">The Hyde Amendment</a>, which has protected American taxpayers from funding most abortions through Medicaid since 1976, has the support of <a href="https://www.kofc.org/en/resources/news-room/polls/kofc-americans-opinions-on-abortion012021.pdf">58%</a> of Americans.</li>
<li>“We will strengthen access to the full range of family planning services by restoring and expanding the Title X program, our nation’s only family planning program.” President Biden <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-reverses-ban-on-sending-title-x-federal-funds-to-abortion-referring-clinics">reversed</a> President Trump’s pro-life policy, preventing Title X recipients (largely Planned Parenthood) from referring women for an abortion.</li>
<li>“Globally, we will seek to end the harmful Global Gag Rule that restricts women’s access to critical health information and services.” The Mexico City Policy, which President Ronald Reagan first enacted in 1984, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/4-pro-life-policies-joe-biden-has-scrapped-in-his-first-100-days">prevents</a> taxpayer funds from paying for, referring, recommending, or lobbying for the legalization of abortion-on-demand in foreign nations. More than three-quarters (77%) of Americans, including 55% of Democrats, oppose compelling taxpayers to fund abortions overseas.</li>
</ul>
The report claims that pro-life laws protecting the unborn “undermine women’s ability to take care of their families.”
Perhaps because the administration knows how deeply unpopular its agenda is, its discussion of abortion is almost always surrounded by more popular concepts as a smokescreen: “From the Emancipation Proclamation, to the passage of the 19th Amendment, to the Voting Rights Act and the Civil Rights Act, to the fight for reproductive rights and [redefining marriage].” Its abortion advocacy is presented alongside “responding to gender-based violence” and staving off purportedly “grave threats” to “voting rights.”
Promoting sex education globally: The report states that the U.S. taxpayer “will support medically-accurate, inclusive, age-appropriate sex education,” which it claims “will reduce teen and unintended pregnancies.” Inclusive sex education means explaining both transgenderism and same-sex sexual activity to minors. Former abortionist Carol Everett has <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-york-times-shocked-parents-oppose-porn-literacy-in-schools">explained</a> how “sex education sells abortions” to underage girls. “You have to break down the natural modesty. You have to become the experts in their lives, and you have to separate them from their parents and their values.”
The Biden administration seeks to expand abortion activism and sexually explicit education globally. “[W]e will restore U.S. global leadership on sexual and reproductive rights and comprehensive sex education,” the document says.
More women in the military: “To strengthen peace and security efforts in the United States, we will enact reforms to improve gender integration in the uniformed services and foster the recruitment, promotion, and retention of women, which is a critical step for force readiness, military effectiveness, and national security,” the report alleges.
Signing up women for welfare: In addition to promoting women in work, the plan also advocates having more women sign up for welfare programs: “We will work to reduce barriers for eligible women and families to access public benefits through administrative reforms to simplify enrollment and increase awareness.”
Ending cash bail: The Biden administration promises to “work to end cash bail and reform our pretrial system, recognizing the harm these processes cause, particularly for Black women and families.” So-called “<a href="https://www.dailywire.com/topic/bail-reform">bail reform</a>” in places like New York has produced repeat offenders like Charles Barry, who was <a href="https://www.foxnews.com/us/new-york-bail-reform-law-nyc-subway-thief-thanks-democrats-139th-arrest">reportedly</a> arrested and released several times after the law took effect last year. “Bail reform, it’s lit!” Barry said before praising “the Democrats! The Democrats know me and the Republicans fear me. You can’t touch me! I can’t be stopped!” In Chicago, bail reform led to at least <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/chicagos-affordable-bail-results-in-at-least-32-arrested-for-violent-crimes-after-being-released">32 people</a> being released, only to be arrested for committing violent crimes later. How this improves the safety of women, the report does not say.
Gun control: The report makes one passing reference to the “implementation and expansion of common sense [sic] gun legislation to keep firearms out of the hands of adjudicated abusers.”
Free speech restrictions on the internet? The administration’s plan to curtail gender-based violence goes well beyond physical harm or emotional duress. It includes “the use of the internet as a tool of abuse to intimidate and silence women, including women politicians, journalists, and activists.” The report does not define what behavior constitutes “abuse” or intimidation.
