Alice Through the Looking Glass (1973) – YouTubeThis older version is closer to the book.
I can’t let go of the male/female chess business: why women are pretty bad at all the ‘intellectual’ and ‘mechanical’ stuff men do so much easier. I was an exception to the rule, for example, designing and building houses and doing other ‘men’s jobs’ over the years. But then, my brain is somewhat different from most women’s thinking systems and indeed, I get along infinitely better with men than women because of this. Why is this? I always wondered and I know that I am not anywhere near as good as men of the same IQ when it comes to various things like…playing chess.
Well, it seems that this entire business freaks out many organizations and people who want to pretend men and women are the same. We are not even genetically the same! So why not acknowledge and understand the obvious differences? Why is this so impossible and so many people use every possible scam and trick to hide reality?
This is very bad in a hundred ways. Men are so much better than women when it comes to say, shooting bows and arrows or throwing spears or even shooting guns, all of which I have done all my life and am pretty good at this but…men still beat me when push comes to shove!
I don’t throw a temper tantrum, I find it amusing and fantastic that men can do what they evolved to do so easily, after all, I gave birth and nursed two babies and I loved doing it. This is something men would struggle with much less, want to do in the first place.
Below are some articles from the last 5 years whereby smart scientists go to great lengths to lie, deceive and mutilate the Truth about this issue: Men’s Chess Superiority Explained – Scientific American
A study published by the Royal Society finds that men’s superiority over women at chess at the top levels can be explained by population size. Since many more men play, there’s a wider range of abilities, meaning more individuals at the very top. Karen Hopkin reports
Ta-Da! HAHAHA. Yes, that’s the trick! If only millions of little girls would cease their stupidity and play chess, more will win! This is pure lunacy and stupid, too. I remember exactly what happened when boys began surging past me in chess playing: I had my first period and it was like hitting this brick wall.
I ceased racing along with the boys, getting better over time. I didn’t get worse, it is just…I struggled to go further. 99% of girls who like chess lose interest when this happens. I didn’t lose interest as a spectator, I would team up with some boys and help them along in various ways, I just couldn’t win.
I could analyze a game afterwards or even while it was being played but I couldn’t do so hot, myself. Why is that? Well, my brain, set up to watch babies and little children like a hawk, would be easily distracted in trying to protect various pieces and thus, strategy would die on the vine.
It was very frustrating but after having children…the husband would ignore the baby while mommy has ‘eyes in the back of the head’, for example.
One of the most talked about findings in psychology today is “stereotype threat” – a phenomenon in which a person experiences anxiety because of the fear of confirming a negative stereotype.
Well, bomb the issue to utter annihilation! So, ‘negative stereotypes’ are causing girls to not play chess very well! HAHAHA. Not. I know this is false, it makes me very bitter to hear this. I desperately wanted to win at chess at age 13. And I did, less and less and it was like falling off a cliff.
And it pissed me off. Instead of making excuses, I wanted to figure out why this was so. It is very attached to my eventual career in building stuff: I had to learn very carefully how to handle working in very dangerous places and with dangerous tools. Few women ever ventured to climb up onto building to do this sort of thing.
Research has shown that stereotype threat can lead people to perform worse than expected. For example, women make more mistakes on a math test after being reminded of the stereotype that men are better at math.
Go to hell, damn it. No one expected me to start losing at chess especially me! It was annoying, puzzling and freaky. This crap that ‘women do worse at math when reminded that men are better’ is pure garbage. This excuse making pisses me off greatly.
I honor men for what they have. Thank god they have these abilities. I wouldn’t trust a math or chess genius with raising a baby! They would probably neglect the poor little guys.
Despite hundreds of studies showing its effects, stereotype threat remains controversial as an explanation for real-world performance gaps.
This rotten excuse cooked up for PC reason is ‘controversial’ because it is false, it is terrible and it is very stupid.
This is partly because most studies have been done using college students in carefully controlled laboratory experiments, leaving open the question as to whether stereotype threat operates the same way in more complex real life situations.
These ‘experiments’ were failures. First, one should talk about this with women like myself who somehow, manage to ‘think like a man’ and who can give a detailed explanation about all these mysteries. Top women chess players can explain this, they are more ‘masculine’ in their thinking systems like myself and can trace it to earliest childhood.
Also, since most stereotype threat studies have looked at adults, it’s not clear whether children and teenagers would suffer from its ill effects. Psychology professors Hank Rothgerber and Katie Wolsiefer decided to tackle both of these issues by looking at whether stereotype threat affects young girls who play in chess tournaments.
Hello! Men are pleased to play with women. I never met a man who didn’t want to do this and then be disappointed that I can’t be much better. There was no animosity. The very few females who make the top 100 (2%) are toasted by everyone as ‘geniuses’ even though they are not the very top at all.
