Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

    Originally posted by Michael Yip View Post
    Ok thanks

    So by calling something currently in place for everyone something different with a 'W' in the name will encourage more girls to

    -do more chess work
    -play better
    -get better results
    etc

    and more girls will join the CFC?
    The idea is to keep the strong women and girls in chess a little longer so that they can act as examples and inspiration to younger girls. I doubt that there is a chess coach/teacher in Canada who has a higher proportion of girls in his classes than I do and have had. At times we have had as many or more girls than boys in our advanced classes and those girls give no quarter nor do they expect any when playing boys or adults.

    Recently we have seen more girls showing interest. Part of that is the fact that we had three girls who went to WYCC and had lots of favourable press and radio coverage in 2011. Kids in my beginner class ask me about Lily Zhou, Rachel Tao and Jeannie Zhang because they heard of them in the newspaper or from their friends at school. Last year at the Windsor Chess Challenge after the games were all done a bunch of boys were treating one of our girls Erica like a rock star because she had just gone 8-0 against the boys in her group.

    In beginner classes the boys actively discourage the girls. They also do it to the other boys but the other boys aren't affected as much. I have also seen cases where female siblings of male players are discouraged from pursuing this interest even if they display as much talent as the boy or in some cases even more. If you have one girl in a beginners class pretty soon you will have no girls. If you start with two girls quite often you will soon have three or four girls as they tell their friends.

    When the boys tell the girls that girls can't play chess I tell them that yes they can. I might show a game from one of the Polgar sisters or another woman that holds the grandmaster title. That usually dulls the anti-girl campaign for a while anyway.

    Some of the most vociferous opponents of this measure on chesstalk and elsewhere are relatively young men. I am reminded of Alfalfa and Spanky calling to order the meeting of the he man woman haters club. Of course the club falls on hard times when Darla approaches Alfalfa but that is another story.

    Comment


    • #17
      Re: Re : Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

      Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
      Women may use these titles in self promotion. Fide has titles for women with lower rating or requirements. Many many girls, including Canadians, try to coquer them. I do not hear complains about those W titles. Imho, the motion should have been less resonant than a coach motion.
      'Hi I'm Ms. So and So. I'm so happy to be a W-Yada-Title. My life was ruined when I got born into the wrong gender. My brain just counld't handle the workload that chess requires. Oh my god I've even had to to write the moves...and play a tournament game at the same time.

      But ever since the CFC created these wonderful W-titles I can finally pretend I've accomplished something coz before it was just TOOOOOOO hard. Just the other day I broke nail when I had to open a book. Forget that. Now all I have to do wait until the bar gets lowered again.

      Studies show that chess helps you get way smarter than you ever could have been. This is great if you're a girl. Now there's hope for a brighter future...

      So play chess! and join the CFC!'

      Comment


      • #18
        Re: Re : Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

        Originally posted by Michael Yip View Post
        'Hi I'm Ms. So and So. I'm so happy to be a W-Yada-Title. My life was ruined when I got born into the wrong gender. My brain just counld't handle the workload that chess requires. Oh my god I've even had to to write the moves...and play a tournament game at the same time.

        But ever since the CFC created these wonderful W-titles I can finally pretend I've accomplished something coz before it was just TOOOOOOO hard. Just the other day I broke nail when I had to open a book. Forget that. Now all I have to do wait until the bar gets lowered again.

        Studies show that chess helps you get way smarter than you ever could have been. This is great if you're a girl. Now there's hope for a brighter future...

        So play chess! and join the CFC!'
        lol jesus christ

        Comment


        • #19
          Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

          Originally posted by Ken Kurkowski View Post
          The Pragmatic view (mine) is that, for whatever reason (and this is an entirely separate debate!) there are far fewer strong female chessplayers than male.
          Well, there are also far fewer weak female chessplayers than male.

          There are far fewer women chessplayers. From this it follows that there are far fewer women chessplayers in any chess category you want to name.

          Unless of course you want to get silly and point out that there are a lot more women female chessplayers than men female chessplayers.

          Comment


          • #20
            Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

            Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
            Hi Michael:

            I am favourable towards "Women-only" tournaments, as I am towards Seniors-only tournaments, and junior-only tournaments. There is no reason they cannot co-exist alongside the "open" tournaments.
            Bob A
            I'm against seniors only tournaments. It gives them false hope that they can still play chess. I'm also against meaningless seniors champion titles. If they think they can really still play chess put them in the regular population and let's see how long they survive.

            Comment


            • #21
              Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

              Originally posted by Zeljko Kitich View Post
              I'm against seniors only tournaments. It gives them false hope that they can still play chess. I'm also against meaningless seniors champion titles. If they think they can really still play chess put them in the regular population and let's see how long they survive.
              Nobody is forcing you to organize seniors tournaments, thus don't condemn those who organize them and who play.

              Comment


              • #22
                Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                Kindly direct me to the academic research that shows that woman cannot play chess as well as men.

                Failing that, I will continue to view the explicit enforcement of such double standards as regressive. A title is not any great accomplishment in itself, what makes them prestigious is the amount of work and skill that goes into earning them. You decrease the merit of the title every time you decrease the criteria needed to earn one.

