Gender Discrimination and Controversies in the Gaming Industry

The gaming industry faced controversy due to hidden derogatory imagery, raising concerns about gender discrimination and workplace ethics.

### Gender Controversies in the Gaming Industry and Beyond
* 🎮 A recent incident in the gaming industry involving **hidden derogatory imagery** has sparked debates about **gender equality** and **workplace professionalism**.
* 👩 The incident involved a team leader secretly inserting a **derogatory hand gesture** into game animations, which was discovered **frame by frame** and led to a **major response from the company**.
* 👥 The incident highlights the risks of individuals **inserting personal beliefs into their work without consent**, potentially causing harm to the company and its reputation.
* 🧑 The text also delves into broader gender equality issues, discussing the **complexities of equal pay in sports** and the **challenges of implementing women's conscription in the military**.
* 🏟 It explores the economic realities of professional sports, where pay is often tied to **revenue generation and viewership**, leading to **disparities between men's and women's sports**.
* 🎾 The discussion extends to tennis, where the text examines the differences between **men's and women's performance**, as well as the controversial topic of **equal prize money in tournaments**.
* 👗 The text also touches on the role of appearance in sports, suggesting that **attractiveness can be a factor** in the popularity and marketability of athletes, particularly in women's sports.
* 👀 Overall, the text presents a nuanced view of gender controversies in various industries, emphasizing the **complex intersections of economics, performance, and societal expectations**.

Recently, there has been an incident in the gaming industry. I learned about it through various channels, and some news outlets are using police data. The term 냄저 (namjeo) is being used here, and it’s not a big deal. This term emerged from a process where certain women's sites replaced words that belittle men. To give you a brief explanation, the word 남자 (namja), meaning man, has an open pronunciation that sounds positive, while 여자 (yeoja), meaning woman, has a closed pronunciation that sounds negative. This alone can be seen as gender discrimination. So, there are suggestions to change 남자 to a pronunciation that sounds more closed, leading to the term 냄저 window. It would be great if such measures could resolve gender equality, but it seems unlikely, and instead, it appears to be causing more division, especially with the well-known hand gesture in Korea.

Among the body parts of men, one area measures 6.9 cm. Now, this hand gesture is somewhat infamous among Korean men for being derogatory and criticized. It turns out that animation companies, which have been supplying videos to our country's game companies, have secretly hidden this hand gesture in their works. If it had been obvious, we would have known about it already, but we were unaware until now, and it has suddenly come to light. The reason is that it was inserted not even for a second, but frame by frame. One frame is 1/144 of a second, which is imperceptible to the human eye. While doing this, it seems they found it amusing, but I honestly don't understand it. There was a team leader responsible for that drawing, and he used to casually mention it as if it were nothing serious.

I guess they did something like this in the past. If you look at this person's work, there are a lot of instances. So, if just one or two come out, you might think, Oh, here we go again, but there are so many that even I think it's excessive. I can't show you all of it, but seriously, who throws dice like this? I don't understand. Look at this; who holds their hand like this? No one would say, Oh, it's too big, in a normal context. How would you know, you jerk? Here, they inserted a single frame. Just think about how much effort it took to create this image separately to show people, like a Da Vinci Code that only I know about. So, this situation escalated, and Nex called all employees at 3 AM on Sunday for a 20-hour response.

They say they handled the situation. So, because of that one person, all employees of Nexon, a fairly large company, woke up at 3 AM on a Sunday and worked for 20 hours to respond. So, this photo probably shows that there was traffic at 3 AM. Is this even reasonable at 3 AM? The CEO said they would respond thoroughly, and some people even went live to post updates. This isn't about who is right or wrong. The issue is why consumers are intentionally made uncomfortable, causing problems. This should be approached rationally, not emotionally. For example, as a YouTuber, I can freely express my beliefs on my channel because if it fails, it’s my loss. But that person earlier was an employee, and our company received work from a large corporation.

If you act on your own beliefs without getting consent from others and secretly insert something, and then it backfires, the company could go under. Why do this? I don't care what ideology that person has. Do you care? Earlier, when you went out for lunch and had some soup, did you care about the beliefs of the person who served it? You didn't. But if that person brought the soup and said something inappropriate while serving it, then it becomes a problem. Why make it obvious? Imagine if they brought the soup like that. Why ruin someone else's business? I, too, get really angry as a business owner. When I meet friends, that's not my concern. Just go home and do whatever you want online or in some community.

When they were doing that, they just played around with it. It's their life, so they can do whatever they want; it's not my place to interfere. But why are they doing that in someone else's workplace? Recently, there was another incident where someone faced disadvantages in employment just because they had a shortcut hairstyle. The very next day, the reason for the disadvantage was revealed. They keep inserting their personal beliefs into their work, which has made things difficult for the company, and many cases like this have accumulated. The company will learn from this: if they hire those individuals, there is a risk involved. So why should they hire them? This incident occurred right before the peak of the college entrance exam season in December. This is how important meta-awareness is. The people causing these issues are currently women in their 20s and 30s, and teenage girls are sympathizing with them.

