-
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
I agree that it's not politically correct. And I would certainly try to avoid making such comments if I were a public figure in chess.Originally posted by John Coleman View Post
Still... men and women are different. Nurturing can get you some places, but it's pointless to deny nature, too.
Nigel is just being provocative here. -
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
Provocative ? Why ? Because he states a balanced opinion ?Originally posted by Mathieu Cloutier View Post
Of course, men are genetically more suited to fighting than women. And chess is largely fighting.
There is absolutely no point in denying that.
Which does not mean that women cannot play good chess or shouldn't play chess at all.
I can hardly believe that Judit Polgar would have said something like : playing chess is not about gender but about being smart.
Considering the facts that would actually be extremely derogatory to women.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
On the whole, I agree with you Jean. But when you write or say such things, you have to be very careful because people will cite you in the most outrageous way possible just to create drama.Originally posted by Jean Hébert View Post
And a statement like Short's "The simple fact of the matter is that men play better chess than women" is obviously false, if taken just by itself with no proper context.
So yeah, Short was being provocative. Not in what he said, but in the way he said it. IMO.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
If you state something worth being stated, there is no way to state it without being provocative.Originally posted by Mathieu Cloutier View Post
If someone disagrees with it, he will find it provocative, if not squarely insulting.
Way to go Nigel Short !
He has something important to say and he says it, strongly but respectfully IHMO.
We need more Shorts.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
I would like to know why it needed to be said that men's brains are better wired to play chess than women's brains. Ignoring the whole question of whether the statement is true or not and to what degree (since it certainly wouldn't be universally true as Judit Polgar's record against Nigel Short indicates)... WHY DOES IT NEED TO BE STATED AT ALL?Originally posted by Jean Hébert View Post
For that matter, why is anyone bothering to separate men and women in chess? Why isn't there a separation of left-handers and right-handers in chess? Or of liberals and conservatives? Or separate out the various races? We could go on and on creating separate groups, and maybe some day we'd find that deaf left-handed conservative blue-eyed Asian vegetarian bisexual transgenders born under the sign of Taurus make the overall best chess players. And of course, even they lose regularly to top computer engines.
Nigel didn't need to say anything at all comparing women and men in chess. He is inviting controversy, even more so by his follow-up rants against feminists. What service does this do to chess? What company that does business with both sexes is going to hear about this and say "Hey, we should put some money into chess"?
And one thing is absolutely for sure: if Jean Hebert disagreed with Nigel's view, we all know Jean would NOT be saying "way to go Nigel Short".Only the rushing is heard...
Onward flies the bird.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
If female chess players disagree with Nigel, then why are they not petitioning FIDE to eliminate female-only tournaments and championships? Why do they not demand the elimination of Women's teams at the Olympiads? It seems to me that these practices are sexist and condescending to women if we are to assume that there is no reason why women cannot play chess just as well as men can. The women who attack Nigel but not FIDE want to have their cake and eat it too. They are guilty of a double-standard. I will respect their attacks on Nigel only when they themselves attack FIDE and the chess world for having women's only events. In fact, by not attacking FIDE and the chess world they are implicitly agreeing with Nigel, unless they are willing to admit to their double-standard of wanting the cake and eating it too.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
Come on now, let's not act like women aren't a minority in chess tournaments.Originally posted by Brad Thomson View Post
You know what's it's like to be a minority? To have the majority always picking on you with condescending remarks? Because that's exactly what your post is doing.Last edited by Mathieu Cloutier; Wednesday, 24th June, 2015, 09:59 AM.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
Really? As an adult white male, I am a distinct minority in local chess tournaments, which are mostly juniors of Chinese or South-Asian descent. That must be why I lose, because the majority is picking on me.Originally posted by Mathieu Cloutier View Post
Hey, I'm a victim! Can I get compensation, or something?Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
The answer is simple. Controversy attracts attention, one only has to look at the number of posts on these threads to see that.Originally posted by Paul Bonham View PostComment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
An adult white male in Canada... thinks he's a minority. I've heard it all.Originally posted by John Coleman View PostComment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
Even in Canada as a whole, men are a minority "total population: 0.99 male(s)/female (2013 est.)" (Wikipedia).
