Players like Judit Polgar in chess and Rui Naiwei in Go seem to me to be strong evidence that women are not inherently worse at that sort of thing, by which I mean, if you randomly sampled 1000 men and 1000 women, and had both groups put in the same amount of effort to improve the chosen discipline (how you would practically do this while isolating for various other factors I have no idea), I would expect no statistical difference in the strength of the two groups. This does not necessarily imply that there will be as many strong female Go players or chess players as male ones, even in a utopia where everyone, so long as it is in keeping with moral behavior, is able to pursue what they desire, since a higher interest in the specific game (such as more women in Scrabble or more men in chess and Go) will affect the results, and, if the Scrabble study is accurate, different means of preferred study may also have an impact.
The claim that this is strong evidence is predicated on my conjecture that if you compare hypothetical world A in which women are inherently worse at chess and Go than men, no matter how hard they try, and hypothetical world B in which women and men are, on the average, level in chess or Go potential, but may or may not pursue those things to the same degree, the likliehood of a very strong female player in world A existing, would be much lower than the likelihood of a very strong female player in world B existing. Thus, we should assume, seeing very strong female players in these (presumably somewhat comparable) disciplines, that the world in which that observation is more likely, should be the world we most likely inhabit.
I would very much like someone who knows more statistics than me to weigh in on whether or not this is valid reasoning, and if not, if there’s a similar argument which can be made, which is not so flawed.
It might be unintuitive, but my first thought is that this was long ago, but not that long ago. Yet nowadays if I stumble upon the Paris marathon (for what I know) I will see plenty of women, perhaps as many as men, perhaps even more, I cannot tell, and I cannot even imagine such a scenario taking place.
I hope this won’t be misunderstood as “sexism is solved and no longer a problem”, which is very much not my point. Nevertheless, while sexism is still alive and well, this should not stop us from appreciating the progress that was made since just a few decades ago. At least that’s my thought when seeing such pictures.
Disclaimer, I’m not great at reading faces. Also disclaimer, I will use “assault” in the sense of acting so as to present a credible threat to another’s life or bodily non-injury. This covers a very wide range of things, many of which are far less severe than the way “assault” is often used in conversation, but it is closer to my impression of the legal definition of assault in the state I live in. (Disclaimer, I’m not a lawyer; Disclaimer, laws on assault can vary between regions)
I first noticed the center with 261 and the man to her right, of course. It’s very difficult from a single picture to see what’s going on, but I will assume the caption is correct. I believe it’s the man in the darker Black coat to her left who assaulted her? The man to her right seems to be attempting to block the man in the Black coat, though it’s really hard to see in a single still image. One thing I don’t see, is anyone looking like they are in favor of his action. 368 looks like he’s wondering wtf is going on, 225 and ?90 clearly think something’s amiss if they’re turning around in the middle of a race, I’m guessing the people in the foreground where we can only see their heads aren’t noticing what’s behind them, which makes sense, and 295 and the man to his right don’t look approving. The others are too far away.
So all in all, I see a consistent disapproval of the actions of the man in the Black coat, which is in line with what I’d expect.
Would I be accurate if I used this quote as a summary of your first reaction?
If so, why is that? Do you imagine that surely someone would stop him? Or that there is at least enough public reaction now to not make such an action acceptable?
I’m not grilling you or anything, we serve as an example, if you may. Very OK to not answer.
Would I be accurate if I used this quote as a summary of your first reaction?
More accurate would be that I cannot even imagine such a scenario taking place nowadays.
If so, why is that? Do you imagine that surely someone would stop him? Or that there is at least enough public reaction now to not make such an action acceptable?
Before such notions of “somebody would stop him”, I don’t think that anybdoy would even think of it.
While this pictures shows it hasn’t always been the case, nowadays I don’t think anybody would even pay attention to the fact that a woman is running in a marathon. It’s normal, there’s plenty of women there, there was plenty last year and there will be plenty next year. It wouldn’t even trigger a reaction (at least in developped countries, I obviously cannot speak worlwide).
I also think that if another runner happened to try to stop a woman, he would be stopped, but most importantly I don’t think anybody would think of trying.
To quote Scott Alexander:
“Or take stereotype threat. Again, this is sort of a voodoo curse. If people make you think you’re going to do bad on a test, then you’ll do bad on the test. Again, widely believed, held up as an example of the power of perception. Again, doesn’t replicate well in large studies, has a very suspicious funnel plot, and is starting to inspire doubt even among top researchers in the area.”
