Why the female headliners?

Been trying to wrap my head around this. First we had the Aspen Ladd vs Germaine de Randamie fight card, then we get the Jessica Eye vs Cynthia Calvillo.

Now, before the virtue signalling, politically correct, white knights show up. i have no issues with females headlining. Nunes vs Spencer was a pay per view worthy main event. And even boring Holly Holm headlining against Irene Aldana is fight night worthy. Giving Holms past victories, being a former champion, popular figure and most importantly, high paying salary.

So my question, why the other 2 fight cards as headliners? I understand the UFC's lack of fighters right now with travel restrictions. But there are far better fighters available, fighting on other cards, who are far more deserving of main event status.

For example most fans would rather have seen Garbrant vs Assuncao, Sterling vs Sandhagen, O'Malley vs Wineland, Burgos vs Emmett headline this Saturdays card with a 5 round fight. And with any of these headliners and known travel restrictions "most" mma fans would have been much more happier and excited than the pile of dung as Jessica Eye vs Cynthia Calvillo

So i come back to my original argument. Why are these fighters, who happen to be female, getting headlining treatment over male fighters, who seem to be more deserving and much more exciting for fans to headline?

My best guess is that they are trying to promote and push the female fights, to seem more politically correct and fair to female fighters. So in the future any feminists or anyone accusing them of being sexist or not giving the same opportunities as men wont have a leg to stand on? Because their will one be a group of people or mma journalists looking for "hate clicks", looking at you bloodyelbow.com, that will write a sensationalist article of why females headlined so few mma cards compared to thier male counterparts. Without looking at any facts of why they didnt or who was more deserving, exciting and fans wanted to see. So my best guess is the UFC would rather deal with short term anger and rage from MMA. Hardcore fan's, who will watch the card basically anyway, (not like theres much competition as well right now) and will forget rather quickly. Then possibly deal with long term anger from liberal media that they were unfair in the treatment of female fighters that would be much more difficult to repair then short term anger from hardcore fans.

Dont take the article too seriously, just opinions

My only guess is trying to build # 1 contenders for the titles

Since title fights are 5 rounders they might be testing these potential contenders endurance as well as drawing power on lower ESPN cards


Eye vs Calvillo -  makes no sense other than the UFC hopes Calvillo win since Eye was a former contender for the title. Shevenko needs to fight somebody eventually so they need to produce some sort of challenger

Holm vs Aldana - Holm was a former title holder and contender  to nunes, so if Aldana wins we yet again have someone to maybe put up to lose against Nunes.

Have no issue with Holm/Aldana headlining. I think i posted that above, it was long like a fishrat post. 😂

 i didnt think calvillo\eye was a number 1 contender but who knows anymore.

Yes, I don't know if its a #1 contender either. 

I just think with Eye being a former challenger It gives Cynthia a chance to climb the ranks and gives the UFC another option for Shev if she wins

and you wonder why people think your white?