Why Do Men Dominate Chess?
quillette.com
quillette.com
But it turns out to be a very well-written and comprehensive overview; could serve as a single reference on the topic.
Interesting stuff.
As an aside, I remember someone on HN saying something I found very meaningful (which I only remember paraphrased) and which I think I’ve tried to live by since. It went something like:
You know what stopped me from programming? It wasn’t the people who said I couldn’t code. It wasn’t the fact that I had limited access to a computer. It was nothing. Nothing stopped me from doing this.
Even if all the creeps and jerks in such areas were magically transformed into perfect gentlemen, women are mostly too wise to spend that much of their lives on long-odd gambits.
Doesn't sound like a convincing argument to me. What is your evidence for this?
I remember reading about a study looking at why boys who did very well in STEM subjects in high school were more likely to major in those subjects in college than girls who did very well in those subjects in high school.
They looked at how these kids who were at the top of their classes in STEM subjects did in their non-STEM subjects. The boys were much more likely than the girls to have STEM subjects as the only subjects where they were at the top of the class. They were often good in other subjects, but usually only outstanding in STEM.
The girls were more likely than the boys to be at the top in both STEM and non-STEM.
They speculated that this could partly explain why girls who are as good as the top boys in high school STEM subjects are less likely to major in such subjects in college.
Maybe there is something similar except for chess instead of STEM? So girls might obsess as much as boys, but girls who are good at chess might be more likely to also be good at something else and so are less likely to pick chess as what they obsess over.
So if males are slightly more competitive, obsessive, aggressive, and stronger on average, we end up with the populations of grandmasters, CEOs, professional sports, and prison populations all 90+ percent male.
The complaint kinda gets at the heart of the competition divide. A driven guy would say "that's what motivated me"
Sure, there's sexism in chess now, but does anyone seriously think 2020's chess players are more sexist than, say, lawyers and law teachers in the 60's and 70's? And yet women were able to steadily break through in law, and medicine, and so many other areas.
Because the female brain is different from the male brain. Everything that involves analytical thinking and physical competition is male dominated. Women are biologically incapable of competing with men on the same level in any sports. That's why they have their own leagues.
Not true. Women can, and do, beat mean head-to-head in ultra-running. Now yes, men win more than women on balance, but it's not unheard of for a woman to outright win a challenging ultra-marathon (as opposed to winning the "women's division"). There are probably other exceptions as well.
Statistically speaking, women are incapable of having the same performance as men. That's why trans-women dominate in female sports.
It seems like you are the operator of this website too as you exclusively created your account to post about it.
The first place spot on that competition was given to Claire Law, who is a male. In second place is Sarah Flamm, an actual woman, who should have been awarded the winning place.
Trans women are women.
https://img1.wsimg.com/blobby/go/5a2c6ab0-8c88-4f37-9827-694...
Fact is, a male was allowed to compete in this women's event, and he came in first place. And this is just one example of many, as the other hundreds of entries on https://shewon.org amply demonstrate.
A family relative is 6'4" female. Unlikely, but not imposible.
Although a D1 scholarship athlete, she recently asked an elderly (60+) male relative to open a jar for her.
Watch this video: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dChsc1LUaZ8