10345 Players currently online!
Man vs. Machine - good luck!
Turn-based games at any time!
Vote for the best move to win!
Do you have what it takes?
Sharpen your tactical vision!
Get advice and game insights!
Learn from top players & pros!
View millions of master games!
Your virtual chess coach!
Perfect your opening moves!
Test your skills vs. computer!
Find the right private coach!
Can you solve it each day?
Bring it all together!
Beginners, start here!
Make friends & play team games!
News from the world of chess!
Search all Chess.com members!
Find local clubs & events!
Who's the best of your friends?
Read what members are saying!
@PhoenixTTD - First off, thank you for taking the time to answer so many posts. I've tried before, and it can be a daunting task. Also, thank you for writing more clearly on your views. This is much better than your previous objection which sounded like your only rebuttle is "they're different."I won't be quoting from all of your responses, and may have to cut specific sentences from them, since there isn't a multiquote function, and whole quotes also take up much space.That is a good list for the the negative impact on men's choices. I disagree with the part about the "original sin" though. I doubt a good portion of men had ever considered the impact of what men in past generations had done. I also doubt many women would blame every single man for that problem, as i believe many would would treat the person as an individual, and not directly responsible for what previous people of their gender had done. This also means there is less reason for the "original sin" idea mentioned.After looking at the list again, i also disagree with the reason men commit serious crimes. The only crime that comes to mind which seems to fit is theft because the husband couldn't provide for the family. However, i don't think it's a common occurance. That is a horrible list for the women's point of view. We've already discussed the lack of education which i believe you agreed with. Women were also dependent on men for survival because men were the 'breadwinners.' It's one reason wives had trouble leaving abusive husbands. There was nowhere to go, and without a source of income, it would seem to them that their life was at an end. They not only had to think of themselves, but their children. Simply staying with the abusive husband provided a better life for their children. A husband's suicide also affected the wife, because she depended on him for support.To sum it up, i would say it is mainly more stress which leads to an earlier death being the main negative impact for men. For women it would be a lack of freedom. It seems to be quantity vs. quality. The quantity being a few years less of life vs. a lifetime with little options, and being dependent on men for support."You cannot argue the lack of female genius is due to society against them."No, you missed my point. The lack of female geniuses is due to there being a lack of higher education to fully develop their potential.Actually, yes, i can argue that. If women were dependent on men for support because the men are the ones in the work force, there was no reason to reach their full potential. What use was there to become a genius when the jobs went to the men? It's possible, and i don't doubt there were parents that discouraged their daughters from pursuing a higher education. From their perspective, it would be a bad investment, when ultimately she would end up a housewife."Women can get any type of job."Yes, through the progress women have made. However, there are still problems. If you recall in the article, the male was recommended with a higher pay."It still does not explain the results we see because the mistreatment is not universal or as close to universal as male domination in elite performances."I think it's pretty close to universal. Most if not all achievements can be divided into either being physical or mental. Physically, i don't think many would dispute men's performance in this area. Mental, as i have tried to explain, women were held back from reaching their full potential. Also, even if there were some that could, the explanation that there were more men in the field meant there were more men in the extremes."I am in no way arguing that women should be given less opportunity than men."However, that was what you were doing when you mentioned people shouldn't bother offering girls a chance to learn and play chess because in general, they showed no interest.
@ Sunshiny, I was not referring to you when talking about misandry. Plus it wasn't a comment that should be taken literally. Just that it seems you are a jerk if you have a different opinion that women lobby ;)
Thanks Pdela. That was easy enough.
...Gotta get deeper.... Why don't women play? ...or is just because men being stronger decided women shouldn't play for no reason and a few generations of freedom have not fixed it yet?
Before you get too deep, you must master the shallow - there is no indication that men are stronger, only that they have better results. Whether you admit it or not, that premise shines through all your many paragraphs.
Please use the "quote" feature more judiciously.
4/19/2014 - Tisdall - Lee, London 1981
by Bruno-92 2 minutes ago
my mind is blown that any chess player could be below a 1300
by Pashakviolino 6 minutes ago
Can't play live chess
by mrcrowl 8 minutes ago
by dashkee94 13 minutes ago
how many players in blitz chess have rating more than 1200 in chess.com ?
by Ziggy_Zugzwang 13 minutes ago
Carlsen and the quest for 2900
by Scottrf 14 minutes ago
no piece and board showing up..its like blindfold
by jiraya1234 15 minutes ago
by dAbernon 22 minutes ago
Need help getting better at chess
by christophercookuncg 26 minutes ago
Never resign! Always fight till the end!
by pauwi9 27 minutes ago
Why Join | Chess Topics |
Help & Support |
© 2014 Chess.com
• Chess - English
We are working hard to make Chess.com available in over 70 languages. Check back over the year as we develop the technology to add more, and we will try our best to notify you when your language is ready for translating!