Everyone slavers over these elite females. People beg them to be better. And…it never really comes along at all. So we have to face reality: women are inferior to men in certain key areas including throwing spears, sword fighting, lifting weights, etc. etc. etc. They create civilizations because of these advantages bought so very dearly.
For many people, the idea of a famous chess player evokes the image of someone smart yet nerdy—and male. Do societal ideas about who makes for a better chess player impact the performance and motivation of girls who play chess?
No, it doesn’t. We have shoehorned women into many once-all male jobs including pretending that females can fight in wars (some of us can, the vast majority can’t so well). Mother nature decrees, women who fight and die end up with NO CHILDREN.
Men create baby booms before and after major wars. Dead women can’t do this trick. So any ‘fighting women’ genes end up like Joan of Arc: ashes.
Why are (the best) women so good at chess? Participation rates and gender differences in intellectual domains: here is another stupid article claiming that few women in intellectual sports is due to few women, not women being crappy at it:
A popular explanation for the small number of women at the top level of intellectually demanding activities from chess to science appeals to biological differences in the intellectual abilities of men and women. An alternative explanation is that the extreme values in a large sample are likely to be greater than those in a small one. Although the performance of the 100 best German male chess players is better than that of the 100 best German women, we show that 96 per cent of the observed difference would be expected given the much greater number of men who play chess. There is little left for biological or cultural explanations to account for. In science, where there are many more male than female participants, this statistical sampling explanation, rather than differences in intellectual ability, may also be the main reason why women are under-represented at the top end.
Utter, total Bullhockyshit. The need to desperately cling to this false story pisses me off. I won awards in various intellectual things…and sucked at winning chess when playing moderately good male players. This is stupid.
My own IQ was through the roof in 1964. My ability to play chess rapidly eroded vis a vis young men of similar intelligence. My own brothers who were all very smart and ended up in the techie world, could beat me (rats!).
(PhysOrg.com) — In the recorded history of chess, world champions have always been male, not female. Further, there is currently only one woman in the top 100 chess players in the world. Because chess is often considered to be the ultimate intellectual activity, male dominance at chess is often cited as an example of innate male intellectual superiority. But rather than resort to biological or cultural explanations, a recent study proposes a different explanation.
Even the Physics guys fell for this stupid scam. The explanation that if only many women were to study physics and play chess, they would equal men…this has been kicked out as ‘true’ with zero proof.’
A team of researchers from the UK has shown that the under-representation of women at the top end in chess is almost exactly what would be expected, given the much greater number of men that participate in the game at all. Researchers Merim Bilalic, et al., have published their research on this statistical sampling explanation in a recent issue of the Proceedings of the Royal Society B.
There are statistics and then there are lies that are statistics. Statistics means nothing, it is the opening shot, NOT the the end result of anything.
The above got us thinking: how many female players are there in the top levels of chess? In the top hundred the answer is one percent, and that 1% is named Judit Polgar. But how about the top thousand? Using the latest available FIDE rating list for all players we were able to extract exactly 22 female players, which works out to (whip out your calculators, boys and girls) 2.2%.
They go on to say what I say: there must be a mysterious genetic component to men being so much better and so much more interested in chess.
Gender differences in chess | ChessBase has to pretend they don’t understand any of this beause there is no real difference between men and women aside from the Y chromosome which is a HUGE difference…ooops:
The most common explanation I hear for the disparity, over and over again, is that it’s an accurate reflection of ability: men do better at the higher ranks of science and math because they have better brains.
DUH! Yes, they do have BIGGER and better brains for this sort of stuff. It came from a series of very nasty Ice Ages where especially in the northern hemisphere, men had to struggle like crazy to survive. Women hunkered down with furs and babies and men hunted MASTODONS, etc. A huge stew of genetic hammering leading to men being really good with weapons and calculations.
And the most frequent rational for that is the greater male variability hypothesis: the bell curve of performance for women is better tuned to achieve a greater likelihood of median ability, while men are more erratic – they produce more damaged, faulty brains than do women, but at the same time, they produce more brilliant brains. The male population exhibits greater extremes.
And perchance, this is due to that Y chromosome which is so stunted with less than 10% of the genes on an X chromosome. But whatever that is, there is something there that was won over the last 5 million years of evolution that causes men to be very, very good at certain things especially ‘brain’ stuff.
This has never made any sense to me.
There are deleterious traits which men have at higher frequency than women: color blindness, for instance, or haemophilia. There is also a known higher incidence for objectively measurable mental defects in males vs. females, diagnosable at birth. But how does this lead one to conclude that the greater variability should lead to greater beneficial variability?
Seemingly, that is true. In reality, that fact that men who were really good at certain difficult and very dangerous skills including fighting off other men or stealing women to have as mates…has led to a rapid evolution of the human brain with men’s brains, like body size, usually bigger than women’s brains and body size.
