Females that play chess are surrounded by an allure and mystery in the chess world. We are seen as a beautiful and tragic anomaly for the pleasure of the male gaze. A nice novelty that people can read about and think "That's nice. Feminism has come so far." The reality of being an actual woman who plays chess is far less poetic.
As a woman, I deal with sexism almost every time I play chess. I have experienced sexism from relatively minor offenses that in some twisted way could be seen as a compliment, to serious sexual harassment. The day to day life of a female chess player is fraught with micro and macro agressions from male chess players.
Naturally, I'm sure a few of my sweet readers will be skeptical of my claims. But one would only need to spend a few weeks checking my direct messages to see some of the ridiculous and lude things dudes feel like they can send to me, and they would clearly see the stuff I have to put up with. Or perhaps instead I should describe how a guy I played in a tournament once suggested that the only reason I won was because of my cleavage. Like for real? I've played hundreds of guys, and never once was I so overcome with sexual attraction that I wasn't able to focus on my game. Or maybe that's not serious enough. Maybe I need to talk about how a fellow chess player consistently would seek me out and make uncomfortable and unwanted sexual advances on me.
Whatever the case may be, whatever evidence that the world needs to understand the prominence of sexism in the chess world, is beyond my understanding. Instead, I'd rather just call it like it is, and hope that talking about will in some way lead to change.
As the man who literally wrote the book on PUA and chess (and using chess as a PUA tactic), I'll chime in:
Most female chessplayers are "geek queens," who know they can't compete with the barbies at the sports bars for the frat boys and jocks they really want, so they effectively betray their gender, seeking out large clusters of geeks where they know their high IQ and very moderate good looks will rule, because they will be every geek's dream woman: smart, attainable (or so they think), and so NICE they won't reject them horribly. Of course they are so NICE that they can feign offense at any advance so there's never a good time to hit on them.
As she strings along 6,277 probability-challenged geeks, all of whom consider her their soulmate, she secretly longs for that jock or frat boy, or, the best of both worlds: the "alpha geek."
Well now the chess world knows why I was that "idiot" who thought he could be world champion. I'd have loser geeks insulting me as if they were better than me, then slobbering over women who used to beg me for sex, women I'd reject. It was like the more contempt the geeks had for me, the more the hot chicks wanted me.
At 24, the game was up for me, as I was becoming more chess degenerate than rising star. I then became a writer and started that little PUA movement, which I'm bringing back with 9x9 chess, the secret PUA conspiracy (9x9 has a king and two queens, as it should be).
This has to be my favorite post from this thread. What an amusingly absurd analysis, and I applaud you for your creativity.
Neverfearthedark made a post which did nothing more than waste time.
She wrote 4 hard to read paragraphs in red highlight which could be summed up in a single sentence!
"Boys will be Boys!"
What a waste of hard drive space.
"However, I think that, as in team sports, one piece can act as a "decoy" and can be used as an effective distraction on the board. Never underestimate the potential power of pieces that you might too readily perceive as being "bad" pieces."
I don't disagree with you. Good point.
I prefer "framework" to "biases" hehe. But I think that's fair.
We have to assume something!
I mean, even in daily life. Our minds are very limited. We assume lots of stuff even when accomplishing basic tasks or interactions.
Yup. Agreed. Anyone who says otherwise is a hypocrite.
"Interesting. Biases actually serve an important function then - to show us when we need to calculate and which lines we should be checking while calculating. Is that a fair assessment?"
Right. Biases are in a lot of ways good, even. It's just more interesting to focus on the bad, because those situations often represent big mistakes. I may have a bias towards having a piece in the center, and so, that's most likely the first place I'll look, but unlike a much weaker player perhaps, I'm still quite open to taking a quick glance at other options for that piece, just to make sure I'm not limiting my options in terms of the plan I pick. Whereas a much weaker player will just give into the bias without any thought. That's easy for an opponent to abuse -- they can just play a counter-intuitive move, and assume the player will only focus on the superficial, and let the real idea slip right by.