Seniors, should we just follow the path that our seniors have paved? In my opinion, absolutely not. It's similar to the significant conflict we see nowadays between men in their 20s and those over 40. Likewise, women will also start to experience generational conflicts. Right now, women in their 20s and 30s are dealing with issues like military service, and because of that, teenage girls are now uncertain about whether they will have to serve in the military. So, among the teenagers, those who lack metacognition might be cheering on their older sisters' sons, saying, Hang in there! But when they turn 19 and suddenly have to go for a physical examination, or when they receive their military enlistment notice at 21, they will realize, Oh, my older sisters have paved the way for this. Personally, I am very open to foreigners. Since I was young, I have done a lot of manual labor and similar work.

I had many friends from Southeast Asia and met a lot of Korean-Chinese brothers. I saw that they were very innocent and hardworking. I have never seen a bad person among them. However, entrusting our national defense to foreign friends is a bit difficult, isn't it? This would be the case for any country. Even in the United States, people like Arnold cannot run for president because they are foreign-born. That's a bit challenging. Just think about it: if Korean-Chinese individuals were leading our military, how would that work? I didn't quite catch that, Sergeant Kim. You said the duty starts at 4 o'clock? That's a bit strange. The male conscription rate is around 99%. No, really, friends who shouldn't go are going. That's the reality.

From what I see, an incident will occur soon. I dare to predict that within a few years, a significant problem will arise in the military, and as a result, the issue of conscription for women will come to the forefront. It will be complete chaos. For example, I envision that the roles of administrative soldiers and cooks will be entirely replaced by women. However, many problems will arise from this as well. For instance, I am currently an administrative soldier. While the regular army soldiers are outside training and leading the reserves under the scorching summer sun, I am in a third-floor office, enjoying a fan, thinking, Ah, the fan rotates, and it feels cool every four seconds. If the soldiers outside see this, they would want to kill me. But the ones rolling around outside are all men, while the ones typing away inside with the fan and air conditioning are all women. Isn't that a problem?

So now, they are going to implement a system for women. If we assume that women will be assigned all the regular duties of soldiers, the most common task performed by our military personnel is guard duty. Let's say guard duty involves being alert; if you hear a rustling sound, you must stay still, or you will be shot. Now, the bigger issue is considering the reservists. Imagine if women were to take on the role of reservists. Senior members would have to say, Please return your weapons here, and Don't leave your weapon there, return it here. Can you imagine how that would go? Reservists would be thinking, Oh, the reservist training is ending. This is why higher-ups in the military say that implementing conscription for women is realistically quite difficult. Please don't just dismiss this as an excuse; it is genuinely challenging. I find it difficult myself.

Women’s conscription, but now if the older sisters support them, the friends in their early to mid-teens can really go to the military. There might be friends who can’t even disassemble and assemble firearms, and then the instructor comes and asks, “Why can’t you disassemble the firearm? Why aren’t you doing it?” They might say, “It’s not going well because of tomorrow.” I mean, are you going to do it or not? So, I support the movement for women's rights improvement. I also support it. But right now, we are putting ourselves in a lot of own goals. Just by being in the community, I’m having fun, writing, sympathizing, and clicking likes, but in reality, women end up getting hurt. Among these incidents, it’s not exactly the same, but one of the videos I posted on YouTube a while ago received quite a good response.

There is one issue regarding equal pay for women and men in sports. This is the famous Equal Play, Equal Pay case. After one of the members of the U.S. Women's National Soccer Team won the World Cup, she pointed out that despite winning the World Cup herself, there was a 100-fold difference in pay compared to male players like Messi. She even gave a speech at the White House about it. The argument was that if you play the same game, you should receive the same pay. This caused quite a stir. Of course, if we discuss this theoretically, there are countless arguments to be made. First of all, the women's national soccer team has lost to the male high school team. This is not even the youth national team; they lost to the senior national team. In fact, the U.S. national soccer team faced off against a 15-year-old representative team and lost 7-0.

Professional soccer players can win against even middle school boys. There have been matches where Neymar played against young female players and adult female professional players. Neymar could easily handle it alone, but honestly, if I were to play against Neymar, I might just give him a light tap on the back of the head. I feel like it wouldn't hurt if I hit him. However, with female players, it's a different story; I wouldn't even be able to touch them. They would just outmaneuver me completely. For example, if having Messi on our team generates a profit of 100 billion won a year, we could pay Messi a salary of 80 billion won. But if we have a female player, the benefit to our team might only be 1 billion won. How can we pay 80 billion won then? We need to generate revenue to pay that amount. Recently, there have been similar situations in the NBA, and many NBA fans have noticed this.