Letting school bullies slide: “Black girls experience disproportionate rates of school discipline … Black girls and other girls of color, girls with disabilities, and LGBTQI+ youth are overrepresented in school-based arrests,” the plan states. That ideology led to the Obama administration&#8217;s Departments of Justice and Education <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/murder-rape-suicide-how-obama-era-diversity-amanda-prestigiacomo">creating</a> a guidance threatening schools if minority students were punished at a disproportionate rate, a policy that critics said led to needless assaults in the classroom. President Trump <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/biden-administration-expected-to-bring-back-obama-era-school-discipline-rules-which-led-to-racial-quotas">noted</a> in 2018 that this Obama-era policy “often led to school environments where discipline decisions were based on a student’s race and where quotas became more important than the safety of students and teachers.”
U.S. taxpayer funding of global feminist, left-wing groups? The plan promises to “support local and regional women activists and women’s rights organizations in advocating for needed policy reforms.” Subsequently, it spells this out in greater detail:
<blockquote>To advance leadership and meaningful participation, we will promote movements and community-based organizations led by women, girls, and members of other underserved communities, including LGBTQI+ people. Both domestically and globally, we will support leaders and organizations pushing for greater power, influence, and leadership for women and girls and other underrepresented groups, which research confirms will pay powerful dividends in advancing women’s economic participation, shifting attitudes about gender roles and gender- based violence, and promoting democracy. </blockquote>
In clearer terms, that means taxpayers will be forced to fund political activism in foreign countries that they may — and polls show, likely do — deem morally and politically offensive.
Kangaroo courts for men accused of sexual harassment: “In the United States we will strengthen the enforcement of laws—such as Title IX, which prohibits sex discrimination in education, and … improve prevention and response policies at K-12 schools and institutions of higher education,” says the plan. Former Education Secretary Betsy DeVos reformed the Obama-Biden administration’s draconian Title IX regulations for those accused of sexual harassment, instituting due rights process. But the Biden administration has signaled its commitment to <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/college-students-finally-received-some-due-process-protections-but-the-biden-administration-wants-to-remove-them-report">repeal such fundamental rights</a> as the ability to know the charges brought against you and to have someone cross-examine the witness.
Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion: The report says it will operate from an “intersectional” approach, a concept which strongly connects to Critical Race Theory, and fixates on “individuals from marginalized or underserved populations who experience intersecting forms of oppression, such as racism, homophobia, xenophobia, and economic exploitation.”
Global push: The Biden administration promises a complete, global push to implement its agenda. It will “partner with multilateral institutions … including in the United Nations General Assembly and Generation Equality Forum, the G-7 and the G-20, the Summit for Democracy, the UN Climate Change Conference, and through the Build Back Better World Partnership, among other initiatives.”
“Behavior Change” Programs? The overseas portion of the gender equity plan states that the Biden administration will “support programs that aim to eliminate barriers to women and girls in STEM fields, including behavior change communication programs.” (Emphasis added on the Orwellian phrase.) That Orwellian-sounding program, which is now widely called <a href="https://sbccimplementationkits.org/sbcc-in-emergencies/learn-about-sbcc-and-emergencies/what-is-social-and-behavior-change-communication/">Social and Behavior Change Communication</a>, constitutes “the strategic use of communication approaches to promote changes in knowledge, attitudes, norms, beliefs and behaviors.”
Belated concern for Afghan girls: The plan mentions offhandedly that “In Afghanistan, the universal human rights and fundamental freedoms of a generation of girls and women are in jeopardy, threatening the future and security of the region.” But it does not address the Biden administration’s role in bringing the Taliban to power, nor how its precipitous withdrawal left hundreds of Americans stranded under the Taliban’s authority, perhaps forever. If the Biden administration wants to improve women’s dignity and freedom, it might take to heart the maxim, “First, do no harm.”
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Inside Joe Biden’s New ‘Gender Equity’ Plan: Taxpayer-Funded Abortion, Gender Ideology, Identity Politics

