dan38Here's my problem with this argument because personally, I think the skill gap is the largest reason why they don't get paid equally. Here and with a lot of your fans Steve, we appreciate the nuances and technicality of tricks (like Kelly Sildaru doing switch 900's in both directions to win). That's really impressive. Unfortunately, the majority of viewers have no idea what a "pretz" or "unnatural" trick is. And sponsors aren't marketing to us, the "informed" park skiers, they're marketing to the largest fan base possible. This is done by finding the athletes the throw the flashiest tricks (Think someone like Jesper) rather than a woman, who is still doing difficult tricks but aren't as mindboggling to the average person.
I do agree with you to a point. The only reason i didnt want to entertain that point was because usually when its brought up the conversation turns into:
"Girls suck, so yea pay them less"
Which like i said, is unproductive.
I think its a not as black and white as you are saying though, regarding flashy tricks the general audience. I think the crazy tricks help garner more general viewers overall, but i wanted to disregard the skill gap because if women as a whole were more interested in skiing they would be watching events either way.
An example might be, for me at least:
I would most likely tune into ANY freeskiing event if it were on TV. Even if it wasnt the wildest flashy tricks or the top name athletes, i would just be stoked to watch freeskiing because i love it. Take SLVSH for sub-example. By no means is every game flashy, and by no means is each game filled with the top 10 skiers in the world, but we all tune in and watch it anyways.
My larger point here is, if we can increase the general interest in skiing/freeskiing for the women in the general population, the the skill gap becomes irrelevant: they would be tuning into watch skiing because they love to watch it