Draymond Green, whom I dislike, makes a statement. A female basketball player says she deserves to be paid more, claiming that she can't even get a minute of playtime. However, those who understand the reality of the NBA cannot view this female player favorably. The WNBA, the women's NBA league, has been perpetually in the red, and it is supported by the profits generated from the NBA men's teams. The salaries they receive are partially funded by the NBA. Yet, in the midst of this, she is asking for more money. Shouldn't she at least work hard? For those who have watched the WNBA, you know that there are many players who struggle with weight management, and there are plenty who can't even make basic shots in the paint. The overall skill level is quite low. Honestly, it seems like just being tall is enough; after all, she is a woman who is 190 cm tall.

If you are born with that talent, then you should just try to challenge the WNBA. In my opinion, I think our country's average male basketball club would probably lose to them. Honestly, they can't compete; I'm not joking. Anyway, after hearing that, Draymond Green speaks up, saying, You guys just can't do it. I'm good at this, and that's why I get paid a lot. That's all there is to it. You might find it surprising, but I don't know if this is the case in all leagues. However, in European football, like the EPL, Serie A, Bundesliga, and La Liga, there are no regulations preventing women from playing. The NBA also has no rules against women playing. If they have the skills, they can play. The only issue is that there aren't any women with the skills to play at that level. So, if you think Messi's salary is high, then you can go to the EPL or La Liga. When I talked about this before, I mentioned a movie where even a dog, like our black dog, becomes a professional football player. Why? Because only male humans are supposed to play.

There are no regulations stating that you can't just let a dog that plays soccer run around. In that movie, there’s a dog in the countryside, a Border Collie, that herds sheep really well. The dog is doing a great job. But then, while the kids in the neighborhood are playing soccer, the dog suddenly runs over, takes the ball, and starts dribbling it, scoring goals and everything. The owner is like, Oh, how impressive! and gives the dog some beef soup as a reward. Just in case, there’s a local league, and while watching soccer, the owner explains to the dog what soccer is—soccer, football, whatever. Suddenly, the dog bolts out without a leash. The owner has to pay a fine of 50,000 won because the dog runs out, steals the ball, and scores a goal. This is now professional.

The team’s last-place coach happened to be watching YouTube shorts and thought, What is this? This guy has better finishing skills than our striker. So, he went to the countryside to find this dog and said, I want to put this dog on our team. The owner said no, and the coach thought, I need to gather some sheep. The minimum salary in our league is over 1 billion won, so I signed a contract. The coach then selected our new striker. The reporters asked, Where is this? and looked down. Yes, our new striker is number one, Bodecolli. It caused a stir; people were questioning whether this was even possible. But the coach had done all the research and read through the thick rulebook, and there was no regulation stating that he couldn't play. So, he played and scored a header, or rather, he scored with his mouth. Anyway, there’s that issue.

What I mean is that if a female soccer player wants to earn money like Messi, she should go to a big league, just like Son Heung-min did. What this means is that it's like a person working in a small local company as an accountant wondering why their salary is different from that of an accountant at Samsung Electronics. If you go to Samsung Electronics and interview, you might fail, but if a woman plays in the Premier League, her marketability would be tremendous, right? 

So, there was a golfer from our country named Michelle Wie. Her physical attributes were outstanding. I believe Michelle Wie became famous not because she was ranked number one in the world, but because she played in men's tournaments, specifically the PGA, not just the LPGA.

Only women can participate, and anyone can enter the PGA. Anyone who plays golf well can join. That's why Michelle Wie played in the PGA. In reality, most of them did miss the cut, but she became famous and got sponsorship from Nike. Although her performance wasn't outstanding, I know she made quite a bit of money from sponsorships. Is there anyone here who has criticized Michelle Wie? Is there even one person who has? There isn't a single one. Challenge is a beautiful thing in sports. So, if women want to earn as much as male athletes, they should compete in leagues that pay more and have higher skill levels, just like Michelle Wie did. But why can't women compete in the PGA? There are women who play golf really well; why can't they participate? You might wonder about this. For example, male athletes...

Once you hit that tee shot, as far as I know, it goes a little over 300 yards. Let's say it's a par four hole. If you can get it in the hole in four strokes, that means you're at par, which is a good score. If you can get it in three strokes on a par four hole, that's a birdie, which means you're at -1. The lower the score, the better you are. Typically, a round consists of 18 holes. So, if you play 18 holes and manage to get ten birdies, that would be a score of 10 under par, which is really impressive. 