Abortion

Gender

Gender Identity

Readers Pass

Transgender

Transgender Athletes

President Joe Biden’s pick to serve as Comptroller of the Currency, a position that regulates national banks and federal savings associations, appeared to long for the glory days of the USSR because it had no apparent gender wage gap.
A recently unearthed tweet from the nominee, Saule Omarova, in 2019 says: “Until I came to the US, I couldn’t imagine that things like gender pay gap still existed in today’s world. Say what you will about old USSR, there was no gender pay gap there. Market doesn’t always ‘know best.’”
As The Wall Street Journal’s editorial board <a href="https://www.wsj.com/articles/comptroller-of-the-economy-saule-omarova-joe-biden-nominee-11632937029?reflink=share_mobilewebshare">wrote</a>, Omarova was criticized for her tweet and responded by saying: “I never claimed women and men were treated absolutely equally in every facet of Soviet life. But people’s salaries were set (by the state) in a gender-blind manner. And all women got very generous maternity benefits. Both things are still a pipe dream in our society!”
As the editorial board remarked, “Sure, there was a Gulag, and no private property, but maternity benefits!”
Omarova’s comments ignoring the numerous downsides to the USSR while promoting its gender parity are not uncommon for modern feminists. The World Economic Forum each year produces a report ranking the countries on the world based on various gender policies and routinely ranks Rwanda ahead of the U.S. because it has a smaller gender wage gap. Sure, many countries have no gender wage gap because people are so poor that both men and women are forced to work and have limited freedoms in the jobs available, but that is seen as better than the U.S. because the gap is smaller.
As I have reported <a href="https://www.washingtonexaminer.com/harvard-prof-takes-down-gender-wage-gap-myth">time</a> and <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/new-study-confirms-yet-again-gender-wage-gap-due-ashe-schow">time</a> again, the gender wage gap can be attributed almost entirely to the different choices men and women make in their careers, and what can’t be explained that way cannot conclusively be linked to any kind of discrimination. Thus, it is not a “wage” gap, but an earnings gap, because it is measured by the median or average amount of money a woman earns at the end of the year versus the median or average amount a man earns.
In 2018, when the media tried once against to insist there is a discriminatory wage gap, The Atlantic <a href="https://www.theatlantic.com/ideas/archive/2018/11/how-big-male-female-wage-gap-really/576877/?utm_content=edit-promo&amp;utm_medium=social&amp;utm_campaign=the-atlantic&amp;utm_source=twitter&amp;utm_term=2018-11-28T20%3A40%3A04">admitted</a> six paragraphs in that the earnings gap is entirely due to women making different choices in their lives than men, and not a “wage” gap from discrimination:
<blockquote>Comparing apples to apples and oranges to oranges, women earn close to what men earn: Women in similar workplaces with similar titles and similar credentials make pretty much what their male peers do, whether they are fast-food employees making close to the minimum wage or corporate executives making hundreds of thousands of dollars a year.</blockquote>
I’ve explained before how earnings gap works:
<blockquote>Think of it this way: A man and a woman with the same educational background work for the exact same company for the exact same number of years. They’re both paid $20 per hour. The man works 47 hours per week, while the woman works 37. Even though they’re paid the exact same wages, at the end of the week the man will end up earning more because he worked more hours.</blockquote>
Numerous studies bear this out: Men routinely work more hours than women, which contributes to the gap. Activists will argue that it is because women are assumed to be the ones to take off work to care for children or a sick family member, but that is a decision among families. Also, assuming this assumes the flip side: That men are valued for the amount of money they can bring in and not the time spent with family.