                I fail to see how watering down the titles is a "great motivator" for woman in chess. I mean what is the incentive here, play chess because it is way easier for a woman to gain a title than a man? That offends me, I'd rather chess not move towards enforcing gender stereotypes.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                  Originally posted by Zeljko Kitich View Post
                  I'm against seniors only tournaments. It gives them false hope that they can still play chess. I'm also against meaningless seniors champion titles. If they think they can really still play chess put them in the regular population and let's see how long they survive.
                  Hi Jerry:

                  Sub-groups play chess for many reasons - sometimes it is socially more enjoyable; sometimes it is the competitive urge to be the best in the sub-group; sometimes it is just that it is another official tournament to play in and gain/lose rating points.

                  So I see nothing wrong with women-only tournaments, junior-only tournaments, senior-only tournaments; people with red hair-only tournaments. The more tournaments the better.

                  No one is saying that by winning a sub-group title, they are better than anyone playing in "open" tournaments. The "open" tournament remains the gold standard. The sub-group tournaments in no way diminish the value of "open" tournaments.

                  Bob A

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                    Originally posted by Egidijus Zeromskis View Post
                    Nobody is forcing you to organize seniors tournaments, thus don't condemn those who organize them and who play.
                    They are sending the wrong signal, they are stereotyping seniors as losing cognitive processes. And worse they qualify as seniors as early as 55. :p Don't you remember the instant chess pundits who, when interviewed by the media during the second Fischer-Spassky match, derided them as playing 'old man's chess'? Man I'd like to play old man's chess like that... I mean Fischer was only 49 at the time. Spassky was only 55 and ranked 101 in the world. Did Korchnoi need seniors tournaments?
                    Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Monday, 8th April, 2013, 09:40 AM. Reason: forgot the commas

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                      Originally posted by Bob Armstrong View Post
                      Hi Jerry:

                      Sub-groups play chess for many reasons - sometimes it is socially more enjoyable; sometimes it is the competitive urge to be the best in the sub-group; sometimes it is just that it is another official tournament to play in and gain/lose rating points.

                      So I see nothing wrong with women-only tournaments, junior-only tournaments, senior-only tournaments; people with red hair-only tournaments. The more tournaments the better.

                      No one is saying that by winning a sub-group title, they are better than anyone playing in "open" tournaments. The "open" tournament remains the gold standard. The sub-group tournaments in no way diminish the value of "open" tournaments.

                      Bob A
                      People with red-hair only tournaments sounds like it would be a recipe for disaster. Who is going to police and separate the real red heads from the Clairol jobs.... Especially the seniors who claim their gray hair was red once upon a time...

                      Also I'm confused, aren't you arguing the exact opposite in your 7th day CCC adventist post about junior girls' tournaments and FIDE?
                      Last edited by Zeljko Kitich; Monday, 8th April, 2013, 09:51 AM.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                        You should read the book "Chess Bitch" from Jennifer Shahade.

                        Many woman find this classification "Woman only title" like been intellectually inferior.

                        It's a big debate. Maybe CFC should contact (a poll?!) the female members of the federation and ask for inputs about this topic.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                          Originally posted by Zeljko Kitich View Post
                          I'm against seniors only tournaments. It gives them false hope that they can still play chess. I'm also against meaningless seniors champion titles. If they think they can really still play chess put them in the regular population and let's see how long they survive.
                          The ridiculous part is they use an age like 50 or 55 for those events. Most players should still be playing close to their prime strength at that age.
                          Gary Ruben
                          CC - IA and SIM

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                            Originally posted by Zeljko Kitich View Post
                            ...aren't you arguing the exact opposite in your 7th day CCC adventist post about junior girls' tournaments and FIDE?
                            Hi Jerry:

                            Generally I favour women-only tournaments, as a legitimate sub-group tournament.

                            In the case of the WYCC however, I see very negative consequences of there being two simultaneous parallel tournaments - "open youth" / "girls' youth".

                            The first problem is that girls are forced to choose between them, and there are institutional incentives to the girls to choose the girls' sections.

                            Secondly, the progress being made in chess by junior girls is unable to be promoted, because they are not winning the "open" titles, when they well might, if they played there.

                            So in this particular case, I do see a need to eliminate the girls' sections in order to help promote women's chess.

                            Bob A

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                              Originally posted by Gary Ruben View Post
                              The ridiculous part is they use an age like 50 or 55 for those events. Most players should still be playing close to their prime strength at that age.
                              Last time I asked, I recall being told that the age for Seniors Championships had been raised to 60 (at least for Canada & World Seniors Ch.). I had asked because I was soon to be 50 myself.
                              Anything that can go wrong will go wrong.
                              Murphy's law, by Edward A. Murphy Jr., USAF, Aerospace Engineer

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Re: Why I Supported The Motion For Womens CFC Titles

                                Originally posted by Kevin Pacey View Post
                                Last time I asked, I recall being told that the age for Seniors Championships had been raised to 60 (at least for Canada & World Seniors Ch.). I had asked because I was soon to be 50 myself.
                                Finally, progress. We've left the stone age! :)

                                Here in Canada the government sends a seniors card when a person reaches 65. I'm for using that age for seniors events.

                                I'm not sure what age the CCCA and ICCF use. I don't play seniors events.
                                Gary Ruben
                                CC - IA and SIM

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X