Now, why can't women achieve this? On a par four hole, the distance is about 650 yards. If you start from the tee, it takes about nine years to reach that distance. Male players can hit it once and get halfway there, and if they hit it twice, they can get close to the ball, then make a third putt to get a birdie. If they can't get a birdie, they settle for par. However, women generally can't hit over 300 yards.

This is because I can only hit a tee shot 250 yards. So, I can't get a chance to make a birdie by hitting twice due to this distance; it's completely impossible. Only women with good physicality, like Michelle, who can hit the ball near the hole with just two putts, can challenge that. In golf, having a lot of muscle can be a disadvantage. There are pros and cons, but if you look for YouTube shorts of NFL players playing golf, you'll see that even someone who has never played before can hit the ball 350 yards. If you think having a lot of muscle is a disadvantage, maybe you actually lack muscle. However, the biggest incident for me happened in tennis. Tennis really grew in popularity. I don't know if this was the very first instance, but the reason tennis started to gain traction in this area was because of a male tennis player.

In an official interview, the legend mentioned that at that time, Serena Williams was the best female tennis player. She is considered one of the greatest female tennis players of all time, having won numerous championships. However, she also expressed concerns about prize money. In tennis, men can participate in women's tournaments, but women cannot compete in men's tournaments. She did attempt to compete in a men's tournament when she was very young, but after being quickly defeated, she gave up on that dream. 

Nonetheless, there are major tournaments like the US Open, Wimbledon, and others, where the prize money is enormous. The top-ranked players earn a significant amount of money, and in tennis, the further you advance in the rounds, the more money you can make.

When you enter the round of 32, the prize money is 10 million won; in the round of 16, it’s 50 million won; and in the quarterfinals, it’s around 300 million won. It increases exponentially. But why is there a difference in prize money between men's and women's tournaments? The reason for the difference in prize money is that men's tournaments have more spectators, higher viewership, and thus more sponsorship money coming in. Isn’t it obvious? It’s not like someone would say, Hey, you’re a man, so I’ll give you more money. That doesn’t happen. In the professional world, economics is cold. While Kyochon Chicken is warm, the money involved is cold. Therefore, it’s only natural that in the tennis industry, since men's tournaments generate higher revenue, male players receive more money. However, players like Sharapova and Serena Williams have expressed dissatisfaction, arguing that it should be equal.

There was this movement, and among the male players, Djokovic officially expressed his dissatisfaction. He said, Women play three rounds, while men play five rounds. Women's tennis takes one and a half to two hours, while men's takes three hours. The viewership for women's tennis is this much, while for men's it's this much. The audience for women is this much, while for men it's this much. So how can they receive the same amount of money? After saying this, he faced a lot of backlash and criticism. This is the world we live in right now. Adapt, everyone. If you can't adapt, you might as well go to Mars because this is how things are on Earth. Amidst all this, a well-known tennis coach, as far as I know, was interviewed in an official setting, and he stated that Serena Williams would rank around 800 if she were a male player. So, there was one man and two women on the panel.

There seems to be a news segment where the women in front are said to be shooting lasers from their eyes. Why did they say that? It turns out that a reporter asked, What do you think about Serena Williams? The response was that she is the greatest female tennis player in history. The reporter then clarified that she meant player, not female player. It seems that the person wanted to engage in a bit of a power struggle. So, while acknowledging that Serena is indeed doing very well as a woman, they added that if she were a man, she would be ranked around 800th. This person couldn't just let it go and continued the power struggle. Now, they are facing backlash, being asked if they plan to apologize. The response was, Why should I apologize? That's the truth. I really like Serena Williams and think she is a great player, but if she were a male player, I think she would be ranked around 800th.

This has become such a hot topic that Serena Williams appeared on a talk show. There, she was asked about the situation, and she responded, If I were to play tennis against Djokovic, I would lose in about three to five minutes. Men's tennis and women's tennis are completely different games. Please, I don't want to compete with men; I don't want to play tennis with men, so please stop bringing it up. It seems Serena got a bit uncomfortable. I had a similar experience when I was younger; there was a friend in the next class who was good at fighting and was a taekwondo player. Luckily, I was the top student in my class. But then my friends suddenly said, Hey, do you think the black guy from the next class could beat him? He's a taekwondo player, right? He can't...

I think, no matter how I think about it, it seems like there would be a surplus. Be quiet, you jerk. Just be quiet for a moment. Wasn't this how Serena Williams felt? Anyway, there was such an incident, and I can't let this end as just a delusion in my brain. So, I looked into mixed doubles tennis, where men and women play together. We know about mixed doubles badminton because of player Lee Yong-dae. When you watch them play, how is it? They both play well together. Of course, the male players are generally better, but the female players are not completely outmatched. However, in mixed doubles tennis, female players struggle to return the male players' serves. This means that the game doesn't really hold up. Serena Williams has such incredible physicality, but in the U.S. national team...

