The Status of Female Players in Chess

I think a main point you may be overlooking is that the Women's tournaments and ratings may be in place to help grow a female chess playing public.  Women are allowed to compete on the same level as men must.  The purpose isn't to create an area where women can compete.  The purpose is to create an area where women will compete.  The rating standard for women allows girls who may be on the fence an attainable dream.  This may be enough to keep a small percentage of the female youth interested in the game.  If this happens a tiny bit with every generation, eventually women may be just as involved in the sport, and competing for the world title, to boot.

And I think it's good the filmstar broke his vow of silence on this issue.

Good Points.

It seems to me that the deck is stacked against women players because we bear the brunt of running a home.   If I am at a chess club, I'll mostly find men.  The only reason I am there is because I am neglecting some chore that a man would not do.  With women working, we work another job keeping the house in order, shopping, laundry, etc.   I think most men will agree that they shirk these duties and leave it up to the women to do even if they are working a full time job.  Therefore, I submit, that women do not have the same amount of leisure time that men do leaving them little time to explore their capabilities in a game that requires much studying and time to truly excel at.  Most families are not in the position to hire help for the time-consuming tasks that are left for the women to fulfill and by the time we perform these mind numbing tasks we are burnt out!

All the best.

Again, how do so many single men that obviously have to do all the "female" work themselves, still manage to excell in chess even to the point of world champions?

 If you've seen the average bachelor's flat, it's not hard to tell what gets the priority. Plus, a one-person household is substantially less work.

While there are certain jobs in the home that usually are done by the woman of the house (laundry, dishes, vacuuming etc) there are also jobs that typically the man does that never seems to get mentioned. Such as working on the car, yard work, handy work around the house, fixing/repairing etc.

 Exactly. The woman generally ends up doing the time- and effort-intensive tasks that have to be done every day (or almost every day), especially child care, while men usually limit their efforts around the house to things that only have to be done occasionally and irregularly.

Again, how do so many single men that obviously have to do all the "female" work themselves, still manage to excell in chess even to the point of world champions?

 If you've seen the average bachelor's flat, it's not hard to tell what gets the priority.

While there are certain jobs in the home that usually are done by the woman of the house (laundry, dishes, vacuuming etc) there are also jobs that typically the man does that never seems to get mentioned. Such as working on the car, yard work, handy work around the house, fixing/repairing etc.

 Exactly. The woman generally ends up doing the time- and effort-intensive tasks that have to be done every day (or almost every day), while men usually usually limit their efforts around the house to things that only have to be done occasionally and irregularly.

You appear to be making many generalizations, and attempting to apply them to all members of a single gender.  There are men who are extremely clean, and neat, and meticuluous in their housekeeping, as well as the average man who is unruly in appearance and housekeeping.   On the flip side, there are women who are slovenly, and women who are meticuluous.

You cannot generalize behavior caused by personality to affecting a whole gender, no matter what may be the average or norm for that gender. 

I think a lot of people are missing an important point: women are far less interested in chess. Like Loomis said, there are far less women at the top of chess, but there are also far less women at the bottom. So, it's only obvious that there would be less women master's. It doesn't really matter whether women are less interested due to biological reasons (which seems very unlikely) or sociological reasons, the bottom line is that women statistically aren't as likely to participate in chess (especially on a professional level), so it's only natural that there would be fewer masters.

Besides, even if you claim women are "worse" at chess than men, men still aren't as good as computers. There's no reason to brag about second place, dudes. 

it's just like many other games. Like rugby is mostly for men, ballet mostly girls etc etc. The funny thing is chess isn't very tough nor graceful (yeah yeah can be both) So it should be 50-50.

I think the main issue is that girls find it more important how they appear than guys. By that I also mean things people say or think about you. Since chess isn't considered cool or feminime, most females won't even start or try. 

At least, that's my theory 

 That is my conclusion as well.

I think the main issue is that girls find it more important how they appear than guys. By that I also mean things people say or think about you. Since chess isn't considered cool or feminime, most females won't even start or try.

 I think it would be more accurate to say that women and girls are more often judged on their appearance then their male counterparts. 

Females have the capability to play, but I still don't understand why they choose to not play just because of how they "appear" in public.

 As a lot of the women who have posted here have pointed out, that doesn't seem like the main reason. In fact, I'd say it's probably a good idea to take statements about women's abilities, preferences, and thoughts with a grain of salt when they don't come from women. 

But it's different kinds.  Men (generally) specialize in spacial intelligence and mathematics, and we all know how much that predominates chess.  Women, on the other hand, tend to have a higher propensity toward linguistic and emotional intelligence, and there's not much of that at all in chess.

Those studies are generally based on a lot of questionable assumptions, but the thing to keep in mind is that the gender difference in those skills would most like have been substantially greater 50 years ago. A lot of these apparent differences in terms of abilities, etc. are actually getting smaller over time.

I dont know why alot of these issues are important. The door to the world of chess appears to be open for anyone, man woman black or white. Whether some particular group or subsection of community plays less or more than another isn't something that needs fixing so long as that door is always open to everyone so people and society can change if they wish to.

As for self evaluation - that can sometimes have as many blind spots or more than an external evaluation.