However, I said I was a minority in local chess tournaments, as white adult male. Note the qualifying adjectives.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
You missed the part "... in local chess tournaments" - he is also a minority in Chinese Supermarkets but that means just as little.Originally posted by Mathieu Cloutier View Post
Sometimes a "minority" is NOT the result of systemic bias, it is just the makeup of the people involved. For hundreds of years,
chess has been dominated by males but that does not mean females were explicitly excluded....Mike Pence: the Lord of the fly.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
I understand all of that. But being a minority also involves that you might feel intimidated (strong word, but you get the idea) by the majority. Not like the majority is actively intimidating you, but there's just a slight feeling of discomfort.
If you're a white adult male and feel intimidated by a bunch of asian kids in your local chess tournament, maybe you should get yourself checked.Comment
-
Re: Nigel Short sticking to his guns...
So your understanding of a minority is someone who feels intimidated?? Sigh.
This thread has turned into a prime example of "when you argue with an idiot, there are two idiots arguing".Comment
- If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
- Policy / Politique
The fee for tournament organizers advertising on ChessTalk is $20/event or $100/yearly unlimited for the year.
Les frais d'inscription des organisateurs de tournoi sur ChessTalk sont de 20 $/événement ou de 100 $/année illimitée.
You can etransfer to Henry Lam at chesstalkforum at gmail dot com
Transfér à Henry Lam à chesstalkforum@gmail.com
Dark Knight / Le Chevalier Noir - General Guidelines
---- Nous avons besoin d'un traduction français!
Some Basics
1. Under Board "Frequently Asked Questions" (FAQs) there are 3 sections dealing with General Forum Usage, User Profile Features, and Reading and Posting Messages. These deal with everything from Avatars to Your Notifications. Most general technical questions are covered there. Here is a link to the FAQs. https://forum.chesstalk.com/help
2. Consider using the SEARCH button if you are looking for information. You may find your question has already been answered in a previous thread.
3. If you've looked for an answer to a question, and not found one, then you should consider asking your question in a new thread. For example, there have already been questions and discussion regarding: how to do chess diagrams (FENs); crosstables that line up properly; and the numerous little “glitches” that every new site will have.
4. Read pinned or sticky threads, like this one, if they look important. This applies especially to newcomers.
5. Read the thread you're posting in before you post. There are a variety of ways to look at a thread. These are covered under “Display Modes”.
6. Thread titles: please provide some details in your thread title. This is useful for a number of reasons. It helps ChessTalk members to quickly skim the threads. It prevents duplication of threads. And so on.
7. Unnecessary thread proliferation (e.g., deliberately creating a new thread that duplicates existing discussion) is discouraged. Look to see if a thread on your topic may have already been started and, if so, consider adding your contribution to the pre-existing thread. However, starting new threads to explore side-issues that are not relevant to the original subject is strongly encouraged. A single thread on the Canadian Open, with hundreds of posts on multiple sub-topics, is no better than a dozen threads on the Open covering only a few topics. Use your good judgment when starting a new thread.
8. If and/or when sub-forums are created, please make sure to create threads in the proper place.
Debate
9. Give an opinion and back it up with a reason. Throwaway comments such as "Game X pwnz because my friend and I think so!" could be considered pointless at best, and inflammatory at worst.
10. Try to give your own opinions, not simply those copied and pasted from reviews or opinions of your friends.
Unacceptable behavior and warnings
11. In registering here at ChessTalk please note that the same or similar rules apply here as applied at the previous Boardhost message board. In particular, the following content is not permitted to appear in any messages:
* Racism
* Hatred
* Harassment
* Adult content
* Obscene material
* Nudity or pornography
* Material that infringes intellectual property or other proprietary rights of any party
* Material the posting of which is tortious or violates a contractual or fiduciary obligation you or we owe to another party
* Piracy, hacking, viruses, worms, or warez
* Spam
* Any illegal content
* unapproved Commercial banner advertisements or revenue-generating links
* Any link to or any images from a site containing any material outlined in these restrictions
* Any material deemed offensive or inappropriate by the Board staff
12. Users are welcome to challenge other points of view and opinions, but should do so respectfully. Personal attacks on others will not be tolerated. Posts and threads with unacceptable content can be closed or deleted altogether. Furthermore, a range of sanctions are possible - from a simple warning to a temporary or even a permanent banning from ChessTalk.
Helping to Moderate
13. 'Report' links (an exclamation mark inside a triangle) can be found in many places throughout the board. These links allow users to alert the board staff to anything which is offensive, objectionable or illegal. Please consider using this feature if the need arises.
Advice for free
14. You should exercise the same caution with Private Messages as you would with any public posting.
15. Have fun!
(Thanks to Nigel Hanrahan for writing these up!)
Tweet
Comment