I represented my country in the Olympics, and during doubles, I had a high-five with a male player. Serena had to do a high-five too. Serena is about 170 cm tall, while the male player is around 2 meters tall. I don't even know who it was; I think it was Roddick since it was in the U.S. Andy Roddick is now famous for his explosive serve. Roddick reached the world number one ranking with just his serve. If I can receive this serve, I win; if I can't, then I lose. It's just a serve, one, two, three. This guy serves so hard that I feel like he needs to change his racket after three serves because it seems like the racket might break from the force. It's amazing how that ball doesn't burst, considering how hard he hits it. A tennis serve can reach about 200 km/h, and of course, I was watching it on a small screen, so...

I don't know, but I can't see the ball. Well, I need to see it to receive it, right? I can't see the ball, I mean. Just, um, the sound is from Reddick, and the sound of the ball hitting my court is... um, um, um. Oh, Eun-hyung, take it easy. So, I'm playing against Serena Reddick, but the opposing team doesn't know where I am. It's a female player, and her mental state is off. At first, she seems a bit like this, asking if there's anything to spin. Tennis players tend to do this when they're receiving. Um, um, um, and then she loses her mental focus and later on, she doesn't even think about receiving. What kind of game is this? If we compare it to StarCraft, it's like just doing drone rushes. But the female players physically can't handle it. Anyway, the serve goes over, and it's the same situation. Serena can't receive it anyway.

In the past, when tennis was first created, it was considered a very high-class sport. Why was tennis regarded as a high-class sport? Let's think about it. First of all, it requires quite a large space. Moreover, it needs to be played on well-maintained grass or a flat surface. Naturally, only wealthy individuals could afford such facilities. In the past, there were also clay courts, which are played on dirt surfaces. 

Secondly, there needs to be ball boys, and rackets are expensive, making it difficult for poorer people to participate. Therefore, tennis was a sport for the nobility. It was a sport for those who were somewhat affluent and wanted to exercise while sweating a bit, feeling healthy. For men, it was common for those around 175 cm tall and weighing between 68 to 70 kg to play and enjoy the game. As tennis became professionalized, being tall became advantageous because of the powerful serves.

Having long arms is advantageous. Athletes with good physical strength have started to specialize in tennis, and now the physical attributes of these players are typically over 190 cm tall, with wingspans exceeding 2 meters. This creates a significant gap compared to female players. One major difference I notice in the physicality between men and women is that when they are in similar weight classes, their athletic abilities do not differ as much as one might think. For example, in CrossFit, female athletes who can lift around 70 kg do not show a huge difference compared to male athletes lifting the same weight. Of course, there are differences, but the real disparity becomes apparent when height increases significantly. For instance, in the NBA, there are players who are 2.10 meters tall and can move exceptionally well. However, there are no female athletes who are 2 meters tall and can move with the same level of agility. That difference is quite substantial, especially in men's tennis.

The player is about 190 cm tall and moves very well, but when a female tennis player reaches around 177 to 180 cm, she tends to become a bit less agile. If you look at Sharapova, she is about 180 cm tall, but naturally, she doesn't have the same agility as male players. So, I also have some insights about tennis; I'm not just making things up, but rather sharing what I've gathered. One of the points is that the popularity of tennis is declining. When we watch the Olympics or national competitions, we often talk about the excellence of our nation and our people, but in reality, it almost directly correlates with money. For example, when Japan focused on recreational sports, and we concentrated on elite sports during the 1988 Olympics, our country performed much better than Japan in the Olympics and Asian Games. Now, Japan has lost that edge.

After 20 years, I thought I should fill my national pride with sports, so I started to focus on developing elite sports again. That's why I made efforts to host the Tokyo Olympics. After that, Japan began to get ahead of us. The reason is that when you invest money, sports inevitably produce results. Therefore, the fact that we can now watch very high-level soccer matches is simply because soccer generates a lot of money, attracting talented athletes. It's very natural. These days, the NBA is growing significantly because it has a lot of money, which leads to the emergence of great players. It's just obvious. As for Chinese soccer, my brother Lee Chun-soo mentioned that even though China invests a lot of money in soccer, it fails to succeed because it continues to focus only on adult players. They need to send youth players to well-known overseas training programs.

Isn't it true that in our country, players like Son Heung-min and Lee Kang-in have received a lot of training abroad? Of course, they have their fathers supporting them, but in China, due to its unique characteristics, they bring famous coaches over. However, amidst all this, they can't just let anyone in. The reality is that they have to let everyone in, which makes it quite difficult. Moreover, in the adult league, they invest a lot of money, but what does that investment mean? Ultimately, they bring in high-profile veterans who are older and were once great players, and they just advertise, saying, Look, we have Shasha! and that's it. The system is quite challenging. This is why the popularity of tennis is declining; it's all about money. Djokovic, Federer, and Nadal have made a tremendous amount of money.

