- Blind mode tutorial
lichess.org
Donate

Invisible Pieces: Women in Chess

#265

I believe your sex doesn't matter.
what you achieve is what matters.
nobody is going to help you.
i am not going to help you.
life is hard for everyone.
deal with it.

I believe your sex doesn't matter. what you achieve is what matters. nobody is going to help you. i am not going to help you. life is hard for everyone. deal with it.
#266

Identity politics is a Communist scam that utilizes psychological techniques in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the human psyche and is calculated to manufacture reliable blocks of Socialist voter groups. Don't fall for this garbage.

Identity politics is a Communist scam that utilizes psychological techniques in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the human psyche and is calculated to manufacture reliable blocks of Socialist voter groups. Don't fall for this garbage.
#267

please stop spewing feminist garbage. women and men do have differences in the brain. for example, although our IQs are about the same, women cluster more around the mean.

also guys post softcore porn because they're horny, not because they want to make women uncomfortable. if women wanted to do the same with guys, I wouldn't give a shit. this whole famale victim narrative/mentality has infested society quite enough. please dont assault the chess community with its presence too.

please stop spewing feminist garbage. women and men do have differences in the brain. for example, although our IQs are about the same, women cluster more around the mean. also guys post softcore porn because they're horny, not because they want to make women uncomfortable. if women wanted to do the same with guys, I wouldn't give a shit. this whole famale victim narrative/mentality has infested society quite enough. please dont assault the chess community with its presence too.
#268

#12 #21 Seriously? I can understand having a difference in opinions or philosophies, but gaslighting is another thing entirely. Only twice does our article use the word "equal" in conjunction with anything political: "equal opportunities" and "equality index." Of course there are facts about unpaid work, facts about how women compete under different conditions, and facts about how women are actually treated, in addition to facts about those in FIDE's employ. If you read the conclusion of our article, it doesn't even call for better representation or any other sort of improvement. I don't understand how this article can be read as a political piece. The insults I would love to fling here would get me banned from this site, so please... try to keep an open mind, I guess.

Our article doesn't even mention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_World_Chess_Championship_2017 ...

“I decided to drop out from WGP cycle after I received an unclear answer from FIDE regarding the possibility of a change in the current Women’s World Championship system. I participated in all previous cycles, since 2009, and the main reason in recent years was that the overall winner got the right to play the Women’s World Championship match. I didn’t think this was actually reasonable, but it was the only option I had.

Now the situation is different. I do not see any point in taking part in the different stages only to be able to play in the WWCC, especially when the opponents usually are at least one hundred points below me. For years now I have expressed my deep dissatisfaction to FIDE about this, but they didn’t accept anything I said. So I won’t consider staying in a system with which I completely disagree.”

“As for the 2017 Women's World Chess Championship in Iran, I decided not to take part in it, since Iran is obviously not a suitable country for such a prestigious competition. It is so wrong that those chess players, who refuse to go to Iran and to wear the hijab, simply lose the right to participate in the Championship for no reason.”

“I think it's unacceptable to host a Women's World Championship in a place where women do not have basic fundamental rights and are treated as second-class citizens.”

https://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-announces-participants-of-wwch-2017

"For 32-year-old Iranian Shohreh Bayat, the Women's World Chess Championship was meant to be a career highlight.

It is her first time as the event's chief arbiter - a senior role.

But that achievement has been clouded by controversy after the circulation of a photograph taken at game in Shanghai that appears to show Ms Bayat without a headscarf, as her country mandates.

She now feels unsafe to return to Iran, where women can be arrested for violating strict Islamic dress code."

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51103686

#12 #21 Seriously? I can understand having a difference in opinions or philosophies, but gaslighting is another thing entirely. Only twice does our article use the word "equal" in conjunction with anything political: "equal opportunities" and "equality index." Of course there are facts about unpaid work, facts about how women compete under different conditions, and facts about how women are actually treated, in addition to facts about those in FIDE's employ. If you read the conclusion of our article, it doesn't even call for better representation or any other sort of improvement. I don't understand how this article can be read as a political piece. The insults I would love to fling here would get me banned from this site, so please... try to keep an open mind, I guess. Our article doesn't even mention https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Women%27s_World_Chess_Championship_2017 ... “I decided to drop out from WGP cycle after I received an unclear answer from FIDE regarding the possibility of a change in the current Women’s World Championship system. I participated in all previous cycles, since 2009, and the main reason in recent years was that the overall winner got the right to play the Women’s World Championship match. I didn’t think this was actually reasonable, but it was the only option I had. Now the situation is different. I do not see any point in taking part in the different stages only to be able to play in the WWCC, especially when the opponents usually are at least one hundred points below me. For years now I have expressed my deep dissatisfaction to FIDE about this, but they didn’t accept anything I said. So I won’t consider staying in a system with which I completely disagree.” “As for the 2017 Women's World Chess Championship in Iran, I decided not to take part in it, since Iran is obviously not a suitable country for such a prestigious competition. It is so wrong that those chess players, who refuse to go to Iran and to wear the hijab, simply lose the right to participate in the Championship for no reason.” “I think it's unacceptable to host a Women's World Championship in a place where women do not have basic fundamental rights and are treated as second-class citizens.” https://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-announces-participants-of-wwch-2017 "For 32-year-old Iranian Shohreh Bayat, the Women's World Chess Championship was meant to be a career highlight. It is her first time as the event's chief arbiter - a senior role. But that achievement has been clouded by controversy after the circulation of a photograph taken at game in Shanghai that appears to show Ms Bayat without a headscarf, as her country mandates. She now feels unsafe to return to Iran, where women can be arrested for violating strict Islamic dress code." https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-51103686
#269

