>obviously the lion share of their net worth is gonna come
>from endorsements and partnerships over their career
>purses/fees. so no doubt white/male privilege is gonna come
>into play.

this was my point re: privilege

> but there are some other factors at play too.

of course there are....

>mens tennis overall is just a bigger draw with a larger
>consumer base (men buy more athletic apparel, equipment, etc).
> plus federer has high profile rivalries (rafa/djoker) that
>consistently draws in a ton of interest/ticket sales/ad
>dollars/etc.
>
>and dont forget tennis is a sport with an international
>audience and consumer base too. as big as serena is to
>american tennis...federer is most likely a bigger star in a
>lot of overseas markets. japanese company uniqlo signed him
>to a huge deal a while ago that even nike couldnt match.
>
>if you can sell products across the entire globe then
>companies are gonna offer you more money (look at soccer
>stars).

bruh. all that is what it is. and i hope you can see you are actually proving MY point. what you are describing is a structure that supports and indemnifies the privilege we are talking about, making a weird chicken egg thing

if you treat serena and her version of the sport as second class entertainment, its gonna be viewed/treated as second-class entertainment

using her dominance as a negative is weird to me. She has less value because she's been out there killing it for a couple decades?

part of the reason you can "sell products across the globe" is because people across the globe have biases

this is what get Federer, Kournikova and cheating-a$$ Sharapova over. Folks would rather see lily white them than un-repentantly Black Serena on an ad for ______. So advertisers pay them more. Same thing happens in pretty much all sports.

you totally downplayed Serena as significant (popular) to American tennis primarily - she's way more than that. and SHOULD be way more than she is. She is arguably the GREATEST *EVER* even after overcoming all the bull she has (and still does) have to deal with

from a historical significance standpoint, she isn't worth half as much as Federer (who I'm NOT painting as a bum by any stretch)

i'm legit shocked we are having this as a point of contention