Did that 55 years ago. I well remember the event. The Boston Marathon was under the authority of the AAU (Amateur Athletic Union), which had a rule against women in all of its road races. Pressure to change that rule had already been going on for a few years, but this event crystalized the outrage. My impression at the time was that the bulk of opinion in the running community was on Switzer’s side.
It is not clear which guy you are referring to. Jock Semple, the Boston Marathon director who tried to rip off her number and pull her out of the race, is the guy in black behind her in the photo. The guy with his hand on her shoulder is unknown to me, but I think he is actually defending her. I think he is pulling her away from Semple’s grip while deflecting Semple with his left hand (unseen behind Switzer). Notice that Semple’s right hand has been deflected and he is off balance. In a later photo this guy, no longer gripping Switzer, has positioned himself between Switzer and Semple, while the muscular, black-haired guy on the right also rushed in to help Switzer. News accounts at the time referred to other runners coming to Switzer’s defense, but I don’t remember any speaking of runners assisting Semple.
Semple’s motivation is unclear to me. From what I know, I strongly suspect that he was a typical tyrannical bureaucrat. Tyrannical bureaucrats, whether in government, sports, or elsewhere, hate anyone defying their authority.
I have just finished reading this thread (I think I can link it now) and I’m a bit shocked.
I don’t know if it applies to me because I don’t think I’m physically attractive, but the idea that it’s possible that many go players want to interact with me mainly because I’m a woman doesn’t appeal to me at all.
Online it’s probably different. From my nickname you can clearly see that I’m a woman (although I assure you that many people thought I’m a man ) but I guess the distance has a big role.
As @yebellz already said, the fact that there are few women could lead to some women not wanting to stay in the community. I find it a bit sad but I understand it.
@Groin Thanks for the statistics, I had never seen that report and I find it very interesting. I didn’t know Hungary had so many young players. And I agree with you, 26% on OGS seems very good to me. It’s not 50, but I didn’t expect that much.
I don’t know. I have already said some things. Many things I agree with have already been said by others.
I can’t think of anything else I want to go into right now. I’m sorry.
It can be because I’m a woman (but I prefer to think it’s because I am me).
If that can make you feel more confortable about the drawing, to me it’s a caricature exagerating the situation of one woman and many men. Women do go in clubs and enjoy it so that’s not really depicting the social life in go clubs.
Have you read the except from Dostoevsky’s “Notes from the Underground” about men being piano keys? Further context is at the link. I find it sums up very nicely my feelings about any philosophy which does not posit me and my free decisions as being responsible for my own actions.
It is just his fantastic dreams, his vulgar folly that he will desire to retain, simply in order to prove to himself–as though that were so necessary-- that men still are men and not the keys of a piano, which the laws of nature threaten to control so completely that soon one will be able to desire nothing but by the calendar. And that is not all: even if man really were nothing but a piano-key, even if this were proved to him by natural science and mathematics, even then he would not become reasonable, but would purposely do something perverse out of simple ingratitude, simply to gain his point. And if he does not find means he will contrive destruction and chaos, will contrive sufferings of all sorts, only to gain his point! He will launch a curse upon the world, and as only man can curse (it is his privilege, the primary distinction between him and other animals), may be by his curse alone he will attain his object–that is, convince himself that he is a man and not a piano-key! If you say that all this, too, can be calculated and tabulated–chaos and darkness and curses, so that the mere possibility of calculating it all beforehand would stop it all, and reason would reassert itself, then man would purposely go mad in order to be rid of reason and gain his point!
Oh, that thread. I muted it at some point.
It brings back unpleasant memories, not a good experience.
I’m going to exit this thread now as well, I don’t want to relive the experience.
@_Sofiam I’m glad you brought up the discussion, nevertheless.
well, someone died - got assaulted and murdered - in Greece yesterday for a similar, yet somehow even more trivial reason to dislike people. He was just a football fan outside the stadium of his own team.
Dead, just for that, according to the current information that I can find.
I am just pointing this out to say that sometimes our imagination on how bad things can get, or be, for other people, is hard to approach reality.
.
) but I guess the distance has a big role.
(but I prefer to think it’s because I am me).