Can women be as good at chess?

Sort:
Avatar of NitroGene
Raspberry_Yoghurt:
I will not enter into the debate on whether less egal society are doing better than egal societies. And I still believe that there is a social aspect to women's low participation in chess.

Let's agree that we disagree on these two topics. No hard feelings. Cheers
Avatar of trysts
Elubas wrote:
trysts wrote:
Elubas wrote:

Well, then. Should we now actually talk about the thread topic, or should we continue to talk about me? :)

Yes, I think it's a good time to get back to the fascinating and of course unique topic of this thread. I know it's one of your favourite subjects and I'm totally ready to endure the ever-surprising views of you and all the other men wishing to clarify it all for me:)

Well remember trysts, the topic is about "women," not you.

True, I'm just me, I'm not "women". In fact it's one of my personal joys to hear about this "women" species from those who know:)

Avatar of Raspberry_Yoghurt
NitroGene wrote:
Raspberry_Yoghurt:
I will not enter into the debate on whether less egal society are doing better than egal societies. And I still believe that there is a social aspect to women's low participation in chess.

Let's agree that we disagree on these two topics. No hard feelings. Cheers

There's nothing debate. You can just look it up. I am right and you are wrong because that is what the lists that show where the female GMs are coming from.

Ukraine has 4 female GMs, Canada 0, USA 1

Placement of the gender equality index: Georgia 76 Canada 9 USA 8.

This says if anything: You want many female GMs, you need to be low on the gender qquality list.

http://hdr.undp.org/en/composite/GII

Avatar of ChastityMoon

Sorry, it's me again.   My eyes aren't so good -  did you ask if women are better at chest or at chess?

Avatar of solskytz

Image result for judit polgar photo

Teach me about inverse ratio

Avatar of FRENCHBASHER
trysts a écrit :
Elubas wrote:

Well, then. Should we now actually talk about the thread topic, or should we continue to talk about me? :)

Yes, I think it's a good time to get back to the fascinating and of course unique topic of this thread. I know it's one of your favourite subjects and I'm totally ready to endure the ever-surprising views of you and all the other men wishing to clarify it all for me:)

Hilarious 8 pages off off off topic , woffwoof woff, stop pepete!

Hi MOON nice to see u again, Raspberry swept, it happens.

this thread is fascinating, the best of us,if we know who I'm.

Elubas is ALWAYS good on any subject, too bad he finds me undecipherable. I work like a beast to be better.

Back to the topic the favourite of frenchies, respecting Dames, ....ie checkers too, it is not funny. The truth is never funny; the peace is. Too much psychodram , here.

(nb i loved the joke : ....Dyson, Mike Dyson ...)

When you know who I am, u go back to topic, ppl. And only the topic, ty for OP, for Elubas work, bwahaha ViceOP : no show !! is this a pb ? No Sir, a revolution !

Vive OP, vive chess , CC, moon, and Jovis.

Avatar of DjonniDerevnja
Raspberry_Yoghurt wrote:
DjonniDerevnja wrote:
iatanbaal wrote:

It is proven by many different disciplines (psycolocy, anthropology etc) that distinctions between men and women according to mental abilities are culturally orientated and not scientifically originated. The most usual (wrong) argument is that men are better in maths than women. The same goes for chess. There are various parameters not taken into account by those who state that women are not as good as men at chess. For instance what is the ratio of men and women playing chess in the overall population? I suspect that more men play chess than women, so there are more chances to have male talents than female. Plus, scrolling down the posts i saw an argument according to which women tend to play less aggressively. In my opinion it is a very nice example of how self-fulfilling prophecies work: the way a person plays reveals his/her personnality, which is a social constraction based upon natural characteristics. Centuries of civilization created a canonical image for women which is anything but aggressive. So when we note a behaviour according to this pattern we simply confirm the preordained image we have created for women and they have accepted it. It is not a matter of sex, but of (socially constructed) gender.

In my chessclub Nordstrand we are ca 95 active men between 7 and 90 years old, and 4 active girls from 7 years to 13. Those girls does better than the average boy at the same age. Two of the girls already have been playing several games representing Norway (for kids). The large girls (11 and 13) have beaten me more than I`ve beaten them.

4 girls don't count for anything argumentativewise. You can't base an average on just 4 people lol. You could proove Danes were way better skiers than Norwegians like that :)

My point is that those 4 girls are very good, but outnumbered. Women are good at chess, but because they are outnumbered they seldom reach top 50. The youngest of these girls also might be the largest talent at Nordstrand, certainly GM -talent, maybe super-GM talent.Her father told me she got the same talent as her big brother(clubchampion) but that she is working harder.

I also believe that the danes are worse than norwegians skiing because they are outnumbered and also lacks trainingenvironments.

If, and that is the really big if, the girls keep on working hard at chess for more than a decade, many of them will become strong GM`s. The problem is when they get 15-20 years old there will be distractions that might pull them away from the board. Boys have that problem too, but because of the huge number there still are many supertalents left that is hardworking.

Avatar of fishyvishy

I am going to say something really racist here, and it may offend some people. But, humans as a race created chess.