Women face gender discrimination in daily life. They should not have to put up with this constantly but it's an unfortunate reality. And in male-dominated spheres of activity such as chess and gaming, among others, this discrimination is only more amplified. Part of the reason why things are worse online is because of the anonymity factor. Men can say whatever they want and act as ugly as they want from behind the comfort and security of a computer monitor (or phone screen). I can guarantee that the vast majority of men (I use that word in the most general sense, because they really cannot be called men at all in any sense of the word) would never even think to send the OP any kind of content of an objectionable nature if they had the prospect of ever being face to face with her. In fact, they probably would not even be able to say hello.
Maybe nit-picking, but I don't like that sort of stuff. Using "man" as if it were a title you had to earn.
Men are (or should be) honorable, outgoing, determined, self sacrificing etc? That's just silly to me. Individuals are themselves. A man, no, people. People can be weak, people can be shy, can be cowardly, selfish, etc.
Well if "men" are so bad I don't want to be one anyway :)
But ok, actually, a lot of people with feminist views do tend to also believe that men shouldn't have to give into the macho stereotypes and what not. Funnily enough, the "feminists" who tell men to "be a real man and treat a woman with respect" are usually men :p Most female feminists I've found don't tend to do that. Draw from that what you will :)
"the vast majority of men who happen to be harassing the OP using the online features here would never have the courage to be offensive in front of her face"
And thank heavens for that?
"the vast majority of men who happen to be harassing the OP using the online features here would never have the courage to be offensive in front of her face"
And thank heavens for that?
Oh do I wish this was the case. In all honesty, I would have to say that I've dealt with equal amounts of online and OTB sexism. Perhaps this is because in my area there are no all female clubs or tournaments, and I am almost always one woman in a sea of men. I honestly think my exposure to it comes from my inability to stay out of spaces where women aren't typically welcome. I just have interests that are typically stereotyped as masculine such as chess.
That's just what I look like. Not sure what to do about that. I literally only posted a picture of myself. That's honest to god what I look like (though it is a bit outdated by a year or two). I don't understand how you get "I want to be looked at out and therefore recieve lots of dirty and disrespectful comments." Its rather judgemental of you to claim to know my inner thoughts and intentions regarding my looks.
I don't see why I have to be socialized to hide myself because men have not been socialized to control themselves. Seems a bit, dare I say, unequal to me.
And that wouldn't be ok either.
@PositionalChessMC
You should never agrue with a fool.
The reason why is because the fool shall dragg you down to there illogical level and than beat you with experience.
The way to beat a fool is on the dance floor!
I don't see why I have to be socialized to hide myself because men have not been socialized to control themselves. Seems a bit, dare I say, unequal to me.
You make it sound like men are animals, and it's just that the nice ones hide it.
Harassment doesn't come from men. It comes from immoral people who are men.
You walk around in a bad neighborhood at night wearing nice things and you'll get mugged. Not because poor people are animals, but some immoral people are also poor.
Immoral people may inconvenience you, but it is your choice. Not posting a pic of yourself is completely painless.
"So you, the OP, willingly play into that bs where you need to "present" your looks to the world and then complain when you take a cute picture and get attention for it."
Yeah, this is the kind of stuff I tend to think. I think (call it speculation, but...) that, part of what makes anyone excited about their looks, if they are, is that they think "Now I can present this to all these people, and this is what they'll see, rather than something ugly." They're thinking about the statement they're making to the world, the interaction even. When you look at someone while having a made up face, you're well aware of the persona you're presenting. You're saying, this is how I want you to see me look, this is what I want to present to you. So in a sense you're partaking in the "looks are important" area, just as the guys who make comments are, by deciding on how you wanted to look with so much detail.
It's true, I can't read minds, and not every individual has to act like I describe. It's just that, it's not mere coincidence or sexism that this observation comes to my mind. A guy with really groomed hair tends to give me a similar impression, that he's trying. And that's fine, that's a life choice, but just be honest about it. Don't try to advocate against people who care enough about looks to comment on it, if you care about and think about those looks just as much. Leave that to the people who truly don't care.
Although, yes, you are free to advocate against outright rudeness! And I'll support you on that wholeheartedly!
instead, delete any posts on your profile, pick a tree- or mountain as you avatar and name it something neutral... and Who would know what sex you are, online?
or to be even more anonymous,create another new account.
