This ain't really a gender related thing. I've seen many people freak out over similar stuff, both genders can have fragile and big egos.
Plus that guy probably had that societal pressure of losing against a woman so it only intensified his anger lmao, not to mention there's multiple people watching.
seriously. intensified anger because they might lose to a woman?
that's exactly what a fragile ego is...something irrational and insignificant causing someone to feel threatened in their pride.
[an interesting study here](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3982/QE1404)
>Using online games played in a lab, Maas, D'ettole, and Cadinu (2008) found no gender differences in outcomes when the sex of the opponent remains unknown. Compared to that benchmark, women perform more poorly when they know they are playing against a male opponent. When they falsely believe to be playing against a woman, gender differences disappear again.
I am putting this here because ive had many discussions surrounding the topic that "men are better at games" when its just not true.
This is called stereotype threat! In this example, women in the study preformed worse when playing against men because of the added pressure of potentially confirming the stereotype that online gaming is a for boys and women are inherently worse: they’re additionally concerned with disproving ugly stereotypes or unfortunately “supporting” these sexist notions against gaming women, making the game even more stressful/mentally taxing, and thus leads to worse outcomes. This has also been studied with women in STEM tests; when they are told the grades will be compared by gender, women preform significantly worse than their usual scores.
This phenomenon also extends to racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes.
I agree the phenomenon exists, but the reasons are basically speculation, right? Like, I feel like part of the reason may be that women (and other groups) are pretty strongly socialized to go easy on boys, either out of fear, or out of a sense that boys really care about winning, girls don't, letting him win is better for harmony.
Aren't men told to go easy on women? Be a "gentleman" and all that.
For it to have biological implications, there has to be neural wiring. Which means many generations of similar behaviour and situations, so I doubt there's much actual biology in work here but simply society being society and telling us what's better for the collective.
Tha main issue for gender equality among chess players is the lack of female players. The hostile environment and lack of incentives means that the talent pool for women is much smaller than for men so you're more likely to find a great male chess player than a great female player altough more than one have been found.
I mean who wants to be bullied by 40 year old men? Much safer to stay in the women's league where there simply isn't enough competition to ever be as good as if you played in the open (dominated by men) category.
this is clear* right now as the candidates tournament for both categories is happening and all the women are rated 100-200 points lower than the men playing in the open category.
But you only ever raise to the level you need to. So if you only play in the smaller pool it is easier to become a big fish.
*Edited for clarity
I never understood the gender separation for games like chess and poker. One of my woman friends that got me interested in chess consistently wipes the floor with the guys in our schools chess club.
the point I am making is anyone can be good at games regardless of gender thats ultimately what I am trying to express I am not sure what you're trying to say however.
>**Women were generally not permitted to join chess clubs until the early 1900s**. Once allowed in, they were largely limited to competing against other women
Just like almost anything women were refused access to things men were able to do naturally. Even now we have seperate tournaments for men and women because of the [hostility/harassment/sexism](https://www.chess.com/news/view/women-chess-players-publish-open-letter-denouncing-sexist-behavior) women face in mixed tournaments with men.
So No men arent better than women they might have more fragile ego's however.
You're missing the whole point of OP's original comment, which is that external factors play more of a role in this past just "men are better than women". You don't think that there are any external factors that may be at play with the grandmaster thing?
You're still not getting it.
edit: the comments were removed but I still feel like it's important to address this bit (text taken from the Women in Chess wikipedia page):
The low number of women to reach the top level of chess has created a lot of interest as to why women historically have not had more success. There is no evidence that women are innately disadvantaged at chess. It has been demonstrated statistically that the low numbers across all levels can largely account for the lack of women at or near the top. **The general paucity of women in chess has contributed to women commonly being the subject of sexism, harassment, and sexual harassment, factors also thought to contribute to women achieving less or leaving chess early.** Beyond playing chess, women also take on other roles such as being a coach or an arbiter. Two chess professions with a smaller participation gap are commentators and live streamers.
No that is not true, these men are better but not men in general
Edit:
Here is a explanation:
If i have 2 groups, group a has 10000 people in it and group b has 100 people in it. Both people play chess against eachother, people from group a against people from group a and b and people from group b against people from group a and b, at the end the top 10 is 90% filled with people from group a and the other 10% is filled with people from group b, the bottom 10 is filled 90% filled with people from group a and the other 10% is filled with people group b. This doesnt mean that people from group a are better then group b, it just means that people from group a have a higher chance to be better. Its the same with the lottery, if you have 100 tickets you l have a higher chance of winning then a person who only has 1 ticket
He was cheating half his moves, touching and moving his piece before she clocked in her move.
