Life In 19x19

A former supporter of 'hot or not'-chess see http://www.nytimes.com/2005/11/27/fashi ... ref=slogin& has this time gotten into hot water over some comments he made related to equality (can women play chess as well as men).

See http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/a ... yers-women

Nigel seems to have been commenting on this old article http://en.chessbase.com/post/explaining ... e-in-chess

Talking of the lack of women excelling in science/maths, I'd actually say women have done better in that than in chess. Marie Curie, Emmy Noether, Ada Lovelace, Roasalind Franklin come to mind. And they faced rather higher social obstacles than women do now in chess, where Judit Polgar is the only example of a top women (and I'd say even her position in chess is way lower than Noether's in science).

Uberdude wrote:Talking of the lack of women excelling in science/maths, I'd actually say women have done better in that than in chess. Marie Curie, Emmy Noether, Ada Lovelace, Roasalind Franklin come to mind. And they faced rather higher social obstacles than women do now in chess, where Judit Polgar is the only example of a top women (and I'd say even her position in chess is way lower than Noether's in science).

Off topic, but I've always thought Emmy Noether would be an amazing choice for a biopic. Got a phd at a time when women had to get explicit permission from each professor to even attend lectures, her work was recognized by some of the biggest mathematicians of the day, taught without pay for years, and then when she finally got a professorship she got fired by the Nazis for being Jewish and had to escape to the US... maybe I am too much of a math nerd but I would see that movie.

This is actually very interesting and it seems a shame it can't be discussed without a knee-jerk backlash. I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures, or that men tend to diverge more from the norm, but I feel a strong urge to know more. I'm off to Google some neuroscience I won't understand.

emeraldemon wrote:
Off topic, but I've always thought Emmy Noether would be an amazing choice for a biopic. Got a phd at a time when women had to get explicit permission from each professor to even attend lectures, her work was recognized by some of the biggest mathematicians of the day, taught without pay for years, and then when she finally got a professorship she got fired by the Nazis for being Jewish and had to escape to the US... maybe I am too much of a math nerd but I would see that movie.

Problem is that Hollywood would want to have the character played by a glamorous blonde actress who probably wouldn't even be able to "add a C". (http://www.math.utah.edu/~cherk/mathjokes.html and search for "add a constant")

Splatted wrote:This is actually very interesting and it seems a shame it can't be discussed without a knee-jerk backlash. I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures, or that men tend to diverge more from the norm, but I feel a strong urge to know more. I'm off to Google some neuroscience I won't understand.

I think it is common sense that evolution must have taken this course. My wife and I, for example, think very differently on many things. (Fortunately we think alike on even more things.) That does not mean one is better than the other, just that we each have different strengths and weaknesses.

I can understand that men may have evolved with a different spatial perspective than women, but that does not make them more intelligent. It merely means that they can apply the strengths they have to different things. How this all applies to chess and go I am not sure. I personally think that it is probably more of a cultural bias which results in fewer top female players.

I think part of the problem of discussing this is we're splitting hairs about differences in the top players but people interpret it as referring to the player base as a whole. Even the question "can women play chess as well as men?" is problematic as it can be interpreted more broadly than just referring to the very top level of play.

DrStraw wrote:

Splatted wrote:This is actually very interesting and it seems a shame it can't be discussed without a knee-jerk backlash. I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures, or that men tend to diverge more from the norm, but I feel a strong urge to know more. I'm off to Google some neuroscience I won't understand.

I think it is common sense that evolution must have taken this course. My wife and I, for example, think very differently on many things. (Fortunately we think alike on even more things.) That does not mean one is better than the other, just that we each have different strengths and weaknesses.

I can understand that men may have evolved with a different spatial perspective than women, but that does not make them more intelligent. It merely means that they can apply the strengths they have to different things. How this all applies to chess and go I am not sure. I personally think that it is probably more of a cultural bias which results in fewer top female players.

