Categories
- Art (356)
- Other (3,632)
- Philosophy (2,814)
- Psychology (4,018)
- Society (1,010)
Recent Questions
- Why did everyone start to hate the Russians if the U.S. did the same thing in Afghanistan, Iraq?
- What needs to be corrected in the management of Russia first?
- Why did Blaise Pascal become a religious man at the end of his life?
- How do I know if a guy likes you?
- When they say "one generation", how many do they mean?
WOMEN, on average, are no more stupid than men,
but in the direction of maximum records in mental and strength sports, women are naturally somewhat lagging behind for a historical reason – women have had completely different responsibilities and interests for centuries.
The female chess champions beat all the male champions in some games-and this is despite the fact that men are very massively and very maniacally striving to become champions, and this is rare for women.
This means that at the level of top-level sports in chess, women's and men's opportunities are different. That is, when (if) you and I will become (will we become?) if we are super chess players, then we will obviously win against super chess players.�
But let's not flatter ourselves: this beautiful fantasy of the real us does not make one iota smarter than the vast majority of women))
There is a division in sports. It may not make much sense in chess, but they follow the general rules.
In general, as we have already mentioned, there are many times fewer women playing chess than men-purely for traditional cultural reasons (as far as I remember, the number of male and female students in chess clubs is 16:1). Hence, the chances of being at the top of the rating among women are the same number of times less.
Yu played in the men's championship. Polgar. Her maximum was 8th overall place sort of. It is clear that if we had 15 other chess players in her class (but who did not take up chess at the time, because their parents did not send them there or even dissuaded them), only according to statistics, one of them would sometimes break out to the top.
“Official recognition” would mean if some higher administrative chess body stated in the guidelines: “Women are less capable of chess, so we allocate them a separate parallel branch of the competition.” So there is no official recognition. There is a well-established practice based on reality.
But the reality is that on average, women play weaker than men and usually do not reach prizes in general competitions. It turns out that if you make a general championship, women will fight among themselves in tenth or fifteenth places, which neither they themselves nor the audience are interested in. So we have to single out “women's chess” in order to maintain the appearance of equality. You can argue for a long time whether it is the peculiarities of physiology/psychology, the consequence of upbringing, the pressure of a “chauvinistic male society” or something else – but this is a fact.
There are no rules that prohibit women from participating in men's competitions.
In the history of world chess, there have been several women who have basically played only in men's tournaments and achieved good results. But they were not even close to the highest chess achievements. (Add-on: as Andrey Bakhmatov correctly pointed out in his comment, there was still one exception to this rule: Judit Polgar, who from 2003 to 2014 was kept in the rating list at the level of a super-grandmaster-2700 and above. And the first woman to successfully play in men's tournaments was Vera Menchik: out of more than 450 tournament games with men, she won about a third, lost a third and drew a third).
It is characteristic that this is not the prerogative of chess at all. The situation is the same in checkers. In the Japanese games of go and shogi, there was initially no gender division, but eventually there were women's titles and women's competitions-for the same reasons. Although women everywhere play in men's tournaments there and have quite good achievements, but no woman has ever won a single “general” professional title, for example, in go.
These championships originated almost a century ago, when men and women had significantly unequal conditions for learning chess. It may seem that they have remained only as a tribute to tradition, but comparing the Elo rating of the best chess players and female players, it is clear that it is too early to abandon them. Perhaps in the future, women's performance will become indistinguishable from men's, but so far this is not the case at all
Everyone can play together (according to Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE President). And the results are not a matter of being more stupid, but of a lower level of aggression (indeed, it is by nature-hormones), which is also necessary for chess.
Why do men and women compete separately in chess?
Why is the World Chess Championship for men and women held separately? (Here is the answer of Kirsan Ilyumzhinov, FIDE president) (and my answer with an example about aggression)
Why do men play chess better than women, and what prevents a woman from becoming a world champion?
An explanation like “women are forced to give birth while men move pieces” is, if not complete nonsense, then something very close (if only simply because countries with the strongest chess teams trail at the tail of the birth rate rating). First, chess of the highest achievements as a competition of sophisticated people who have crossed the equator of years, remained about half a century ago. The modern game is very seriously rejuvenated. Magnus Carlsen, Alexander Khalifman and Garry Kasparov became world champions at 23, Vishy Anand-at 21, Ruslan Ponomarev-at 19. The fundamental stage of becoming a chess player now is the school years, and there it is not easy for a young man to put it mildly (you need to have time to prepare for future exams, and maneuver from the danger of being branded a nerd-it's not like a kid). Even Judith Polgar, mentioned in such threads out of place and out of place, became a grandmaster at the age of 12.�
How many friends do you have who have children at this age?