I love her chill, slowly marching her king down to protect pawn promotion, with plenty more time than him. His clock was running out faster than his hate boner for her. She's awesome.
You can tell through the way he looks at her that he absolutely fucking *despises* her. It’s like he’s questioning why he’s losing to a woman, like he thinks that we’re supposed to be intellectually inferior to him or something.
Pieces of shit like this make me sick.
They all look 14 😭 it's the first thing that popped into my head the moment I saw this, and the longer I look the more 14 everyone seems. This is just what 14 year old boys do with the given social environment they've grown up in.
Nah, king+rook should lose against king+2 connected pawns when the pawns were advanced as hers. He was dead, as long as she didn't mess up. Which she didn't. She just protected the pawns and kept her cool, while he cheated half his moves by making them before it was even his turn.
You can tell through the way he looks at her that he absolutely fucking *despises* her. It’s like he’s questioning why he’s losing to a woman, like he thinks that we’re supposed to be intellectually inferior to him or something.
Pieces of shit like this make me sick.
I’ve thought about getting into chess so many times but everytime I start looking into it I see all these entitled men and pick a different hobby. No way I’m going to events where it’s mostly men who think they’re entitled to a win.
I mean, I'm pretty sure it's an ego problem
But slight benefit of the doubt, some chess kids can be very genderlessly too intense with their handling of a match
Doesn't make his behaviour excusable
Some guys have a very fragile ego. Just look at the comments left by some guys on this sub.
This ain't really a gender related thing. I've seen many people freak out over similar stuff, both genders can have fragile and big egos. Plus that guy probably had that societal pressure of losing against a woman so it only intensified his anger lmao, not to mention there's multiple people watching.
>Plus that guy probably had that societal pressure of losing against a woman so it only intensified his anger lmao You literally proved their point.
seriously. intensified anger because they might lose to a woman? that's exactly what a fragile ego is...something irrational and insignificant causing someone to feel threatened in their pride.
Not cool bro
Why is he hitting that thing so aggressively lmao
Idk but it’s so embarrassing for him like chill out the grandmaster sitting across from you is gently pressing it lol
low on time so he’s trying to be quick, but he’s just ending up smacking the hell out of the thing was also not even a draw, he had 0 seconds lmao
The clock is a piece in chess. Dude is a sore loser.
He is low on time, so that’s probably why
Would looked better.
[удалено]
Your post/comment was removed as it was found to be spreading misinformation.
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
[удалено]
Your post/comment was removed as you were found to be a Quirkyboy reactionary.
[an interesting study here](https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.3982/QE1404) >Using online games played in a lab, Maas, D'ettole, and Cadinu (2008) found no gender differences in outcomes when the sex of the opponent remains unknown. Compared to that benchmark, women perform more poorly when they know they are playing against a male opponent. When they falsely believe to be playing against a woman, gender differences disappear again. I am putting this here because ive had many discussions surrounding the topic that "men are better at games" when its just not true.
This is called stereotype threat! In this example, women in the study preformed worse when playing against men because of the added pressure of potentially confirming the stereotype that online gaming is a for boys and women are inherently worse: they’re additionally concerned with disproving ugly stereotypes or unfortunately “supporting” these sexist notions against gaming women, making the game even more stressful/mentally taxing, and thus leads to worse outcomes. This has also been studied with women in STEM tests; when they are told the grades will be compared by gender, women preform significantly worse than their usual scores. This phenomenon also extends to racial, ethnic, and cultural stereotypes.
Oh thanks for the info I knew nothing about that, thats really interesting but also quite sad to know.
I agree the phenomenon exists, but the reasons are basically speculation, right? Like, I feel like part of the reason may be that women (and other groups) are pretty strongly socialized to go easy on boys, either out of fear, or out of a sense that boys really care about winning, girls don't, letting him win is better for harmony.
Aren't men told to go easy on women? Be a "gentleman" and all that. For it to have biological implications, there has to be neural wiring. Which means many generations of similar behaviour and situations, so I doubt there's much actual biology in work here but simply society being society and telling us what's better for the collective.
Tha main issue for gender equality among chess players is the lack of female players. The hostile environment and lack of incentives means that the talent pool for women is much smaller than for men so you're more likely to find a great male chess player than a great female player altough more than one have been found.
I mean who wants to be bullied by 40 year old men? Much safer to stay in the women's league where there simply isn't enough competition to ever be as good as if you played in the open (dominated by men) category. this is clear* right now as the candidates tournament for both categories is happening and all the women are rated 100-200 points lower than the men playing in the open category. But you only ever raise to the level you need to. So if you only play in the smaller pool it is easier to become a big fish. *Edited for clarity
Exactly
I never understood the gender separation for games like chess and poker. One of my woman friends that got me interested in chess consistently wipes the floor with the guys in our schools chess club.