Feminism concept. Gender Pay Gap for Work of Equal Value

Biden Bank Regulator Nominee: ‘Say What You Will About Old USSR, There Was No Gender Pay Gap’

The U.S. women’s national soccer team has finally admitted that they are paid the same if not more than the U.S. men’s national team but are still arguing they don’t receive equal pay because, they claim, they have “to work more than a man and be much more successful” to receive “about the same pay.”
The Hill <a href="https://thehill.com/homenews/news/564636-us-womens-national-soccer-team-players-appeal-equal-pay-decision?rl=1">reported</a> that the women’s team has appealed the May 2020 decision of Judge Gary Klausner, who dismissed the team’s claims that they were discriminated against because of their gender on the issue of pay. As The Daily Wire <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-womens-soccer-team-wants-to-appeal-pay-discrimination-ruling-that-determined-they-rejected-equal-pay">reported</a> at the time, Klausner noted that the women’s team rejected the same pay structure that the men’s team uses.
“The WNT was willing to forgo higher bonuses for benefits, such as greater base compensation and the guarantee of a higher number of contracted players,” Klausner wrote in his ruling. “Accordingly, plaintiffs cannot now retroactively deem their CBA (collective bargaining agreement) worse than the MNT (men’s national team) CBA by reference to what they would have made had they been paid under the MNT’s pay-to-play terms structure when they themselves rejected such a structure.”
The women’s team previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-womens-soccer-players-refused-the-same-pay-structure-as-men-now-theyre-claiming-sexism-led-to-difference">attempted</a> to get the pay discrimination claim reinstated by appealing to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. Now, they’ve filed their direct appeal of Klausner’s ruling, claiming it was &#8220;based on a flawed analysis of the team&#8217;s compensation, despite the abundant evidence of unequal pay.&#8221;
The appeal, filed by 28 current and former players, requested Klausner reconsider several factors, including the fact that the women’s team, on average, wins more games than the men’s team.
&#8220;In effect, the court held that pay is equal if a woman can obtain the same amount of money as a man by working more and performing better. That is not the law,&#8221; the appeal reads, according to The Hill.
Molly Levinson, spokeswoman for the players, told CNN: &#8220;If a woman has to work more than a man and be much more successful than him to earn about the same pay, that is decidedly not equal pay and it violates the law.&#8221;
&#8220;And yet, that is exactly what the women players on the US National team do — they play more games and achieve better results in order to be paid about the same amount as the men&#8217;s national team players per game. By any measure, that is not equal pay, and it violates federal law,&#8221; Levinson added.
As The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-why-womens-soccer-team-isnt-paid-much-mens-ashe-schow">reported</a>, the women’s soccer team brings in less money because it has fewer viewers than men’s soccer. The only time this changes is when the women’s team makes it to the World Cup, something the U.S. Men’s team hasn’t done.
After the players appealed Klausner’s ruling, the U.S. Soccer Federation (USSF) responded on Twitter, agreeing with Klausner’s original determination.
&#8220;The District Court rightly noted that the Women&#8217;s National Team negotiated for a different pay structure than the Men&#8217;s National Team, and correctly held that the Women&#8217;s National Team was paid more both cumulatively and on an average per-game basis than the Men&#8217;s National Team,&#8221; USSF wrote.

Women’s soccer

U.S. Women’s Soccer Team Appeals Pay Discrimination Ruling That Found They REJECTED Same Pay Structure As Men’s Team