So, he earns more than LeBron. Then you might say, Federer earns similarly. Okay, that's Federer, and LeBron earns similarly. Now, what do you think the salary of the 20th-ranked basketball player is? Currently, it's over 40 billion won, and I'm only talking about the salary they receive from their team. It will probably go up soon. Now, how much do you think the 20th-ranked tennis player earns? I don't know for sure, but I think it might not even be 10 billion won. It's true that tennis doesn't pay well. Federer earns a lot, Djokovic earns a lot, and Nadal earns a lot; only those three earn significantly. However, there is a maximum salary system in the NBA. Since there is a salary cap, both the upper and lower limits for maximum salaries are set. Because the upper limit is defined, people might think that even if an NBA player could earn more, they can't.

No, but if you think about it differently, the player who is the best at basketball has a minimum salary cap. Even the best player on the worst team can receive the maximum salary. So, these two players would have the same salary. When it was said that the NBA's salary cap system would be strictly enforced, there were many opposing opinions, including from the players' union. However, because of this, many talented athletes are now flocking to basketball, and there are even claims that NFL players want to move more towards the NBA. So, I conveyed this message on YouTube, but I noticed that some tennis fans were really angry. There weren't many of them, but they were saying things like, Do you know how much money I make? However, as I mentioned earlier, in tennis, performance is...

To make a lot of money, you have to perform well, and even if you don't win the NBA championship, you still receive a high salary. The power of the NBA players' union has also contributed to benefits like insurance. The culture of supporting others is particularly strong among NBA players. While it exists in sports like football, it is especially pronounced in the NBA. When an NBA player succeeds, they often support 20 to 30 people, even extending to neighbors. This culture still exists today. Players may earn salaries of 10 billion or 20 billion won based on past standards, but taxes take away about 40%, and they have to pay agents around 5%. With various expenses and the responsibility of supporting many people, players can end up with little money. Additionally, many players indulge in luxury, and those who are doing well in the NBA have immense confidence, believing they will be the best again next season and earn the highest salary once more.

Many players live with this mindset, spending money recklessly, thinking that their uncle will take it all anyway, so they might as well spend it all. A notable example is Allen Iverson, who received the highest salary for about ten years but still went bankrupt. However, the NBA has measures in place to prevent this from happening. The association withholds about 10% of the players' salaries. This withheld money can be given to the player in a lump sum right after retirement or in installments, and they can receive a pension until they die, similar to a national pension. This is because many Black players struggle with money management. So, even though Allen Iverson went bankrupt, he doesn't have to worry because he receives a pension of 200 million won each month.

In an interview, he mentioned that one of the best choices he made during his athletic career was playing in the NBA, specifically with the 76ers. He also expressed respect for the team. The second choice he made was to receive his pension in installments. Even if 5% or 10% is deducted, the amount is so large that it doesn't pose any problems. NBA players don't have to worry about this. Kim Byung-hyun, a former MLB player, is also receiving his pension, which seems to be well-structured in the U.S. I'm not entirely sure, but I assume taxes are quite high. In our country, we also have significant tax deductions. The highest tax rate here is probably around 42%, and I believe it ranges from 38% to 42%. We do have substantial tax deductions as well. People like Lee Jae-yong likely pay an enormous amount in taxes. If I were rich, I might feel a bit frustrated about it too.

I earned 10 billion won, but I have to pay 4.2 billion won in taxes. It's not even like I'm living in Europe. If I were living in Switzerland, I could understand it. If I lived in Switzerland and earned 10 billion won, I would pay 5 billion won in taxes. I could accept that because of the lifestyle there. But living in South Korea, in a country that is technically still at war, having to pay 4.2 billion won feels a bit frustrating. Anyway, this is why the popularity of tennis has some aspects to consider. 

First of all, why has women's tennis lost popularity? There used to be popular stars in women's tennis, like the Russian tennis stars and Sharapova, who contributed to its popularity. There was a time in the women's tennis industry when people questioned why female tennis players had to wear such short skirts during matches. Female golfers and female tennis players were expected to wear skirts; that was the rule.

So, if you dress differently, you can't play the game. It's just like wearing a soccer uniform. Female athletes have expressed discomfort about this, worrying about their underwear being visible, and they have resisted it. Personally, I think it's because of the desire to see beautiful women; it's a very pure instinct. Both men and women want to see beautiful women. Wanting to see a beautiful woman in pretty clothes is one of those natural instincts. If I want to see someone who is incredibly good at tennis, I just need to see LeBron James at the tennis court or players like Serena Williams. I want to see those athletes who can smash three balls in a single match, break tennis rackets, and do amazing things.

