"Women have to play a minimum of 3 sets, men have to play a minimum of 5 sets, two more sets than the women"

That only applies to Grand Slams...four tournaments a year.

The vast majority of tournaments played on the world tennis circuit are three set matches whether you're male or female.

Yes Poirot, It often amuses me that women accept that they receive assistance in the likes of golf and tennis, obviously because they feel they can't compete with men, yet on the other hand expect equal pay. How does that work?

Just getting back to this thread after a busy few days:

rechab: "Men are men and women are women, it's only when we have men who wish to be feminine and wonem who wish to be masculine that problems occur. Why can't people just accept that we are different, with different skill levels in different roles."

A lot of my work has been with engineering and mining projects, outdoors, 4WD driving, surveying etc. I am perfectly capable of doing this and still being 'feminine' (although not stereotypically feminine - eg I don't wear high heels in the field, though I did succumb to a pair of smart purple steel capped boots). Actually, these industries seem to have accepted women more easily than others, and there are plenty of women driving heavy equipment on mining projects (I've spoken to project managers who prefer women drivers because they treat the vehicles better).

Note that the difference in male v. female strength is no longer an issue. Pretty well all mining is mechanised, and you need computer skills more than muscle these days. Not even men can change a tyre on one of those mega-trucks without machines.

Ozzie: "There is no such thing as a wage gender gap. Those who persist with this myth are just poor at maths and fail to understand that the AVERAGE wage for a male and a female can be different without there being any difference between what males and females get paid when they perform exactly the same work."

Reread my earlier posts. I have personally been paid less than males doing exactly the same work (and know of others as well) because of the knock-on effect of grading positions differently because of assumptions that if a women is in a position it can be paid at a lower rate. In neither of the examples I gave was the work area traditionally 'male' or 'female' but technical areas where the expertise was neutral.

My examples are some time back, and to my knowledge those agencies have improved, but in both cases the process of discrimination was so subtle that unless you knew the situation (ie an insider told you) you would probably not even be aware that there was a pay difference and how it came about. This is why I think it highly likely that similar cases still exist today

Cossomby, I'm not suggesting women can't do men's work or visa versa. It's a free country.

BTW, in your job, were you paid less than the men you worked with, rate of pay I'm talking about.

Lissa: "over the last 40 years men and women have tended to revert to their innate, gendered behaviour patterns. Basically most women seek to be part of a large group of other women and work better in that situation. The most efficient unit for organising males is two to five man teams, men also tend to want to be left alone in complex, stressful situations whereas women feel better if there's someone at their side."

This is not my experience.

1. The most inefficient and frustrating project I ever worked on was with a large group of women - no cooperation and fights all the way. But I currently work with an all-woman community group which is the most amicable and productive team ever.

2. Mostly I've worked with men:
a) in 1:1 teams. If it works, it's excellent, if it doesn't, it's quickly obvious and the team can be changed. Recently I've been working on a couple of projects with a man 30 years younger, it's a pleasure because we have very a similar mental outlook.
b) as part of a 2-5 person team, which I agree can be the most efficient but that's regardless of gender mix. (Some projects I've led an all-male team this size - in one case my team had a great laugh when people would not believe I was the leader.)
c) as part of (in some cases leader) of a larger up to 25 person team; efficiency of this depends on lots of factors (nature of project, time frame, conditions etc.) the least being gender mix.

3. I've never needed someone at my side in complex, stressful situations though I've seen some men collapse in this position. On the other hand, support in a complex, stressful position can be handy for anyone, male or female.

So, I conclude Lissa's statement is a unsupported generalisation.

(Why should my comments be considered relevant? I've had an unusually diverse career: academia, public service, private enterprise, urban and rural, with a wide range of work colleagues, male and female, and bosses male and female, good and bad.)