The latest advertisement from Subway features none other than U.S. Women’s soccer star, Megan Rapinoe. During the commercial, the World Cup winner encourages a man to ditch his original plan to order burritos for lunch and instead get a “freshly made Footlong from Subway.”
In addition to her soccer-related prowess and apparent fandom of Subway sandwiches, Rapinoe is also an outspoken advocate for gender equality and so-called “equal pay.”
“Rapinoe says that when it comes to pay equity, the U.S. is due for a ‘paradigm shift’ in how we understand the value and potential of women,” reported <a href="https://www.npr.org/2020/11/09/933018609/soccer-star-megan-rapinoe-on-equal-pay-and-what-the-u-s-flag-means-to-her">NPR</a>.
&#8220;Men are so often paid and compensated on the potential that they show, not necessarily what they&#8217;ve done,&#8221; Rapinoe said, according to the outlet. &#8220;And women are so often paid on what they&#8217;ve actually done — which normally I would say, we outperform what our contract was.&#8221;
With this in mind, The Daily Wire reached out to Subway regarding Rapinoe’s partnership and asked the following questions.
<ol>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">How much was she paid for her appearance?</li>
<li style="font-weight: 400;" aria-level="1">How much were the other actors in her commercial paid?</li>
</ol>
At the time of writing, Subway had not responded. However, it seems reasonable to assume that Rapinoe — as the “star” of the commercial — was paid more than the extras who played “man with burger,” “man with phone,” or “man next to man with phone.”
<iframe loading="lazy" title="Megan Rapinoe scores a goal for the ultimate win! A Subway Footlong!" width="500" height="281" src="https://www.youtube.com/embed/yONqa6R6vrk?feature=oembed" frameborder="0" allow="accelerometer; autoplay; clipboard-write; encrypted-media; gyroscope; picture-in-picture; web-share" referrerpolicy="strict-origin-when-cross-origin" allowfullscreen></iframe>
And if this is the case, shouldn’t Megan Rapinoe be outraged by such unequal pay?
This is the same Rapinoe, after all, who <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/megan-rapinoe-reportedly-worth-millions-claims-she-is-disrespected-and-dismissed-over-gender">appeared</a> at the White House in March to speak out against alleged pay discrimination between women and men, suggesting that she should be paid the same as male soccer players for doing “the same job.”
“I’ve been disrespected and dismissed because I am a woman. I’ve been told that I don’t deserve any more than less because I am a woman,” Rapinoe added.
<blockquote class="twitter-tweet" data-width="500" data-dnt="true">
Megan Rapinoe: &quot;I&#39;ve been devalued, I&#39;ve been disrespected and dismissed because I am a woman. I&#39;ve been told that I don&#39;t deserve any more than less because I am a woman. Despite all the wins, I&#39;m still paid less than men who do the same job that I do.&quot; <a href="https://t.co/canJYaCV9s">https://t.co/canJYaCV9s</a> <a href="https://t.co/yFycaMbVXn">pic.twitter.com/yFycaMbVXn</a>
&mdash; CBS News (@CBSNews) <a href="https://twitter.com/CBSNews/status/1374831608092618758?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw">March 24, 2021</a></blockquote>
<script async src="https://platform.twitter.com/widgets.js" charset="utf-8"></script>
Now, Rapinoe would likely argue that she, and not the extras, bring the most value to Subway’s commercial campaign. And she would be right, thereby contradicting the entire premise of her flawed campaign for “equal pay.”
As NBA star Draymond Green <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/nba-star-im-really-tired-of-seeing-female-athletes-complain-about-pay-doing-themselves-a-real-disservice">noted</a> in April, “if you don’t bring in the revenue, we can’t up your pay.”
Megan Rapinoe is — we can only assume — paid more than lesser-known actors in her latest commercial because her “public status” is viewed as an opportunity for profit by Subway. For Subway, Rapinoe brings in the revenue, earning her a significant share of their corresponding expenditure.
The same is not true when it comes to U.S. soccer, hence why Rapinoe and the other women’s players are paid “less” than their male counterparts.
If Rapinoe disagrees, perhaps she should share her Subway paycheck with “man with burger,” “man with phone,” or “man next to man with phone?”
Ian Haworth is an Editor and Writer for The Daily Wire. Follow him on Twitter at <a href="https://twitter.com/ighaworth">@ighaworth</a>.
The views expressed in this piece are the author’s own and do not necessarily represent those of The Daily Wire.

Will Megan Rapinoe Share Her Subway Paycheck With Extras In The Name Of ‘Equal Pay’?