There is a desire to see beautiful people play, and then there’s the desire to watch those who are really good at tennis. This is fulfilled by players like Rodger, Djokovic, Nadal, and Federer. When watching women's tennis, I can have a different mindset, and that can actually be a selling point. The popularity of women's tennis is rising thanks to popular stars like Sharapova, and as the popularity increases, not only they but also other players can earn more money, so it’s a win-win situation. However, among some female tennis players, there are those who criticize Sharapova and tell her to go back to the Alps, while looking at other female players who wear short skirts to look pretty and questioning whether they are real athletes.

There were people who seemed to not understand why he makes a lot of money. However, this is not limited to women. In our country, there are now some baseball players who pay attention to their appearance. Among our basketball and volleyball players, there are also male athletes who take care of their looks, and there are some critical views towards them, suggesting that athletes should just focus on their sport. But with the emergence of these players, a fan base that used to be quite common in the past, known as oppa brigade, has started to reappear. As the audience increases, not only do the handsome players benefit, but their salaries also rise. I personally think that those who look down on this are not thinking clearly. Sure, they play baseball really well, but if all 20 players on the field were like Yoo Hee-kwan, their skills would still be at a higher level than they are now.

Let's think about it. Will popularity increase or decrease? I think it will decrease. But what if the level of baseball in our country drops a tier, and we can no longer win in international competitions, not even a gold medal in the WBC? Instead, all the baseball players look like Ohtani. Would the popularity of baseball in our country rise or fall? It's obvious, right? What if someone like Cha Eun-woo appears among our baseball players? I'm not making a discriminatory statement by saying that it has to be pretty because it's a woman. Whether it's a man or a woman, being attractive and handsome is valuable. Denying this means denying the fashion models that women love so much. Why do fashion models earn a lot of money? Because they are attractive and good-looking. Originally, there was something called lingerie football, but as far as I know, it no longer exists.

Now, there are female football players who only wear lingerie. If you search on Google, you can find many great scenes. While watching those, do you think most people would say, Oh, that guy is really something, or would they curse a lot? I think they would curse a bit less. However, if we keep talking about real skills, we can't help but be critical. If a female football player says, Why don't they pay me like Messi? then while watching her play, we might think, In the second half, I could probably mark that female football player and prevent her from scoring a single goal. I used to play football in a club, and I was really fast and quite strong, so I feel like I could stop her from getting the ball.

The kids have now told me that they also have friendly matches with girls' teams during middle and high school. Usually, the request comes from the girls' teams. They need to train a bit, but since there aren't many girls' teams, they often lack sparring partners for practice. So, they usually ask the boys' teams to practice together, and they often request to train with middle and high school teams. Every time they meet, the coach gathers the kids and tells them to take it easy. However, they say it's still easy for them. This is because female athletes have their own advantages. For example, if I were to become the president of a women's soccer, basketball, tennis, or golf association, I would definitely want to change the uniforms to make them look really nice. I would try to meet with brands like Chanel or Prada and plead with them to design the uniforms.

We asked to make ourselves look pretty, so we changed the uniforms to be more attractive, and the makeup team from the association is providing makeup for all the female athletes before their matches. If there are discussions about skills, honestly, a few pretty athletes might appear on YouTube channels and talk about various things. But what I want to say is this: we look this good, and you’re not going to pay attention? That’s the vibe we’re going for. 

However, there are side effects to this. Athletes who gain popularity from this often experience what is known as star syndrome, which is something that happens a lot to celebrities. This was mentioned by Ms. Lee Yori, who said she experienced it herself and saw many around her go through it as well. The problem is that when female athletes become popular for their looks, it can lead to...

So, our country's volleyball has become quite popular due to its good promotion of appearances. There are two main reasons why women's volleyball in our country became more popular than men's volleyball for a time: first, Kim Yeon-koung, and second, their attractiveness. However, with this newfound fame, some players have lost their focus. They skip training and when celebrities show interest, they start dating, thinking, Oh, I can date an older guy. Meanwhile, our players are working hard, and now women's volleyball is more popular than men's. This leads to situations where players complain to the coach, saying, Coach, can we skip tonight's training? while everyone else is struggling. It's the same for both men and women. There was also a situation with female beach volleyball players questioning why they wear certain outfits.

It's uncomfortable to wear short clothes, so I put on some clothes, and there was a bit of a problem. I mean, you wear something that looks like a swimsuit because you're playing beach volleyball, right? Then you go and play volleyball. But why is there a distinction between volleyball and beach volleyball? In fact, beach volleyball is like a minor version of volleyball. Volleyball is the main sport, and beach volleyball is like a subset. It's a bit of a hierarchical relationship. Athletes who used to play volleyball and are not performing well often switch to beach volleyball. That's how it is; they retire from volleyball and then go to beach volleyball. But no one says anything about it. Why? Because beach volleyball has its own identity. What is that identity? It's playing on the beach in swimsuits. But if that's uncomfortable, then the identity is lost. Well, then should ice hockey just be played on the ground because it's uncomfortable? Swimming is uncomfortable, so let's just run in the park instead. So, when discussing this...

