Why are Men stronger than Women in Chess? 

Fact- Men also have higher rating on average. And the thing is that there are less women in chess it means only best women are going into chess and for men all type of player are going into chess best average and worse. But men still beat women on average rating. It tell us that if women number increase in chess their average rating is going to go down even more.

@@Egg-wt1pk it is a reality but admitting it would be so controversial so we have to say things like "female feel discriminated because there are more male than female, then they dont want to play it".

@@easypeasy9598 That the problem. We as society giving women excuses in everything. That if they fail in something blame it to sexism, which ultimately means blame it to men. Which is really toxic.

You are 100% correct …

Most men are average iq, so it's not that big of a difference. It's not like men are either a genius or a dumbass, most are inbetween.

uh.. says you. Tell us more about the countries with feminist leaders that tried to support 50% in every field.

Hey stop that, don’t use logic in a conversation.

​@@JS-ir7wh In some countries, they are doing a lot to balance these numbers. Encouraging women or men to get into a more female/male dominant fields by making it easier to get into those fields. However, it doesn't seem to do anything. Higher egalitarian values, in general, have been shown to increase differences between men and women.

@@peterpeterson3385 He said some countries have tried to FORCE 50-50 in every field. Force.

I agree with what you are saying here. If a woman wants to put in the work and become a good chess player, then by all means, she can. but if there simply aren't very many women who want to play chess and it becomes a male dominated game by personal desire, there is nothing wrong with that. I don't see why society in general thinks that its automatically a bad thing that something is dominated by 1 of the 2 genders. It is just the fact of the matter that men and women are better suited to different things, and that's a good thing. Wouldn't it seem stupid if gardening communities started initiatives to involve men more? simply by desire, women want to do gardening more than men do, and there is nothing inherently bad about that.

wwow

thanks for admitting womens sports is a participation trophy sport

@@Armed-Forever Not at all! it's competitive sport! As every competition should be, it's made to let equal people compete each other.

@@BICIeCOMPUTERconGabriele yes and womens sports only exists so that a winner can be a person with a vag

@@BICIeCOMPUTERconGabrieledoes that mean women are born weaker in chess than men🤔🤔🤔

@@BICIeCOMPUTERconGabriele except its not equal because women can't compete on the same level as men? ( name any sport where women out perform men ?)

Idk if this is a western thing, because I'm from asia and here both were equally strong back in uni. The toppers were both male and female, and in our stem industries here there is barely any disparity. Could also be because everyone is pushed into STEM/law and anything else is seen as useless

@@rocket9688 idk which part of asia you do live. But your statement is bogus my friend. I also live in asia. Women get more funds, quotas and supports, Men do not get tiniest amount of those perks nowadays.. Morevover Their CGPA is better in some cases but However, even after that Real talent lies in your brain and instinct..for that with less CGPA Men do better things. Now some crybaby feminist always bring up conspiracy blah blah garbage. But actually it's what it is Men do better in those subjects. Women better at nursing, teaching and crafty stuffs. Because we are different and gender do fkn exist. It has been set by Almighty God

@@darksoul6482 Women don't like arts, crafts and nursing because of God. It's because they were forced into those roles for centuries upon centuries. So it's no surprise when there are less women than men playing chess.

Evolutionary history explains it very well. But of course it is taboo.

Men uses mostly only left side of brain while women use both side of brain this actually reduced problem solving speed and accuracy and causes them to relate everything to other While men have an objective→do it/solve it/ achieve it simple

Men are better than almost everything

Ig Everything is more appealing to boys💀💀💀

Girls have historically been taught from a young age that obsessing over stuff is bad, and that focussing on ourselves is bad, that we are expected to be social, etc blah blah. In fact that word, obsessing, if replaced by "impassioned" changes the perspective. Your simplistic evaluation of women v men proclivities/ survival is way off, and out of date.

@@marthalea876 Your claims are fallacious and unsubstantiated where his are reasoned and backed up with referenced timestamps on what he is commenting on. In *this* day and age in Western countries, and I don't give a flying fig about the what you believe "historically" women have been taught, women today are taught from a young age they CAN and MUST compete with and against men. It's hilarious that you believe society tells women that focusing on themselves is bad? LOL, the opposite is what is being promoted; that's the entire reason the fashion and make up industries exist...because society encourages them to focus on themselves so that these parasitic industries can keep being fed. Go home, you're drunk.

