do you also think it´s unfair that women get titled easier?

Stop saying these things.

I don't appreciate it, kids use this platform you know?

I don't really care about your age. Wether my age is 5 years old, or 80 years old, you still should not be saying inappropriate things. I've reported you and will do it again if this persists.

There are people here between the ages of 5-18 which is minors. Saying these things could cause a lot of problems.

Or she may get more respect by virtue of a halo effect. I think they have done studies like that, and it just seems plausible that if you put a man and a woman in front of people, have them perform some kind of task, and they are both equally good at it, the average stranger (whether male or female) is going to perceive the woman as better at it, because they are perceiving the skill plus the intrigue of their being female, as well as also trying to look out for them in some subconscious way, which will give them more positive associations with what the woman is doing compared to the man doing the same thing.

Heck, even if the woman were slightly worse at it than the man, most people probably wouldn't be able to tell the difference, and their attitudes towards women would be the deciding factor, and they would probably think she was more skilled and cheer her on as an inspiration for women or something.

This is because we are very sensitive to women showcasing their skills, in that we keenly take notice very quickly when they are performing something that requires skill. With men, their displays of skill have more of a tendency to blend into the background in our minds, and they perk us up less.

Bruh, I am not even surprised that teens like us like this current topic. 😅 @SernasGambit so what if kids use the website? The website population boom won't let staff see these dumb threads. In fact it's most likely to go unseen for 1-2 years. R u a kid?

Well, well, well, look who it is... Mr Elubas himself.

Yeah man, I'll reply later, too tired right now.

Okay. I'll explain this once again. First of all, just because you are a teen doesn't grant you authority to abuse your language on websites with children. So what if the moderators don't receive a chance to view this? I'm speaking on behalf of everyone who feels incredibly uncomfortable about these subjects. Even if it is a 17 year old they might feel overwhelmed by these topics, unlike you who thinks it is completely normal to speak about subjects like this knowing or not knowing it is against the rules. Especially women. How would you feel if you got a direct message with a 14 year old saying inappropriate stuff to you. I'd certainly feel uncomfortable. Maybe not you but I can guarantee you the majority of people would.

And if you are going to use my name I ask you please spell it correctly.

This could be tricky to show, because oftentimes when someone doesn't succeed, that's taken as evidence of them being discriminated against. The inverse of that, though, is that, when someone does succeed, it may simply be a sign of a lack of discrimination that they experienced.

Might it be that Hou Yifan is more successful than other female chess players because she was one of the lucky ones who didn't suffer from as much discrimination as most other female chess players? As we know, of course, everyone has different individual experiences, and so there will be variance in how much prejudice and discrimination a person suffers through. Some women might face a lot, and some might not face a lot, depending on their specific case. Given the idea that prejudice/discrimination is often the reason behind less success, Hou Yifan's higher level of success than other female players is potential evidence of her facing less prejudice than other female chess players.

One could bring up anecdotes and such of Hou Yifan being mistreated, but this is of course anecdotal evidence, whereas looking at the disparity between her level of success and that of other female chess players seems to be much more data driven, as ratings are defined by the data of the results of chess games.

Not that it isn't obvious at a glance but... went ahead and ran the stats... it's a cheater so... yeah, better play him while he's still not closed.

15% of grandmasters are women. Its unbelievable how much women have officially quit---and almost quit due to the negative response from men. If your here telling me that women perk you up more than maybe try giving us a little bit more respect.

But your point is valid. Sometimes people tend to focus more on the female players due to the male players because of their past history. And women don't get titles easier but they do get famous easier just because people know how hard it is to become a well-respected female player. Most girls get inspired by the famous chess players like Judit polgar, and the Botez sisters but in reality.. Are we judged the same?

I cannot believe how much this society has split up women and men in the chess community. There is a title called Grandmaster then there is a title called Woman Grandmaster. How come no matter what gender or identity you refer to, you will be called just "Grandmaster" No need for the "Woman" .

The famous female chess players we look up to today have even spoke about their experiences in the chess community. Including harassment, and insults.

Doesn't help much. It's a throw away fresh account. They'll just create a new one. By that time all the precious children would have read their content.

Now if there was a priority reporting mechanism that mods would see first with a 1 week mute for those who abuse it, that might help somewhat.

Maybe I should suggest that....But they are busy I doubt they'd see it.

What an original response, never seen anything like it...

Well, this might come as a shock to you, but, to be titled, you don't necessarily have to get the same title as the ones that are open to men. You could get one of the titles that requires a lower rating than the ones open to men; lower ratings are easier to achieve than higher ones; ergo, there is an easier title available for women to acquire compared to men; acquiring a title makes you titled; ergo, it's easier for a woman to get titled than a man, which, as it happens, is the topic under discussion.

If you disagree, then I guess Chess.com has got Titled Tuesday all wrong. Some of the titled players there must not have been titled because some of the titles that they got might have been different from some of the titles that some of the other people got, and so some of the titles must have spontaneously popped out of existence or something, causing the players affected by this scenario to actually be untitled. Duh!

Also, it seems that people, of all kinds, do care about comparative benefit, rather than just absolute benefit. If we made a title that was available only to men, and they only needed a 1200 rating to get it, this would "affect absolutely nothing regarding the" current titles that women have, but I take it that this fact would not do much in the way of assuaging the anger that most women would have if such a title were created.

In other words, you might be missing the point if you think that those complaining about the women's titles are chiefly doing so because they are worried that they will cause their Grandmaster title to be taken away from them or something I'm pretty sure that they are well aware that FIDE is not going to go find them and force them to renounce their title Thanks for reassuring them just in case, though!

"15% of grandmasters are women. Its unbelievable how much women have officially quit---and almost quit due to the negative response from men."

I'm sceptical of that. It's hard to imagine loving something, and then because some people give you negative responses, you decide not to play that game anymore. Imagine that you were in the middle of discovering an amazing opening novelty that would even make Kasparov proud, but, you just stop wanting to do it because you got some negative responses from people? You don't need to speak to them to discover that opening novelty, you know. Chess pieces don't talk.

It's one thing to say that you get negative experiences. It's another to say that you would give up something you love doing just to avoid those negative experiences. I suspect that there were many more factors at play than just the negative experiences, if you ask these women why they quit. Pay attention to those factors, too. Try to isolate the variables.

"But your point is valid. Sometimes people tend to focus more on the female players due to the male players because of their past history."

I don't think "past history" is the main reason. It's a more general psychological thing. Even something as banal and seemingly boring as the sight of a woman reading a book can often be intriguing to a man, for example. Evolutionarily, men have an outgroup preference regarding gender, and evolutionarily, women have an ingroup preference regarding gender, so both genders end up perceiving women more positively for the same thing.

Again, think of the Halo Effect, of which I assume you're aware. It's when, because of a general positive opinion of a person, they get perceived as having certain positive qualities that they don't have (or have to a lesser extent than is perceived), or vice versa. The Halo Effect is often what is at play when perceiving a woman doing the same thing that a man is doing: the general opinion they have of the woman is manifesting in specific characteristics of which they perceive, that they wouldn't attribute as readily, if at all, to a man doing the same thing.

Let's assume that we are talking about the average man versus the average woman to help isolate the variables at play. In those cases there is a significant Halo Effect that women have on people.