Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Lacking in the philosophy of sport is discussion of the gendered numbers of sets played in Grand Slam tennis. We argue that the practice is indefensible. It can be upheld only through false beliefs about women or repressive femininity ideals. It treats male tennis players unfairly in forcing them to play more sets because of their sex. Its ideological consequences are pernicious, since it reinforces the respective identifications of the female and male with physical limitation and heroism. Both sexes have compelling reason to reject the practice.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Davis et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: