Female Chess Players and Their Discomfort With Male Chess Players

[Brad Thomson]

Schopenhauer explained things in an interesting manner. A man, he said, can reproduce hundreds of times a year, a woman can do so once. This biological fact helps to explain how much each of us thinks about sex and why men tend to do so more than women. There are scumbags and there are hose-bags in all walks of life. Is it fair to single out chess as being particularly offensive or guilty? Well, does the fact the women have their own system of titles, awards and tournaments with lower standards than men indicate that we are a bunch of scumbags and hose-bags, or does it indicate that men are actually better chess players than women simply and only because they are men?

[Peter McKillop]

Neil, since it is obvious that Peter is in favor of women / girl-only sections, what would YOU do to put an end to 'uncomfortable', 'unsafe' chess environments (composed of both male and female players)?

Something occurred to me reading that article.... chess is maybe unique among sports in which males and females intermingle. It's because when you have a male against a female, they are sitting at a table across from each other for one to several hours. So the male is subjected to seeing a female sitting directly across from him, and perhaps the female is (whether intentionally or not) dressed in a way that could be considered.... hmmmm.... provocative?

The reason I thought of this is because of these passages from the article:

"The first reality the chess world has to face is that men – for the most part – are preoccupied with sex, particularly at chess tournaments.

This is not conjecture or opinion – what I'm saying is actually documented in "Chess Bitch: Women in the Ultimate Intellectual Sport," by Jennifer Shahade, a world-renowned chess player, educator and author.

...

Even grandmasters wrestle with thoughts of sex during chess tournaments. For instance, Shahade wrote that, according U.S. Chess Hall of Famer Alexander Shabalov, most men are thinking about sex for most of the game.

"With characteristic candor, the Latvian -born grandmaster tells me, 'In most games, I am thinking about girls for about fifty to seventy-five percent of the time,'" Shahade wrote."

This is amazing stuff.... really speaking to something not spoken of nearly enough in chess. I think it is safe to say that most of the time, the women / girls are NOT thinking of sex as the men are during games.

So if the female is halfway decent looking, and / or is wearing something that could be considered provocative, the male could end up feeling he is, by being seated across from her for some lengthy period of time, either taken advantage of OR just being a victim his own hormones.

I guess what I'm suggesting is this: because chess has this unique characteristic of male and female sitting across from each other for some lengthy period of time, AND because males seem to think of sex much, much more than females, THEN it seems Peter and others are correct to push for women-only chess. But in Peter's case, perhaps he should back away from characterizing the males as "scumbags", because.... as Melania Trump would say... boys will be boys???

Sorry, Peter, I know how you love everything Trump LOL.

Uhhhh.......no. No, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no, no. I am not suggesting women-only sections because some libidinous jackass gets a woody on when his opponent is a woman. Please see my reply to Neil Frarey for particulars.

Re "scumbags," Pargat, have you ever noticed that there are some words/terms which, technically, can be applied to any human being but which, in reality, when they are used, are almost exclusively applied to men? "Scumbags" is one of those words/terms and I do not back away from using it when appropriate.

[Bob Armstrong]

Statement:s

1. Women themselves, only, should decide when a separate, parallel, women-only, title system is no longer wanted by them!

2. It is not the right of FIDE alone to decide whether to abolish the separate, parallel, women-only, title system.

Agree or disagree? Give reasons!

~ Bob A(T-S/P)

[Peter McKillop]

Article written by just another woke democrat, no doubt. ....

Another piece of cogent analysis by Neil Frarey.

.... Nothing to do with how the tournament is run or the people allowed to run it, nothing to do with how people treat one-another, nothing to do with strengthening society by maintaining a civil safe and welcoming environment. ....

I think the writer was drawing attention to an ongoing problem in chess. In a short article, he wasn't attempting a heavy-duty, academic study of the issues. But then you knew that, right Neil? You just wanted an opportunity to sound off on one of your favourite issues. Here's an article which is also NOT a study but it does set out some of the day-to-day fears women have as they try to survive in a misogynistic world:

https://www-buzzfeed-com.cdn.ampproj...to-worry-about

Do you have any women in your life, Neil? Wife, daughters, sisters? Ever talk to them about the precautions they take every day just to feel safe from men? This is a gigantic problem.

....How will you put an end to the 'uncomfortable' 'unsafe' chess environments?

Separate the women? ......

I'm not in favour of segregating girls and women. I am in favour of having the option of separate sections available for girls and women who are uncomfortable with the disrespectful (or worse) BS of some boys and men.

[Pargat Perrer]

Article written by just another woke democrat, no doubt.

Nothing to do with how the tournament is run or the people allowed to run it, nothing to do with how people treat one-another, nothing to do with strengthening society by maintaining a civil safe and welcoming environment.

Just more shit about justifying segregation ... instead of developing peaceful unification.

How f'n typical is that?

Huh?

How will you put an end to the 'uncomfortable' 'unsafe' chess environments?

Separate the women?

This shit has to end, Peter.

Neil, since it is obvious that Peter is in favor of women / girl-only sections, what would YOU do to put an end to 'uncomfortable', 'unsafe' chess environments (composed of both male and female players)?

Something occurred to me reading that article.... chess is maybe unique among sports in which males and females intermingle. It's because when you have a male against a female, they are sitting at a table across from each other for one to several hours. So the male is subjected to seeing a female sitting directly across from him, and perhaps the female is (whether intentionally or not) dressed in a way that could be considered.... hmmmm.... provocative?

The reason I thought of this is because of these passages from the article:

"The first reality the chess world has to face is that men – for the most part – are preoccupied with sex, particularly at chess tournaments.

This is not conjecture or opinion – what I'm saying is actually documented in "Chess Bitch: Women in the Ultimate Intellectual Sport," by Jennifer Shahade, a world-renowned chess player, educator and author.

...

Even grandmasters wrestle with thoughts of sex during chess tournaments. For instance, Shahade wrote that, according U.S. Chess Hall of Famer Alexander Shabalov, most men are thinking about sex for most of the game.

"With characteristic candor, the Latvian -born grandmaster tells me, 'In most games, I am thinking about girls for about fifty to seventy-five percent of the time,'" Shahade wrote."

This is amazing stuff.... really speaking to something not spoken of nearly enough in chess. I think it is safe to say that most of the time, the women / girls are NOT thinking of sex as the men are during games.

So if the female is halfway decent looking, and / or is wearing something that could be considered provocative, the male could end up feeling he is, by being seated across from her for some lengthy period of time, either taken advantage of OR just being a victim his own hormones.

I guess what I'm suggesting is this: because chess has this unique characteristic of male and female sitting across from each other for some lengthy period of time, AND because males seem to think of sex much, much more than females, THEN it seems Peter and others are correct to push for women-only chess. But in Peter's case, perhaps he should back away from characterizing the males as "scumbags", because.... as Melania Trump would say... boys will be boys???

Sorry, Peter, I know how you love everything Trump LOL.

[Bob Armstrong]

The male attitude to women is still emerging from the dark ages, across society. What is it that we don't get??

~ Bob A (T-S/P)

[Brad Thomson]

The article uses chess as an example, but is about human nature more generally speaking.

[Neil Frarey]

Article written by just another woke democrat, no doubt.

Nothing to do with how the tournament is run or the people allowed to run it, nothing to do with how people treat one-another, nothing to do with strengthening society by maintaining a civil safe and welcoming environment.

Just more shit about justifying segregation ... instead of developing peaceful unification.

How f'n typical is that?

Huh?

How will you put an end to the 'uncomfortable' 'unsafe' chess environments?

Separate the women?

This shit has to end, Peter.

[Peter McKillop]

I've linked to an interesting article below. For years I've been saying that women/girls-only sections are justified because, unfortunately, there are a lot of scumbag men/boys who make life at chess tournaments uncomfortable and even unsafe for women/girls.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/why-ch...omen-and-girls