Secondly, the current level of technology and the democratic nature of the game allow you to maintain a small level even without leaving the laptop.
Of course, the above does not mean that any man will beat any woman, but due to biological reasons and greater male variability, the final of the match “Top 10 chess players – Top 10 chess players” can be easily predicted. Is this proof that the smartest men are smarter than the smartest women? Let everyone decide for themselves, we can only say that the skills required for playing chess are better developed in the right tail of the Gaussian distribution among men. And so gender quotas, in whatever field of activity they may be, and no matter who gender they may concern, are very bad.
Left wing gentlemen before indiscriminately minusovat suggest at least express their own arguments
I think it's because our brains are wired differently. We think a little differently. This is confirmed by many studies. I think this is the case, although sexism probably also takes place here…
Because women don't want to play chess. And in order to attract them somehow, they hold separate tournaments. Roughly speaking, women chess players are 100 times less than men, respectively, and the chances that a woman will win the overall tournament are 100 times less.
Why is the male brain different from the female brain? Why do men have better developed lower parietal lobe of the brain, which is responsible for the ability to do math? Why are the obvious facts of neurophysiological differences between men and women shamefully ignored?
Well, the answers, only one adequate. Both men and women can play at any World Championships. But due to the fact that women are rarely seen in any top12, etc., separate tournaments were created for them.
Interesting question. You need to research it “well and honestly”. �Intellectual capabilities �men �and women � need �check for �many �diverse examples. �This isn't very interesting, is it? Gives �so much �opportunities �for sarcastic �smiles �and �views. �
Generally �long �already �need �was �to consider �all of them, �biologically honestly. We all ” know “these leftist” tricks, the conciliatory “philosophy of” everyone is the same if it weren't for socialization.” “Really, she's already got her teeth set on edge. �
At the same time �checking �intelligence, I suggest �to consider �temperament �and SOCIAL �DANGER �flooring �on the subject �proportion. �Dare �in advance �to assume that �we �find �where �more �level �world �crime (any, any) outgoing �from �kind �men. �Simply put, we �see that �almost �all armed, vast �most �violent �and �sexy �crimes �make men. �
NINETY percent of crimes are committed by men. I emphasize, any, any. Of the “female” ten percent, “the lion's share falls on” economic crimes. In general, the picture is exactly that .
Woman �not �became �rape �man, despite the fact that the long �got �physical freedom. �This is strange. �Woman �could rape �members of the male �floor using �effect �surprise, �setting up an ambush �and �applying �handy tools. We all �understand that �be �women �such �desire, she could implement �it once or twice. “As they say, a man is only” finger beckon. “However, women don't do anything like that. “
Statistics �crime shows that women �not �”burn �desire” �not �only in terms �of sexual crimes, but �and �almost all the rest except �economic. � Although �and economic �crime men involved much �more, it �while �still �can �attributed to �what �men �is �more �”delicious” �posts. �Although the size �crime �mean �number of commits �a crime, not fat �stolen �piece, well �okay.�
What is the verdict? �WHAT �is it? “What is… this?” Официальное Official �recognition that a man is socially �more dangerous? �But �in this case, is �can �men to take responsibility �posts, unless �can �we trust �them �your life? “I'm talking about polit. in the sphere of ” our “society. How can a man be responsible for foreign and domestic policy? �It turns out that we ” found the root “of the troubles, the answer to many questions? Isn't this where all the tyrants, aggressors, family oppressors, and maniacal murderers came from? WHAT does a man fantasize about when he thinks about sex? Does he not regard even his own frictions as such as dominance? “Men, after all, this is at least partly true. What do we secretly “think” about when we “make love”? Have we stolen this �expression from women? �Is it love? �Good �male �”love” �- � every �first think �about sex �on the side, then �for women �wildly �and �ridiculous. She loves you, too. “No, such 'love' for a woman's ' feelings and 'feelings' is not a match.�
And if everything is so, then “create for” men “”your own “”separate” policy. �площадку площадку it won't work. This is not possible. It turns out that �woman �need to take �themselves �at least �50% � the �responsible watered. �posts in the government (so that no one is offended). �
So yeah, I �for �honest �investigation �biological �differences �flooring �for �all possible directions. People want to know the truth. I suspect that as a result of all this, women will win much more than they will lose. “And” men “will experience additional, prize-winning” humiliation. �Because �turns out that even �more �high �intelligence saves �their �rod �from �his �”nature” �not �holds �from committing �90% �world of crime.�
Beauty…
Artificial intelligence beats men. Boys of 10-12 years old beat adult men. Why can't adult women beat men? The analysis of performances in various sports shows that women can compete with men in sports that actively involve 1-2 people at the same time, rarely more abilities, h-r, running, shooting, etc.But in dynamic sports, for example, boxing, where you need to move at the same time, beat your hands, etc. and at the same time the role of the specific weight of muscle tissue is
Yes, that's exactly what it is. Gender-segregated sports were created so that women could also receive awards. In the case of a competition with men, they would simply never get into any ratings and would not be able to take at least some prize place. In those sports where women can compete on an equal basis with men, there are no separate competitions. For example, these types of sports are: show jumping, dressage, horse derby, etc.