So you're saying females shouldn't 'provoke' us by using a picture as an avatar? Great idea! and OTB they should definitely wear a burka or hijab...
You are fucking deluded...
This is a male problem, females shouldn't adapt to those assholes, that's just twisting the problem.
instead, delete any posts on your profile, pick a tree- or mountain as you avatar and name it something neutral... and Who would know what sex you are, online?
or to be even more anonymous,create another new account.
So you're saying females shouldn't 'provoke' us by using a picture as an avatar? Great idea! and OTB they should definitely wear a burka or hijab...
You are fucking deluded...
This is a male problem, females shouldn't adapt to those assholes, that's just twisting the problem.
Well I mean at least two things exist. You have guys that can't control themselves, and you have girls that do things for attention. Sometimes the issue is that there is a girl who is doing something normal but the guy is being an animal. Sometimes, the girl is acting like an attention whore and the guy is reacting normally. Sometimes the girl is acting like an attention whore and the guy is being an animal And sometimes both the guy and the girl are acting reasonably and there is no problem.
Sorry trysts :)
Men/Women/Humans are mammals.
Mammals are a subdivision/type of animal.
Which is to say 0110001101101000 post 152 is wrong.
Men can be considered animals.
Any human can be considered an animal.
The term "Harassment" is a word.
The word "Harassment" is defined as aggressive pressure or intimidation.
The word "Harassment" is not gender related or even sex related.
Thus, It can be applyed to anything which resembles the definition.
For example:
If I was to say I am going to crush my opponent like a bug and my opponent than felt intimidated by my words and actions.
He could agrue I was harrassing him.
As for moral, immoral, unethical or ethical those are all society based.
What may seem unethical to one person may be seen as the normal way of life to another person.
These things exist in the world in a lot of different things!
Lets take marrage as an example.
In the US it is considered illegal & unethical to try and marry a minor.
A minor is defined as a person who is under the age of 18.
Thus, if you was to try and marry a women in the US who is 16 years old you would go to jail and it would be considered unethical.
In different Spanish Cultures around the world.
Marrying a women who is at the age 16 is considered the normal way of life.
Take Mexico for example.
A women at the age of 16 is considered an adult. Who is allowed to get marryed.
One person may consider this marrage at the age of 16 a day of immortal, unethical and even criminal events!
Another person may consider this marrage at the age of 16 a day of celebration, filled with a big feast/party, and even considered a monumental day!
How are you going to tell this person he is unethic for doing this marrage when his society has been doing this for over a thousand years?
This is what some people don't understand.
Not every society is the same in the World.
It is a big World out there.
In some cultures(societies) a man sending a women repeat messages could be considered harrassement!
In other cultures(societies) a man sending a women repeat messages could be considered honorable!
An you might ask how on earth can him sending repeat messages be considered honorable?
Well I will explain:
You see he is so infatuated by your beauty.
He is compelled to send you messages.
Even after being rejected hundreds of times he can't help, but to send you another message.
He is compelled to talk to you.
The reason why is because he loves you.
He may have never seen you before in his life.
He may have never even had the chance to talk to you in his life.
He may not know anything about you.
And yet he loves you.
The reason why is because even thought he knows nothing about you; He knows one thing!
He knows how his heart feels toward you.
And that is all he needs to know!
His perseverance to send you messages through all the struggles is considered honorable!
Which is why people who talk about ethics on this forum are completely wrong.
Even the OP is wrong.
You can't say anything about a person if you don't even know the situation of the person in question.
Do you know his society?
Do you know there culture?
I have already given several examples demonstrating how ethics is society based!
The only thing which can be applyed here is the rules and regulations which govern the site.
Which is designed to try and give guidelines on how a person is suppose to treat situations such as this.
From my understanding.
If a person sends you messages you are allowed to block them.
If the person continues by some strange means than you can contact a staff memeber.
However, no were does it say for anyone to say anything directed to those people!
If you call a person unethical when he believes he is being honorable in accordance with his society and culture!
That is discrimination!
You cann't discriminate another person's culture and society!
Furthermore, chess.com has guidelines and rules about discrimination.
There's a girl on chess.com... LET'S GET HER!!!! 