Debates Forum

Debates Forum

  1. Zugzwang
    Joined
    08 Jun '07
    Moves
    2120
    20 Apr '15 05:01
    British GM Nigel Short has provoked controversy by saying 'we should just
    gracefully accept' that women are (inevitably) inferior to men in chess on
    account of natural biological differences, relating to the (gendered) brain.

    "Men and women do have different brains. That is a biological fact."
    --Nigel Short

    Some women chess players have criticized his dogmatic conclusion.

    "Chess definitely has a problem with sexism. I have faced it all my career."
    --Sabrina Chevannes

    I also have noticed sexist attitudes and comments among chess players.
    If male and females participated in chess in equal numbers and with equal
    support and encouragement, then I suspect that nearly all of the supposed
    'biological difference' in performance would not be evident.
  2. Standard memberKellyJay
    Walk your Faith
    USA
    Joined
    24 May '04
    Moves
    149021
    20 Apr '15 05:36
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    British GM Nigel Short has provoked controversy by saying 'we should just
    gracefully accept' that women are (inevitably) inferior to men in chess on
    account of natural biological differences, relating to the (gendered) brain.

    "Men and women do have different brains. That is a biological fact."
    --Nigel Short

    Some women chess players have critici ...[text shortened]... ct that nearly all of the supposed
    'biological difference' in performance would not be evident.
    It is a game of brain against brain, I know there are female players I
    cannot beat. The woman who takes the title from a man will show all that
    there isn't anything about the gender that will give or take away from
    the women and chess. Until that time they have an argument where they
    can present the case, but it is an argument only until they show everyone
    that it matters. Personally, I think it will happen some day, when and who,
    who knows, but that is my opinion.
  3. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Apr '15 05:391 edit
    There are definitely differences (statistically) between male and female brains, but I agree that the current imbalance in Chess performance can mostly be attributed to participation numbers. I have to say that participation numbers may at least in part be caused by differences between male and female brains. In my own family, the women have performed just as well as the men academically but shown less interest in chess. It is possible there was some cultural bias discouraging them from taking an interest, but I don't think so. I do think that had they taken an interest, they would have performed as well as or better than I have.
  4. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Apr '15 05:43
    Of course if we really want to know the answer, scientific studies are the way to go. 'Ask a male chess player' is certainly not that best way to find out.
  5. Account suspended
    Joined
    26 Aug '07
    Moves
    38239
    20 Apr '15 09:32
    Originally posted by Duchess64
    British GM Nigel Short has provoked controversy by saying 'we should just
    gracefully accept' that women are (inevitably) inferior to men in chess on
    account of natural biological differences, relating to the (gendered) brain.

    "Men and women do have different brains. That is a biological fact."
    --Nigel Short

    Some women chess players have critici ...[text shortened]... ct that nearly all of the supposed
    'biological difference' in performance would not be evident.
    I doubt there is significant difference to warrant his silly assertion, after all Judith Polgar kicked his butt. He is employing what appears to be a deductively sound argument but its empirically fallacious. You Hifan would kicks his butt and so would all the Russian, Chinese and Ukrainian ladies team members.

    I personally enjoyed the recent ladies world championship match immensely, it was refreshing to see such humility and the press conferences were a dream. Compare those to the Carlsen/Anand ones which were painful, one word replies and a total lack of expression.
  6. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    20 Apr '15 09:56
    we should abolish women chess championship and give it ten years. i am absolutely certain the gender distribution will be uniform after.
  7. Standard memberSeitse
    Doug Stanhope
    That's Why I Drink
    Joined
    01 Jan '06
    Moves
    33672
    20 Apr '15 10:25
    I've heard their periods attract bears.
  8. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Apr '15 10:43
    Originally posted by Zahlanzi
    we should abolish women chess championship and give it ten years. i am absolutely certain the gender distribution will be uniform after.
    For that to be the case, then women would have to be significantly better than men as there are a lot less girls that go into chess at a young age - a trend that will almost certainly continue well into the future for a variety of reasons - including discrimination.
  9. Standard memberwolfgang59
    Mr. Wolf
    at home
    Joined
    09 Jun '07
    Moves
    45641
    20 Apr '15 11:20
    1. Games (like chess) are designed by men for men.