It's common sense that there would be some differences but I didn't realise there were such pronounced differences, nor did I think I could find specific information as to which parts were different, and in what ways, that could then be combined with research in to what each of those parts does to create baseless misguided theories of my own.

Boidhre wrote:I think part of the problem of discussing this is we're splitting hairs about differences in the top players but people interpret it as referring to the player base as a whole. Even the question "can women play chess as well as men?" is problematic as it can be interpreted more broadly than just referring to the very top level of play.

I didn't interpret this as being just about the top players but rather a trend that runs throughout the entire chess community and manifests itself most clearly at the very top where there is a distinct lack of women. Of course the greater trends are irrelevant from a personal perspective as each individual could fall anywhere on the scale.

Splatted wrote: I didn't interpret this as being just about the top players but rather a trend that runs throughout the entire chess community and manifests itself most clearly at the very top where there is a distinct lack of women. Of course the greater trends are irrelevant from a personal perspective as each individual could fall anywhere on the scale.

The data in the article linked was on female players with over 350 FIDE rated games played. The effect may or may not exist in more casual players. I suspect it does, but I'm not sure offhand.

Which player was female and which male, and what were their pro grades? Don't peek yet!

Boidhre wrote:

Splatted wrote: I didn't interpret this as being just about the top players but rather a trend that runs throughout the entire chess community and manifests itself most clearly at the very top where there is a distinct lack of women. Of course the greater trends are irrelevant from a personal perspective as each individual could fall anywhere on the scale.

The data in the article linked was on female players with over 350 FIDE rated games played. The effect may or may not exist in more casual players. I suspect it does, but I'm not sure offhand.

Fair point. I misread one of the other graphs and my online player brain didn't automatically twig to the significance of 350 rated games.

Splatted wrote:[..] I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures [..]

Me neither. And it seems they haven’t.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science ... ntist.html

Men and women do not have different brains, claims neuroscientist
Neuroscientist Prof Gina Rippon claims male and female brains only differ because of the relentless ‘drip, drip, drip’ of gender stereotyping

Bonobo wrote:

Splatted wrote:[..] I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures [..]

Me neither. And it seems they haven’t.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science ... ntist.html

Men and women do not have different brains, claims neuroscientist
Neuroscientist Prof Gina Rippon claims male and female brains only differ because of the relentless ‘drip, drip, drip’ of gender stereotyping

Another quote from that article states:

She believes differences in male and female brains are due to similar cultural stimuli. A women’s brain may therefore become ‘wired’ for multi-tasking simply because society expects that of her and so she uses that part of her brain more often. The brain adapts in the same way as a muscle gets larger with extra use.

Couldn't this explain why chess is dominated by males? Basically, men are better at chess because they are expected to be.

Bonobo wrote:

Splatted wrote:[..] I didn't know men and women had such different brain structures [..]

Me neither. And it seems they haven’t.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/science ... ntist.html

Men and women do not have different brains, claims neuroscientist
Neuroscientist Prof Gina Rippon claims male and female brains only differ because of the relentless ‘drip, drip, drip’ of gender stereotyping

"It seems they haven't" & "Neuroscientist claims" are not a good mix. This is far from a settled question.

DrStraw wrote:..........
Problem is that Hollywood would want to have the character played by a glamorous blonde actress who probably wouldn't even be able to "add a C". .......

Except one of te Hollywood actresses of that time period was (secretly*) involved in serious science. Hedy Lammarr's "spread spectrum and frequency hopping" not only used in WW II but we still use it in our wifi's and bluetooth, etc.

Where I worked, every few years they used to bring in the late Grace Murray Hopper (admiral) for a talk. She was of course one of the female brains of that time period, cracking "Purple". Highlight of those talks being things like hearing about the first "bug" (where that term came from) or being handed a "nanosecond" (a bit or wire the length electrons would travel in that time).

* secretly, because of course considered unacceptable that a glamor "bombshell" might have a brain.