Equality

The U.S. Women’s Soccer team is appealing a court decision to throw out their pay discrimination claim, arguing that a “pervasive atmosphere of sexism” was the reason the women’s team is paid less than the men’s team.
In reality, as The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/u-s-womens-soccer-team-wants-to-appeal-pay-discrimination-ruling-that-determined-they-rejected-equal-pay">reported</a>, U.S. District Judge R. Gary Klausner dismissed the women’s pay discrimination claim because they had rejected to be paid using the same structure as the men’s team.
“The WNT was willing to forgo higher bonuses for benefits, such as greater base compensation and the guarantee of a higher number of contracted players,” Klausner wrote in his ruling. “Accordingly, plaintiffs cannot now retroactively deem their CBA (collective bargaining agreement) worse than the MNT (men’s national team) CBA by reference to what they would have made had they been paid under the MNT’s pay-to-play terms structure when they themselves rejected such a structure.”
At the same time Klausner rejected the pay discrimination claim, he allowed the women’s team’s claims about discriminatory work conditions to continue. At the time the ruling was handed down, the women’s soccer team vowed to appeal.
“Equal pay means paying women players the same rate for winning a game as men get paid. The argument that women are paid enough if they make close to the same amount as men while winning more than twice as often is not equal pay,” USWNT spokeswoman Molly Levinson said in a statement at the time.
KGW8 <a href="https://www.kgw.com/article/news/nation-world/us-women-soccer-equal-pay-appeal/507-4a370ffe-8879-4dca-8173-c101f57cb588">reported</a> last week that the players have appealed Klausner’s decision to the Ninth U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals.
“For each win, loss and tie that women players secure, they are paid less than men who play the same sport and who do the same work; that is gender discrimination,” Levinson said in a statement last week. “A pervasive atmosphere of sexism drove this pay discrimination.”
The women sued the U.S. Soccer Federation, which doesn’t control every game. The USSF said that for the matches it does control, it pays the men’s and women’s teams equally, but tournaments are organized by FIFA, which pays according to the money the teams bring in.
As The Daily Wire previously <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/heres-why-womens-soccer-team-isnt-paid-much-mens-ashe-schow">reported</a>, the women’s soccer team brings in less money because it has fewer viewers than men’s soccer. The only time this changes is when the women’s team makes it to the World Cup, something the U.S. Men’s team hasn’t done.
The women’s team also receives a higher percentage of revenue than the men’s team, though the revenue is lower. CBS <a href="https://www.cbsnews.com/news/questions-of-equal-pay-brought-to-light-after-womens-world-cup-win/">reported</a> four years ago that the men’s team received 9% of the revenue generated by the 2010 World Cup — which amounted to $348 million. The women’s team received 13% of the 2015 World Cup revenue, but because the women’s team brought in less revenue, they only received $10 million.
The women’s team also receives a base salary and benefits, which the men’s team does not.

U.S. Women’s Soccer Players Refused The Same Pay Structure As Men. Now They’re Claiming ‘Sexism’ Led To Difference.