    2. Less women than men play chess.

    3. The intelligence spectrum for women is less broad than for men.

    4. Women's brains are better suited to useful tasks.

    5. Women are - in general - less competitive.


    Maybe once a millennia there will be a female World Champion.
  10. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Apr '15 12:25
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    4. Women's brains are better suited to useful tasks.
    I dispute that. How do you even decide what is a 'useful task'?
  11. Standard memberSleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    Dustbin of history
    Joined
    13 Apr '07
    Moves
    12727
    20 Apr '15 13:02
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    I dispute that. How do you even decide what is a 'useful task'?
    Well, chess can't be 🙂

    Maybe women are too smart to spend their lives staring at 64 little squares.
  12. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    20 Apr '15 13:35
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    For that to be the case, then women would have to be significantly better than men as there are a lot less girls that go into chess at a young age - a trend that will almost certainly continue well into the future for a variety of reasons - including discrimination.
    when girls get into chess they are told they are less than boys. that they should compete with other girls. they grow up and asholes like kasparov and now this guy keep saying they aren't good enough.

    it is not surprising less girls get into chess.


    however that is not the issue. we don't have to aspire to 50-50 ratio between men and women. we must aspire to offer the same opportunity to all players. if this year, the top 10 in the world are males, so be it. next year number 11 will have another chance to improve his/her game and try again.


    but yes, you are right. abolishing men/women championships is not enough. we also have to change education which discourages girls from getting into math and science. that tells girls they are less than boys on an intellectual level.
  13. Joined
    04 Feb '05
    Moves
    29132
    20 Apr '15 13:41
    Originally posted by wolfgang59
    1. Games (like chess) are designed by men for men.

    2. Less women than men play chess.

    3. The intelligence spectrum for women is less broad than for men.

    4. Women's brains are better suited to useful tasks.

    5. Women are - in general - less competitive.


    Maybe once a millennia there will be a female World Champion.
    1. Games (like chess) are designed by men for men.
    nonsense. at no point in a chess game is a penis needed.

    2. Less women than men play chess.
    because we discouraged girls to get into chess. because morons like kasparov and this guy aren't ridiculed for their outdated thinking

    3. The intelligence spectrum for women is less broad than for men.
    nonsense and already disproved thoroughly.

    4. Women's brains are better suited to useful tasks.
    elaborate

    5. Women are - in general - less competitive.
    again, because they are conditioned by society that competitiveness is a masculine trait and unattractive. little girls feign stupidity so they fit into the idea of feminity that is hammered into them and into boys


    "Maybe once a millennia there will be a female World Champion."
    incredibly mysoginistic. we are still struggling with gender equality TODAY, there have't been 10 years of real gender equality and you presume to say "once in a millenia". there has hardly been 1000 years of MALE (sort of) enlightenment.
  14. Cape Town
    Joined
    14 Apr '05
    Moves
    52945
    20 Apr '15 13:42
    Originally posted by Sleepyguy
    Well, chess can't be 🙂
    And why not? But more importantly, what are the other tasks that are useful, and what is the correlation between being useful and being amenable to womens brains?

    Maybe women are too smart to spend their lives staring at 64 little squares.
    There are plenty of women who do play chess. Are you saying they are dumber than the average woman?
  15. Standard memberSleepyguy
    Reepy Rastardly Guy
    Dustbin of history
    Joined
    13 Apr '07
    Moves
    12727
    20 Apr '15 13:50
    Originally posted by twhitehead
    And why not? But more importantly, what are the other tasks that are useful, and what is the correlation between being useful and being amenable to womens brains?

    [b]Maybe women are too smart to spend their lives staring at 64 little squares.

    There are plenty of women who do play chess. Are you saying they are dumber than the average woman?[/b]
    Just kidding around. Nevermind.
Back to Top