It's different when we talk about clothing. For example, when we wear swimsuits and play beach volleyball, diving to save the ball can lead to many scratches from the sand. So, there is a need to change our outfits. If I say this, who would argue? I've liked leggings for a long time. Can't we just switch to leggings? But then, if the outfits are too short and uncomfortable, it becomes a controversy. Why is there such a lack of flexibility? Personally, I prefer leggings over swimsuits. Can't we just play volleyball in that? Do you all remember when full-body swimsuits were introduced? The records were significantly shortened, and after that, those records were all erased. Since then, there have been various discussions, but the viewership for men's swimming has drastically dropped.

In fact, there is also a certain pleasure in looking at the body. I mean, look at that guy. How can his shoulders be so broad? His abs are insane! So, it's not just women who look at this; men do the same. Ultimately, professionals are about selling a product. The play I perform is what I sell, and since what I do is visible, it’s only natural that what can be seen is important, right?

스포츠계 남녀평등 회생 방안

실(Loss)없이 운동하자! 흑자헬스(Surplus Health) [비지니스 문의] jdiet@naver.com
흑자헬스가 런칭한 [흑닭] https://plushealth.co.kr
[흑자헬스 채널 가입 링크] https://www.youtube.com/channel/UCygs-_iDpCJOnhuCZibK7JQ/join


흑자헬스 SurplusHealth

A hand gesture with derogatory connotations towards men, known as "냄저 (namjeo)," has sparked a major controversy in the gaming industry in Korea.

Animation companies have been secretly inserting this gesture into their work, causing a significant backlash and leading to a 20-hour emergency response from the company Nexon.

The incident has raised questions about the insertion of personal beliefs into work and has highlighted potential generational conflicts among women in different age groups.

Challenges and Controversies Surrounding Women in the Military and Sports

The issue of conscripting women into the military is complex, with concerns about changing traditional roles and responsibilities.

In the world of sports, the debate over equal pay for female athletes continues, with arguments about the revenue they generate and their skill levels compared to male athletes.

The request for higher pay in the WNBA, despite its financial dependency on the men's NBA teams, has sparked further controversy.

The Importance of Women Challenging Male-Dominated Leagues

Draymond Green asserts that women can't compete in male-dominated leagues, but there are no official rules against it.

Michelle Wie's success in the PGA demonstrates the potential for women to earn money and fame in a male-dominated sport.

The physical differences between men and women present challenges in golf, but exceptional female athletes can still compete at a high level.

Serena Williams: The Greatest Female Tennis Player

Serena Williams is regarded as one of the best female tennis players, with numerous championships.

There is a stark difference in prize money between men's and women's tournaments, justified by higher revenue and viewership for men's tennis.

Despite discussions about equal pay, Williams expressed discomfort with the idea of competing against men and faced controversy over a comment about her hypothetical male ranking.

Tennis was initially a sport for the wealthy due to the need for space, well-maintained courts, and expensive equipment, creating a gap between the affluent and the poorer population.

As the sport professionalized, the physical attributes of players, particularly height, became a significant factor, creating a stark contrast between male and female players.

The decline in the popularity of tennis is linked to the correlation between financial investment and sports performance, as seen in the shifting success of nations like Japan in elite competitions.

The Unique Financial Challenges of Tennis Players Compared to NBA Players

Tennis players, except for the top few, struggle to earn high salaries, while NBA players benefit from a structured salary cap system.

The NBA's strong players' union and support culture contribute to financial benefits and post-career pension plans for players.

In contrast, many tennis players face high taxes, expenses, and the pressure to perform in order to make a significant income, leading to financial challenges for all but the very top players.

The Complex Factors Affecting the Popularity of Tennis

The frustration of paying high taxes leads to a discussion of tennis popularity.

Women's tennis has lost its popularity due to the focus on players' appearance and attire, but the rise of stars like Sharapova is helping to increase its popularity.

The debate over the importance of looks and skills is not limited to women's tennis, as similar discussions are emerging in other sports like baseball and football.

Gender Issues in Sports: The Impact of Appearance and Uniforms

Female athletes often lack sparring partners, leading to joint practice sessions with boys' teams.

The focus on making female athletes look attractive has led to popularity but also to the "star syndrome" and a loss of focus on training.

There is a debate about the uniforms in women's sports, with a call for more comfortable and flexible outfits, as well as a discussion about the impact of appearance on viewership and the selling of the sports product.