Soccer

Federal authorities are expected to instate a never-implemented Obama-era rule mandating that companies provide the government with employee pay data broken down by race and gender, the latest in a series of actions the Biden administration has taken to use companies to push &#8220;equity.&#8221;
The Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), which works to enforce federal civil rights laws against workplace discrimination, is likely to start requiring companies with more than 100 employees to include pay equity data in their Employer Information Reports. The idea behind collecting the data was that the EEOC would use it to identify and target companies that had a pay gap, interpreting differences in pay as discrimination.
The EEOC says that the workforce data is shared with other federal agencies, and “although the data is confidential, aggregated data is available to the public.”
The rule was announced in October 2016 by the Barack Obama White House’s Office of Management and Budget (OMB), but the Donald Trump administration scrapped the requirements the next year before it went into effect, citing privacy concerns as well as doubts about how useful the information actually is and the burden it could place on companies.
“Some aspects of the revised collection of information lack practical utility, are unnecessarily burdensome, and do not adequately address privacy and confidentiality issues,” the Trump White House&#8217;s OMB said.
That move prompted a <a href="https://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/desktop/document/NATIONALWOMENaposSLAWCENTERetalPlaintiffsvOFFICEOFMANAGEMENTANDBU?1617406330">lawsuit</a> from the National Women’s Law Center and the Labor Council for Latin American Advancement, both of whom sued both the EEOC and the OMB in November 2017.
In March 2019, Judge Tanya Chutkan of the U.S. District Court for the District of Columbia, an Obama appointee, sided with the advocacy groups, issuing an opinion saying that OMB lacked &#8220;good cause&#8221; in its “arbitrary and capricious” move to suspend the new reporting requirements since the decision “totally lacked the reasoned explanation” required under federal law.
The judge directed the EEOC to collect two years of pay data broken down by race and gender. The agency collected the pay equity data for 2017 and 2018 before closing out the survey early last year.
Now, attorneys representing both employees and employers <a href="https://www.constangy.com/employment-labor-insider/eeo-1-data-collection-to-start-april">expect</a> the pay equity data collection requirements to go back into effect, although it remains unclear when that would happen. The EEOC’s five-member commission still has a 3-2 Republican majority. If Biden wanted to reinstate the data collection mandate immediately, he would likely have to fire a Trump-appointed member of the commission in order to create a Democratic majority before July 1 of next year, when Republican commissioner Janet Dhillon’s term is up.
Just a week after Biden was inaugurated, former EEOC Commissioner and Acting Chair Victoria Lipnic, nominated to two terms by Obama, predicted that the agency will sharpen its focus on pay equity data collection.
&#8220;You can definitely expect a renewed emphasis on collecting pay data in conjunction with the [Office of Federal Contract Compliance Programs],&#8221; Lipnic <a href="https://www.hrdive.com/news/biden-admin-likely-to-act-on-pay-equity-systemic-bias-says-former-eeoc-of/594662/">said</a> during a National Employment Law Institute (NELI) webinar.
Companies with more than 100 employees are already required to report the numbers of their employees by job category, race, sex, and ethnicity, but they are not required to submit compensation data.
In 2019, law firm Fisher Phillips warned employers to conduct an audit of their pay practices in order to root out any race or gender pay gaps that could &#8220;catch the eye of the federal government if you are forced to turn over this information.&#8221;
&#8220;You may have time to determine whether any disparities that may exist can be justified by legitimate and non-discriminatory explanations, or whether you will need to take corrective action to address troublesome pay gaps,&#8221; the law firm wrote in a <a href="https://www.fisherphillips.com/news-insights/late-night-shocker-eeo-1-once-again-poised-to-gather-pay-data-information.html">post</a> on its website.
The push for pay equity data reporting comes on the heels of other actions the Biden administration has taken to reverse Trump administration efforts at the EEOC.
Sharon Gustafson, appointed by Trump as EEOC general counsel, <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/behind-bidens-firing-of-a-trump-appointed-lawyer-from-a-top-civil-rights-post">made waves</a> last month when she penned a letter refusing the Biden administration’s request that she resign. She was immediately fired, prompting questions about the legality of her termination as well as a spirited condemnation of the president’s decision from one of Gustafson’s EEOC colleagues.
Less than two weeks after Gustafson&#8217;s abrupt firing, the EEOC sent out an agency-wide email that <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/federal-civil-rights-agency-sends-email-to-employees-with-quote-from-anti-semitic-author-alice-walker">included</a> a quote from notoriously anti-Semitic author Alice Walker.
Meanwhile, the Biden administration is moving to crack down on companies it perceives as falling short in equity.
Under the Biden administration, the Securities and Exchange Commission (SEC) has sharpened its focus on the “Environmental, Social, and Governance” (ESG) actions of publicly-traded companies, nebulous categories that one industry official <a href="https://www.dailywire.com/news/sec-eyes-forcing-companies-to-disclose-data-on-social-issues-sparking-politicization-concerns">said</a> could lead to “politicizing the role of the corporation.”
The SEC is weighing expanding ESG disclosure requirements and forcing companies to publicly release data on the climate risks their investments pose as well as their workforce and board diversity.

diversity

Feds Likely to Force Companies To Report Pay By Race and Gender

Equity

Menu