Chess is gendered?

[commasense]

It’s a bit of a side track (heh), but the issue of women’s participation in professional auto racing bears certain similarities. Obviously, in most of the world, young boys have historically been much more encouraged to take an interest in cars and racing than girls. So the cultural forces at work are clear.

Although many people don’t realize it, top level pro racers have to be world-class athletes. But the physical characteristics they need are not primarily strength, which would obviously favor men, but quick reactions and the stamina to sustain high G forces and cockpit temperatures for two hours or more at a time.

A few women have succeeded at the top levels of racing, most notably Danica Patrick, who was Rookie of the Year in 2005’s Indianapolis 500 and in that year’s IndyCar series. She came in third in the 2009 Indy 500, the highest position ever for a woman, and is the only woman to have won an IndyCar race. She later moved to NASCAR.

(Regarding the physical requirements for racing, in her early days in IndyCar, there were complaints from some drivers that Danica had an advantage because she weighed less than most of the men, and could therefore go faster!

However, women in racing are still such a rarity that in 2019 the W Series, a women-only racing series, was launched to help advance women in pro racing. It is in its second year (the 2020 season was canceled by COVID), and is run on the same tracks on the same weekends as Formula 1 World Championship races. The final race of the 2021 season will be at Circuit of the Americas in Austin, Oct. 23.

The announcement of the W Series was not universally welcomed, because some, including female drivers, saw it as segregation, arguing that the money used to set up and run it would have been better spent helping women get a leg up in F1.

British IndyCar Series driver Pippa Mann responded to the series’ announcement on Twitter, saying “What a sad day for motorsport. Those with funding to help female racers are choosing to segregate them as opposed to supporting them. I am deeply disappointed to see such a historic step backwards take place in my life time.”[19][20]

Perhaps the most significant difference between chess and racing is that the latter takes fiendishly large amounts of money: top F1 teams have budgets exceeding $400 million. Drivers not only have to have the driving skills, they also have to be able to attract sponsors and bring cash to the team, and this is true at all levels of motor sports. Yet another barrier to women in a traditionally male-dominated arena.

And that may be part of the reason why the most successful female driver ever also happened to have near-supermodel looks (borderline NSFW), which she and her husband-manager did not hesitate to take advantage of.

[RickJay]

@Novelty_Bobble

No that sentence doesn’t hold. Whether such a country exists or not is independent of any claim I’m making.

I’m saying that the existence of such a country would enable the hypothesis to be tested. The implicit assumption in that would be that if such a country doesn’t exists then it could not be tested. That is obvious and doesn’t need saying.

What Broomstick claimed was that such a country doesn’t exist. I don’t know on what basis such a specific claim is made.

In other words it remains open as to whether that hypothesis can be tested until someone is able to show that such a country either does or does not exist.

Let’s please ensure we stay on the topic of chess and gender. We are beginning to steer away from it a bit.

RickJay
Moderator

[Novelty_Bobble]

@RickJay

Let’s please ensure we stay on the topic of chess and gender. We are beginning to steer away from it a bit.

To be fair, all that you quoted was in defence of a hypothesis that spoke directly to the question of gender and chess. I have no further need to mount a defence as the point has now been clearly made.

[Snarky_Kong]

@Broomstick

Let me give an example from earlier in this thread (paraphrased, but you can scroll back to read the exchange):

I said that there had never been any women in the top 10 of chess.

Someone came back with an example of a woman who was rated #8.

I said, oh, I did not know that, thanks for the information, I stand corrected.

OK, got that?

I said there is no country that is non-gendered in chess. I am certainly not aware of any. Until we have an actual example of that we can not prove or disprove your hypothesis.

If you come back with an example of a nation where chess is non-gendered I say thank you, I stand corrected, and the dialog progresses.

This is the kind of stupid bullshit fox news does.

[omenran]

@Novelty_Bobble

@Novelty_Bobble

I feel that the best indication that differences in M/F attainment are due purely to social factors would be to find a country that encourages female participation and track the difference between male and female ratings in that country.

If the societal hypothesis holds then we’d expect to see that difference narrow in comparison to other countries.

Note, there is no claim on my part that such a country definitely does exist.

So feel free to read that again and tell me who exactly is making a positive claim.

I was looking around for some info on women as a percentage of rankings to see how they are distributed when I came across this article on Slate.

In it, are referenced two academic papers. One of which has in its summary that Hungary had increased participation by women, and a narrowed gap in achievement.

It seems to me that participation and societal views of women’s ability and intelligence are the main current reasons women have not done better in chess rankings.