A political and philosophical bomb is almost inevitably going to drop as a result of the USA's least popular, mainstream sport.
US Soccer has, for the second time in a row, offered the exact same pay structure to both the men and women's teams. For the second time in a row, the women's team turned the offer down.
The last CBA that was offered to both teams was entirely pay for play. Namely, if you don't play, you don't get paid. The men agreed and the women didn't. The women wanted more guaranteed money and benefits. If a man twisted his ankle and couldn't play, he didn't get paid. If a woman twisted her ankle and couldn't play, she'd still have a salary and health insurance paid by US Soccer.
During the last World Cup, the women made more than the men both overall and by games played. Yes, the women won the World Cup while the men failed to qualify; but, the women earned significantly more money in salaries, benefits, ticket sales, etc. that the men's team didn't get.
During 2020 when the unspecified virus of unknown origins hit, the men's team got paid zero because the games were cancelled while the women's team brought in a six figure salary.
So, now, going off of the stated demands of the women's team, they want the same pay for play structure as the men; but, they don't want to give up the added benefits that the men's team lacked.
US Soccer therefore can choose to dig its heels in and not offer more. US Soccer can offer the men and the women the same deal with the pay for play benefit in addition to the benefits in the women's last CBA. Or, US Soccer can offer the women what they want and not offer it to the men.
The first case would lead to more bullshit accusations of sexism with no basis in reality.
The second option, given the history of this discussion, would lead to the women's team holding out again wanting more than the men's team.
The third option, which I think is the most plausible, should result in a lawsuit filed by the men's team for wage discrimination.