However, thanks to advances in biotechnology and medicine in recent years, it has been possible in some sports to bring some women to the level of men. We can see this with the example of figure skating and swimming, where the results of the best champions are almost equal to the men's. Transgender people also make a big contribution to this, because legally they are women, despite their male biology.
In addition, thanks to modern medicine, women with various biological abnormalities associated with an imbalance of sex hormones have been given the opportunity to reproduce and transmit their genes. For example, previously women with narrow pelvises could not bear children and either did not give offspring, or died in childbirth. But it is these women who, on average, give the best results in sports.
On the contrary, this is done so that such disputes do not arise. So that there are no situations when a man gives in to a woman or when a girl influences her counterpart, suddenly he is a third-generation virgin.
The Women's World Championship was conceived in 1927 by FIDE, the international chess federation that had just been founded in 1924. In the end, the normal bureaucratic logic worked: a new organization, in order to establish itself, is looking for new tasks.
The main chess competition, the one-on-one World Championship matches, had already been held for four decades, and on the principle of self-organization. The strongest chess players themselves agreed who was playing with whom for the title of world champion, and they themselves were looking for money to host the match. FIDE really began to control the individual World Championships only after the war, before that it was “all difficult”.�
In this situation, FIDE made a bet, firstly, on team championships (chess Olympiads), which, unlike individual ones, were difficult to organize by gravity; secondly, on competitions among categories that remained outside of “big chess”-this is how the women's championships appeared, and a few decades later the junior championships.�
The question” why women lag behind ” was not at all the main one for the chess functionaries of the 1920s: they were organizers, not researchers or ideologues. We came up with and organized a project that was useful for both women and themselves.�
Then there is normal inertia, when something already exists, works well and, in principle, suits everyone. As long as there were women's championships, women chess players had the right to play in men's tournaments (as Vera Menchik, the first world champion, did), so they did not see discrimination here.
Both women and men can take part in any “men's” championship or tournament. Moreover, the world's strongest chess player, Judith Polgar, participated only in men's competitions, even in matches for the women's championship, she never played.
There are championships and tournaments that are open only to women. This is done in order to attract more representatives of the fair sex to this sport, as it happened historically, they are less interested in it than men. The logic is simple: if you allocate additional titles, titles and categories only for female athletes, it will be easier for them to break through at the initial stage, get sponsorship and continue playing this sport at a professional level.
The difference in the ratings of leading male and female chess players is not due to the difference in intelligence, but to other factors dictated by society: interest in the game, motivation for personal competition, faith in success, and the skill of the coach. In order to become the best in the world in any sport, it takes a lot of work and years, or even decades of training. This is a real career and, no kidding, a monstrous load. Imagine that you need to make a decision: starting today, for the next ten years, you need to train for several hours every day for the sake of a chance at the chess crown. Do you agree? No one guarantees success. If you get sick of all this at some point, then leaving everything halfway is a huge personal tragedy, so much invested success and emotions will go to waste. All this time it is necessary to live somehow, earn something, and women also have strong social pressure in terms of families and children. Trying to reduce this most complex, complex question to “does this mean that women are naturally more stupid” is the real idiocy.
EDIT: Based on the dispute that broke out in the comments, a mathematical explanation. An international team of researchers studied statistics on a significant sample of German chess players, more than 120 thousand people. In Germany, there are 16 times more men than women playing chess. The researchers noted the obvious numerical dominance of men in the lists of the best chess players in the country, but concluded that this proportion can be explained by 96% purely statistically, without taking into account biological and socio-cultural factors.
If you simplify their results very much and conditionally retell them without statistical terms and formulas, you can make a similar analogy. If in order to play at the level of the best hundred chess players on the planet, you need abilities that are found, for example, in one person in six million, then the final list of the top 100 will be significantly influenced by the demographics of our sample: if there are an order of magnitude or two more men than women playing chess in the world, then Which is 96% accurate in line with statistics on German chess players.
The ability to play chess is just one manifestation of a very complex set of qualities and abilities that we call intelligence. Women are indeed statistically weaker at chess, but we cannot say that women are statistically more stupid on this basis, these are far from equivalent concepts.