There is never any specific explanation of a mechanism that would allow greater variability to promote greater intelligence in males.
The writer of this article and the ‘scientists’ are all rather stupid, I fear. That ‘mechanism’ is simple: surviving Ice Age conditions took lots and lots of intelligence!!! It was not easy!!!! The tropical men and women on the equator didn’t evolve the ferocious brain size of Eurasian and North American humans.
This is due to them living in a Garden of Eden while the other humanoids were battling saber tooth tigers, gigantic hairy elephants, cave bears twice the size of grizzlies, etc.
There is much flapping of hands over the greater male frequency of autism, reading disorders, juvenile delinquency, etc. (all true), and then a dangling “therefore…” leading to the conclusion that there must be compensatory intellectual benefits for men.
DUH. A bigger brain can cause bigger malfunctions, too. And women die during childbirth! Each have evolutionary stresses that are huge. The smarter men survived better than ones that were stupid and couldn’t plan ahead or figure out how to make better and better tools, or persuade other men to do whatever when hunting or going to war with the tribe over the hill.
Men earned this genetic power via the hammer and the sword!
The small, stumpy Y chromosome—possessed by male mammals but not females, and often shrugged off as doing little more than determining the sex of a developing fetus—may impact human biology in a big way.
Good lord. That ‘stump’ is directly responsible for men being able to be physically and mentally more powerful than women! It is the key to the ‘big human brain’ evolution.
Two independent studies have concluded that the sex chromosome, which shrank millions of years ago, retains the handful of genes that it does not by chance, but because they are key to our survival. The findings may also explain differences in disease susceptibility between men and women.
“The old textbook description says that once maleness is determined by a few Y chromosome genes and you have gonads, all other sex differences stem from there,” says geneticist Andrew Clark of Cornell University, who was not involved in either study. “These papers open up the door to a much richer and more complex way to think about the Y chromosome.”
But while the X chromosome has remained large throughout evolution, with about 2000 genes, the Y chromosome lost most of its genetic material early in its evolution; it now retains less than 100 of those original genes. That’s led some scientists to hypothesize that the chromosome is largely indispensable and could shrink away entirely.
Nope. It means that it has been pared down by evolution. When you pare a bush by cutting off all sorts of growth, it bears more flowers and more and fatter fruits. Pruning a tree makes it produce better!
To determine which Y chromosome genes are shared across species, Daniel Winston Bellott, a biologist at the Whitehead Institute for Biomedical Research in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and colleagues compared the Y chromosomes of eight mammals, including humans, chimpanzees, monkeys, mice, rats, bulls, and opossums. The overlap, they found, wasn’t just in those genes known to determine the sex of an embryo. Eighteen diverse genes stood out as being highly similar between the species. The genes had broad functions including controlling the expression of genes in many other areas of the genome. The fact that all the species have retained these genes, despite massive changes to the overall Y chromosome, hints that they’re vital to mammalian survival.
These ‘on/off’ switches are highly important. Boys have the opposite of girls when reaching sex age: they see great growth in the parts of the brain which is connected to throwing spears, killing mastodons, counting stuff when divvying up the loot and hunting for sex or protecting the home cave and tribe!
Now, a pair of Penn State scientists has discovered that this sex chromosome, the Y chromosome, has evolved at a much more rapid pace than its partner chromosome, the X chromosome, which both males and females carry. This rapid evolution of the Y chromosome has led to a dramatic loss of genes on the Y chromosome at a rate that, if maintained, eventually could lead to the Y chromosome’s complete disappearance.
Um, no. The sex stuff will continue. Of course, over time, when brains ceases to matter and people who are incompetent and even stupid can have endless children and other people pay to feed them all and protect them and give them shelter while they do nothing useful…THAT will lead to evolution that will terminate humans over time.
By comparing the DNA of the X and Y chromosomes in eutherian mammals to the DNA of the non-sex chromosomes in the opossum and platypus, the team was able to go back in time to the point when the X and Y chromosomes were still swapping DNA, just like the non-sex chromosomes in the opossum and platypus. The scientists then were able to observe how the DNA of the X and Y chromosomes changed over time relative to the DNA of the non-sex chromosomes. “Our research revealed that the Y-specific DNA began to evolve rapidly at the time that the DNA region split into two entities, while the X-specific DNA maintained the same evolutionary rate as the non-sex chromosomes,” said Makova.
Yes, we are no longer sea slugs or octopus. Isn’t evolution funny? Those raging dinosaurs spawned some strange relatives who evolved into mammals and these had a strict male/female game going which humans today seem bent on destroying utterly. Which is rather funny and won’t last long.
When the next Ice Age hits, there will be swift evolution again with people who have great life skills like being able to fight with rocks and sticks and other tools and make fires (all of which I can do, thank you) will survive.
Evolution is incredibly cruel. And the females better be good at protecting and raising little hellion children! Or we really will be doomed.