Avatar of anntaylor

One of the most unusual chess titans 3D games is waiting for you. Magic Chess 3D - play chess with your friends and have fun! Cool
https://www.microsoft.com/en-us/store/apps/magic-chess-3d-continuum/9nblggh4p34k 

Avatar of Babytigrrr
trysts wrote:
Elubas wrote:
trysts wrote:
Elubas wrote:

Well, then. Should we now actually talk about the thread topic, or should we continue to talk about me? :)

Yes, I think it's a good time to get back to the fascinating and of course unique topic of this thread. I know it's one of your favourite subjects and I'm totally ready to endure the ever-surprising views of you and all the other men wishing to clarify it all for me:)

Well remember trysts, the topic is about "women," not you.

True, I'm just me, I'm not "women". In fact it's one of my personal joys to hear about this "women" species from those who know:)

I think you forget that the men on here have studied 'women' in detail and have highly specialised scientific 'knowledge' about a woman's psyche and sex differences. Including our vulnerabilites, fears, passions and anxieties... we must read what they say, in order to give us a greater understanding of ... women.

Avatar of FRENCHBASHER
[COMMENT DELETED]
Avatar of Babytigrrr

Another little snippet of scientific excellence... gone forevs.

Avatar of FRENCHBASHER

yes

We think one's  forget that the men on here have studied 'women' in detail and have highly specialised scientific 'knowledge' about a woman's psyche and sex differences. Including vulnerabilites, fears, passions and anxieties... it is a must to read what we say, Pdela master of Science, in order to give us a greater understanding of ... women. I assume we probably should know more about it.           

Truth is something like a bottle , something half full, half empty. Sometimes me Frenchbasher no Pete, empty the bottle. Fear is important , i assume it is a hint of paranoia too. sometimes it derails from topics, sometimes it helps us to drive better left than right. Who knows ? Elubas, Elroch, El Cordobes ??Laughing

Avatar of kadvs
Of course! :)
Avatar of trysts
Babytigrrr wrote:

Another little snippet of scientific excellence... gone forevs.

Laughing

Avatar of iatanbaal
Megabyte έγραψε:
iatanbaal wrote:

 In my opinion it is a very nice example of how self-fulfilling prophecies work: the way a person plays reveals his/her personnality, which is a social constraction based upon natural characteristics. Centuries of civilization created a canonical image for women which is anything but aggressive. So when we note a behaviour according to this pattern we simply confirm the preordained image we have created for women and they have accepted it. It is not a matter of sex, but of (socially constructed) gender.

Initially I thought a cultural explanation was plausible, but now I think it doesn't explain everything. It doesn't explain, for example, why gay men, which a few studies show to have a more feminine brain (varying in degree, with transexuals being the most feminine), are less likely to get involved in group aggressions. They still show a aggression pattern similar to straight men, but it's mostly individual aggression; therefore, gay men are not as likely to join a gang. Of course, a similar trend applies to women: they are less likely to get involved in crimes overall, and when they do, crimes are less violent on the average. Even psychopathic women are usually less violent than their male counterparts, more likely to rely, for example, on parasitic behavior.

The thing is, the differences between men and women are less obvious than what you would think, and are not easily explained by stereotypes. Nobody would intuitively think that women tend to play more solid and less aggressive than men, for example, even if their playing strength ends up being the same in the end.

Nothing of what you have written actually proves a non-cultural origin of the gender differences. For instance: how many gangs do you have in mind that would accepted a homosexual as a member? Plus what are our culture's expectations of non-male genders? Aren' t we taught that aggression is a man's attitude? As i said before: self fulfilling prophecies.

 
Avatar of Megabyte
iatanbaal wrote:

Nothing of what you have written actually proves a non-cultural origin of the gender differences. For instance: how many gangs do you have in mind that would accepted a homosexual as a member? Plus what are our culture's expectations of non-male genders? Aren' t we taught that aggression is a man's attitude? As i said before: self fulfilling prophecies.

 

If the problem with gay men was just non-acceptance by straight gang members, they could form gangs themselves. But that's not frequent at all.

As for cultural reinforcement, yes, men are being taught aggression is male behavior. But so are gay men, and gay men are still less aggressive. Haven't you ever wondered why gay men are cursed with words like "sissy", or "girly"? If they were more aggressive on the average, the curses would be "rabid dog", or "troglodyte". But it's not common at all to hear gay men being called rabid dogs, is it?

Don't get me wrong: I'm not taking for granted social behavior when considering male and female roles. But I don't think it's correct to say ALL male and female behavior derives from social norms.

Avatar of trysts

Hmm...Don't know about this 'gay men are not aggressive' stereotype you're fixated on? There are famous gay serial killers--Dahmer, John Wayne Gacy, Wayne Willams, etc. 

Avatar of u0110001101101000
Darth_Algar wrote:

Playing stronger competition makes you stronger, and few women routinely play stronger male players, as they are incentivized to essentially self-segregate.

Most tournaments are open to all, so this sounds like something you made up off the top of your head. It seems the majority of events for active players are necessarily open events.

Also, it seems to me this is only a good argument if females and males were statistically equal at all levels except at the top (where supposedly the ~2500 rated women are getting stuck by playing women only events). Because e.g. as an 1800 female in a female only event you could play higher rated players. It's only a problem for the top rated females.

Avatar of Suman3

Women are not as good as men in chess., and the reason is biological ... - an assumption that has little empirical evidence to support it, but still there seems to be something that can't be explained, like the ratings difference of top men versus women players, and never in recorded history a world champion woman... Who knows, the jerks maybe proven right in future, (I'm in pessimistic mood now) :P

This forum topic has been locked