Very good blog post, right, precise, accurate, and discussing about the real problem (and well-written, too).
Women are not essentially better or worse than men, as well as men are not essentially better or worse than women. Just there is something which is called: environment. The society in which we live. Which has an enormous influence.
Frenches are not more stupid than Russians (though I'm not really patriotic...). Though, there is much less french chess players than Russian ones, and not any french player has ever been world champion. Why ? Because of the place given to chess, and the way it is taught, which is quiet different between those countries. Same kind of things (in worse, and also other things, as explain in the blog post) goes for women.
Obviously, there is a problem of sexism in the chess community, as well as outside, and no one can deny it. And it won't solves by itself. Which means we have to act.
Women are not essentially better or worse than men, as well as men are not essentially better or worse than women. Just there is something which is called: environment. The society in which we live. Which has an enormous influence.
Frenches are not more stupid than Russians (though I'm not really patriotic...). Though, there is much less french chess players than Russian ones, and not any french player has ever been world champion. Why ? Because of the place given to chess, and the way it is taught, which is quiet different between those countries. Same kind of things (in worse, and also other things, as explain in the blog post) goes for women.
Obviously, there is a problem of sexism in the chess community, as well as outside, and no one can deny it. And it won't solves by itself. Which means we have to act.
First of all, hiding behind a genderless username is a very poor approach. If you only want to play chess then don't pick your nickname "xxxBeautifulBlondePrincessxxx". What's the even point of revealing the gender? I met many people from online chess, even on my childhood. And this includes many females too, but they didn't shout "I'M A GIRL". I learned that they are female after a veeery long time, and even then, they told me themselves. I never asked someone what their gender is. Why would someone ask this?
Secondly, "women are forced to do housework" is a very poor excuse. I would argue men are even more handicapped. Keep reading...
I was really focused on chess just before the highschool. I would really like to go as a professional chess player. I was having fun and i was progressing very fast. I was joining chess classes on weekends and one time teacher(was also a chess refree) told me "I come these classes for only a couple of bucks each week, prioritize your education first". It was very dissappointing for me. But men have to have regular income, to feed themselves, to FEED THEIR FAMILY. I can't speak for whole world but women employement is something like 35% in my country. Yes, women do more chores than men but not all of them. But all of the males have to work, without exceptions. Being a pro chess player is not a reliable work at all, so men are discouraged from the start, as opposed to article.
Secondly, "women are forced to do housework" is a very poor excuse. I would argue men are even more handicapped. Keep reading...
I was really focused on chess just before the highschool. I would really like to go as a professional chess player. I was having fun and i was progressing very fast. I was joining chess classes on weekends and one time teacher(was also a chess refree) told me "I come these classes for only a couple of bucks each week, prioritize your education first". It was very dissappointing for me. But men have to have regular income, to feed themselves, to FEED THEIR FAMILY. I can't speak for whole world but women employement is something like 35% in my country. Yes, women do more chores than men but not all of them. But all of the males have to work, without exceptions. Being a pro chess player is not a reliable work at all, so men are discouraged from the start, as opposed to article.
It's not cool when your passion for a specific activity cannot outweigh hurdles such as being the center of attraction in a chess club and getting circled around for being a woman. As a socially anxious guy, the only way I can quell my thirst for chess is by playing online, despite all the cheaters and flaggers that disgust me (not everyone is like that, of course, but there are some). This also implies that I will never become a titled player since I don't play chess OTB (apart from simply not being good enough), even though that would be one of my few purposes, but it is what it is. There are so many things I would like to change about humanity, perhaps I would be able to write similar articles. Anyway, I'm quite sure that someone with the burning desire to become a world champion or just an elite, whether man or woman, cannot be stopped just by sexism. Not only in chess, but in any other field. Until sexism will cease to be a thing, it's up to you whether your passion can be stronger than these barriers.
me gusta
Yikes @ about half of these replies.
Very well written and thorough article; not sure I have anything meaningful to add - I just liked it.
Very well written and thorough article; not sure I have anything meaningful to add - I just liked it.
liberal participation culture: change nothing in our game of monopoly, not the slightest bit, allow no changes, allow no different paradigms, no different perspectives. only allow a very narrow acceptable frame of opinions. but allow EVERYBODY to participate in it. everybody being able to participate reinforces and permanently reinitiates the status quo. cui bono? hegemonic forces. sjwism is gramsci's cultural hegemony 2.0
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”― Noam Chomsky
to break free create something new. create a new board game. support something women invented, give it more ressources. if you reform existing institutions you just give them more power and narrow down alternatives
“The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”― Noam Chomsky
to break free create something new. create a new board game. support something women invented, give it more ressources. if you reform existing institutions you just give them more power and narrow down alternatives
Excellent article, and thank you for sharing it. Hoping for a bright future for all female chess players and for a lot of male players to get their heads out of their asses.
#382 “The smart way to keep people passive and obedient is to strictly limit the spectrum of acceptable opinion, but allow very lively debate within that spectrum — even encourage the more critical and dissident views. That gives people the sense that there's free thinking going on, while all the time the presuppositions of the system are being reinforced by the limits put on the range of the debate.”― Noam Chomsky
Exactly what our "democracy" is about.
Also about it (if you can understand french) : blog.mondediplo.net/chili-73
Exactly what our "democracy" is about.
Also about it (if you can understand french) : blog.mondediplo.net/chili-73
Many commentators have said that the direction of blog posts should come as no surprise, since Lichess is inherently left-wing. First of all, it's unclear to me what being left-wing has to do with it, but second of all - can anyone point me towards a source showing the left-wing philosophy behind Lichess? What I've seen is that Lichess is based on community, free software, and the open Internet. Those are not at all the property of any political ideology.
As for the post, I found that it dismissed biological differences between men and women with inadequate evidence, and didn't consider the whole topic with much depth. Thus the quest to solve the problem of "too few women in chess" (maybe they have something better to do?) is kind of unjustified. The best part was the discussion of sexism and harassment, which definitely are serious problems for women in chess. Kudos for that.
I myself have been a Lichess patron in the past, but I would really urge the site administration to reconsider the move to take public positions in peripheral or completely non-chess issues. It's a distraction, it's sure to cause discord, and in my opinion shows an unflattering egotistic side. It makes me more reluctant to support the site in the future, not because the blog posts bother me that much, but because I fear there's just more drama and trouble ahead for the site.
As for the post, I found that it dismissed biological differences between men and women with inadequate evidence, and didn't consider the whole topic with much depth. Thus the quest to solve the problem of "too few women in chess" (maybe they have something better to do?) is kind of unjustified. The best part was the discussion of sexism and harassment, which definitely are serious problems for women in chess. Kudos for that.
I myself have been a Lichess patron in the past, but I would really urge the site administration to reconsider the move to take public positions in peripheral or completely non-chess issues. It's a distraction, it's sure to cause discord, and in my opinion shows an unflattering egotistic side. It makes me more reluctant to support the site in the future, not because the blog posts bother me that much, but because I fear there's just more drama and trouble ahead for the site.
This topic has been archived and can no longer be replied to.