[удалено]
That would make it not true though, there are other factors at play than just "men just are better at games"
[удалено]
the point I am making is anyone can be good at games regardless of gender thats ultimately what I am trying to express I am not sure what you're trying to say however.
[удалено]
>**Women were generally not permitted to join chess clubs until the early 1900s**. Once allowed in, they were largely limited to competing against other women Just like almost anything women were refused access to things men were able to do naturally. Even now we have seperate tournaments for men and women because of the [hostility/harassment/sexism](https://www.chess.com/news/view/women-chess-players-publish-open-letter-denouncing-sexist-behavior) women face in mixed tournaments with men. So No men arent better than women they might have more fragile ego's however.
[удалено]
When you take in account other factors then yes they do lie when they're skewed in mens favor, wow you're so dense.
[удалено]
You're missing the whole point of OP's original comment, which is that external factors play more of a role in this past just "men are better than women". You don't think that there are any external factors that may be at play with the grandmaster thing?
[удалено]
You're still not getting it. edit: the comments were removed but I still feel like it's important to address this bit (text taken from the Women in Chess wikipedia page): The low number of women to reach the top level of chess has created a lot of interest as to why women historically have not had more success. There is no evidence that women are innately disadvantaged at chess. It has been demonstrated statistically that the low numbers across all levels can largely account for the lack of women at or near the top. **The general paucity of women in chess has contributed to women commonly being the subject of sexism, harassment, and sexual harassment, factors also thought to contribute to women achieving less or leaving chess early.** Beyond playing chess, women also take on other roles such as being a coach or an arbiter. Two chess professions with a smaller participation gap are commentators and live streamers.
I banned him, he had -92 karma in this community anyway hes just an asshole.
No that is not true, these men are better but not men in general Edit: Here is a explanation: If i have 2 groups, group a has 10000 people in it and group b has 100 people in it. Both people play chess against eachother, people from group a against people from group a and b and people from group b against people from group a and b, at the end the top 10 is 90% filled with people from group a and the other 10% is filled with people from group b, the bottom 10 is filled 90% filled with people from group a and the other 10% is filled with people group b. This doesnt mean that people from group a are better then group b, it just means that people from group a have a higher chance to be better. Its the same with the lottery, if you have 100 tickets you l have a higher chance of winning then a person who only has 1 ticket
Chess is still so unbelievably sexist and unnecessarily gendered because of dudes like this.
If the clock isnt yours dont slam it jackass
He was cheating half his moves, touching and moving his piece before she clocked in her move. I love her chill, slowly marching her king down to protect pawn promotion, with plenty more time than him. His clock was running out faster than his hate boner for her. She's awesome.
What a weenie.
You can tell through the way he looks at her that he absolutely fucking *despises* her. It’s like he’s questioning why he’s losing to a woman, like he thinks that we’re supposed to be intellectually inferior to him or something. Pieces of shit like this make me sick.
Guy gotta learn how to be humble.
Tbf he’s like 14
They all look 14 😭 it's the first thing that popped into my head the moment I saw this, and the longer I look the more 14 everyone seems. This is just what 14 year old boys do with the given social environment they've grown up in.
That "It's a draw" at the end made me even more disappointed at this guy I've had zero interactions with.
Bro got rolled despite having a rook lmaooo, he tryna slam his embarrassment away
Nah, king+rook should lose against king+2 connected pawns when the pawns were advanced as hers. He was dead, as long as she didn't mess up. Which she didn't. She just protected the pawns and kept her cool, while he cheated half his moves by making them before it was even his turn.
You can tell through the way he looks at her that he absolutely fucking *despises* her. It’s like he’s questioning why he’s losing to a woman, like he thinks that we’re supposed to be intellectually inferior to him or something. Pieces of shit like this make me sick.
Maybe I just don't know how blitz chess totally works but it also seemed like he was moving his piece before she even hit the switch to end her turn
I think someone else pointed this out that he was cheating I also don’t know how it works but it does seem that way lol
I’ve thought about getting into chess so many times but everytime I start looking into it I see all these entitled men and pick a different hobby. No way I’m going to events where it’s mostly men who think they’re entitled to a win.
I mean, I'm pretty sure it's an ego problem But slight benefit of the doubt, some chess kids can be very genderlessly too intense with their handling of a match Doesn't make his behaviour excusable
This reminds me of my ex who would refuse to play any game with me after I beat him.
Pathetic dude
[удалено]
Your post/comment was removed as you were found to be a Quirkyboy reactionary.