#264 True, that is relevant; what these experts fail to realize is how few women professionally play chess, and just how heavily discouraged women are from participating. I'm not pretending there is an overnight solution or that equality is a good thing, but dear god the current situation is such a mess.

#264 True, that is relevant; what these experts fail to realize is how few women professionally play chess, and just how heavily discouraged women are from participating. I'm not pretending there is an overnight solution or that equality is a good thing, but dear god the current situation is such a mess.
#270

Opening with the line "Women don't play chess, and when they do, they play badly." Was probably the worst thing you could have done in an article where you're trying to promote women in the game. Most critics of journalism will tell you that the opening paragraph is what sells the story. The opening paragraph of this article sells a completely different painting than the image you're trying to pick. In it's entirety, the article was very well put together. But the selling point in this article was probably the worst imaginable.

Opening with the line "Women don't play chess, and when they do, they play badly." Was probably the worst thing you could have done in an article where you're trying to promote women in the game. Most critics of journalism will tell you that the opening paragraph is what sells the story. The opening paragraph of this article sells a completely different painting than the image you're trying to pick. In it's entirety, the article was very well put together. But the selling point in this article was probably the worst imaginable.
#271

Excellent article! Very well-written and addresses almost all relevant issues!

I think that men have failed to adapt to the changing environment. Men were used to being the physically stronger sex, but as the article states, there was never any proof of intellectual superiority. Therefore, when physicality became almost nonexistent (I've never been in a fight :) and hope to never be in one), men failed to adapt and erected these illusions to retain their "status." I've met many smart women and many dumb men - surprisingly here in Lebanon, gender stereotypes concerning intelligence and achievement are not as common as you'd expect them to be (ones concerning roles, though, are).

Another point I'd like to make is about the "implication" of all of this. If we found out tomorrow that it is true that men are superior chess players to women and that this difference is biologically determined, what would that mean? Absolutely nothing, in my opinion. As a chess promoter, I'd still encourage women to play chess. We're all a bunch of patzers anyway (and Mr. Carlsen, if you're reading this, you need to be humble in the face of Stockfish), so who cares if you'll peak at #10,000 in the world if you're a female, but #9.998 if, ceteris paribus, you're male?!

Small quip: The ageism in the article kind of annoyed me, but otherwise, I greatly enjoyed it!

Excellent article! Very well-written and addresses almost all relevant issues! I think that men have failed to adapt to the changing environment. Men were used to being the physically stronger sex, but as the article states, there was never any proof of intellectual superiority. Therefore, when physicality became almost nonexistent (I've never been in a fight :) and hope to never be in one), men failed to adapt and erected these illusions to retain their "status." I've met many smart women and many dumb men - surprisingly here in Lebanon, gender stereotypes concerning intelligence and achievement are not as common as you'd expect them to be (ones concerning roles, though, are). Another point I'd like to make is about the "implication" of all of this. If we found out tomorrow that it is true that men are superior chess players to women and that this difference is biologically determined, what would that mean? Absolutely nothing, in my opinion. As a chess promoter, I'd still encourage women to play chess. We're all a bunch of patzers anyway (and Mr. Carlsen, if you're reading this, you need to be humble in the face of Stockfish), so who cares if you'll peak at #10,000 in the world if you're a female, but #9.998 if, ceteris paribus, you're male?! Small quip: The ageism in the article kind of annoyed me, but otherwise, I greatly enjoyed it!
#272

No matter whats the reason, women should try chess, its fun.

No matter whats the reason, women should try chess, its fun.
#273

"women aren't shorter than men. they just have access to less growth hormone in their adolescent years.

ok, it looks like they are shorter, but they are not. they just were under-privileged with respect to growth hormone.

they're not shorter. ok? ok? you get i? they're not shorter. it's men's fault. men are bad

women are just as tall as men."

that's what some of you sound like.

"women aren't shorter than men. they just have access to less growth hormone in their adolescent years. ok, it looks like they are shorter, but they are not. they just were under-privileged with respect to growth hormone. they're not shorter. ok? ok? you get i? they're not shorter. it's men's fault. men are bad women are just as tall as men." that's what some of you sound like.

This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.