More logic than whole video, girls just making up silly reasons for not achieving something bigger than men Even after men have done/invented it

​@@marthalea876 You could get rid of every m*sogynistic comment, that, say, the Botez sisters get today and have them free of them for the rest of their lives. I don't think there would be a big change in their ratings. I don't think that the grinding lifestyle would suddenly look like a good option to them compared to what they have. If women were told that obsessing over things were good, they would just get mad at that gender role instead of the role that's currently "put upon" them. In any case, gender roles are mostly just repeating what women (or men) generally like to aspire towards, just in a rigid, simplified way; it's just the rigidity of it that can get annoying, but rigid frameworks are often needed to understand complex reality by turning it into digestible but slightly arbitrary chunks, although naturally we must understand their limitations as well as their insights. Since men often get benefits by being strong, being strong will be a common topic of conversation around men in general. It doesn't mean that every man has to be strong or that a role is being placed upon them in some forceful way. You yourself call these things "blah blah," so clearly you don't buy it, and many women probably think the same way as you do; given that, what difference would it make if people didn't expect these things of them? Either way you would think those things were "blah blah," so it's not as if you are adopting that position and hence you can't really blame that position for anything or connect it to anything about the matter at hand. For example, you think the idea that obsessing over stuff is bad is "blah blah," and aren't convinced by what you hear, so there must be some feature (unmentioned by you) that is independent from what you hear that makes you choose not to obsess over stuff anyway (if that is what you in fact choose not to do). People might say high achievers are impassioned, and sometimes obsessive. Usually both words will be mentioned often enough, because frankly there are tradeoffs. In some ways it's brilliant what the men (and less commonly, women) do in this context, and in some ways it can be destructive, and for every great achievement there were drawbacks, negative consequences, and tradeoffs. We focus on the beautiful games of Fischer but that doesn't make other quite ugly aspects of his life any less real, and I don't think focusing on his beautiful games says otherwise. It's just that, if you want to learn from Fischer, you gain from looking at his games, rather than his personal life, so looking at his games is the logical choice there. The point is that it's not all rosy and that it's no secret being unfairly kept from anyone. If you tell women that you can be number one without making sacrifices and without being weird in some genuinely unattractive way, you are maybe not lying, since it's not impossible (perhaps with Carlsen being a rare exception as a relatively (though far from entirely) normal guy who got there), but you are telling them something extremely implausible, because of the tradeoffs that come with this in general. It would be nearly lying to tell this to men as well. Men are maybe more likely to deal with the ugly (dark, even) aspects of becoming the best. It's not as if some purely rosy reality of being the best is being kept secret from women; it just factually isn't all rosy. Far from it. There are some really cool things about being the best, but the process of getting there is rather ugly, full of sacrifices, and not guaranteed to be satisfying to the men or women that achieve it, and frankly is sometimes unsatisfying and harmful to people who have achieved it, all things considered. We gather benefits from great achievers not to deny their negative aspects, but in order to be constructive; we aren't thereby denying the existence of the ugly reality of it, or keeping it secret from men or women. We all generally want to be good at things but we must always recognize the tradeoffs and see what's best for us; we should not pretend that such tradeoffs don't exist and call such denial "encouragement."

@@marthalea876 You could get rid of every m*sogynistic comment, that, say, the Botez sisters get today and have them free of them for the rest of their lives. I don't think there would be a big change in their ratings. I don't think that the grinding lifestyle would suddenly look like a good option to them compared to what they have. If women were told that obsessing over things were good, they would just get mad at that role instead of the role that's currently "put upon" them. In any case, roles are mostly just repeating what women (or men) generally like to aspire towards, just in a rigid, simplified way; it's just the rigidity of it that can get annoying, but rigid frameworks are often needed to understand complex reality by turning it into digestible but slightly arbitrary chunks, although naturally we must understand their limitations as well as their insights. Since men often get benefits by being strong, being strong will be a common topic of conversation around men in general. It doesn't mean that every man has to be strong or that a role is being placed upon them in some forceful way. You yourself call these things "blah blah," so clearly you don't buy it, and many women probably think the same way as you do; given that, what difference would it make if people didn't expect these things of them? Either way you would think those things were "blah blah," so it's not as if you are adopting that position and hence you can't really blame that position for anything or connect it to anything about the matter at hand. For example, you think the idea that obsessing over stuff is bad is "blah blah," and aren't convinced by what you hear, so there must be some feature (unmentioned by you) that is independent from what you hear that makes you choose not to obsess over stuff anyway (if that is what you in fact choose not to do). People might say high achievers are impassioned, and sometimes obsessive. Usually both words will be mentioned often enough, because frankly there are tradeoffs. In some ways it's brilliant what the men (and less commonly, women) do in this context, and in some ways it can be destructive, and for every great achievement there were drawbacks, negative consequences, and tradeoffs. We focus on the beautiful games of Fischer but that doesn't make other quite ugly aspects of his life any less real, and I don't think focusing on his beautiful games says otherwise. It's just that, if you want to learn from Fischer, you gain from looking at his games, rather than his personal life, so looking at his games is the logical choice there. The point is that it's not all rosy and that it's no secret being unfairly kept from anyone. If you tell women that you can be number one without making sacrifices and without being weird in some genuinely unattractive way, you are maybe not lying, since it's not impossible (perhaps with Carlsen being a rare exception as a relatively (though far from entirely) normal guy who got there), but you are telling them something extremely implausible, because of the tradeoffs that come with this in general. It would be nearly lying to tell this to men as well. Men are maybe more likely to deal with the ugly (dark, even) aspects of becoming the best. It's not as if some purely rosy reality of being the best is being kept secret from women; it just factually isn't all rosy. Far from it. There are some really cool things about being the best, but the process of getting there is rather ugly, full of sacrifices, and not guaranteed to be satisfying to the men or women that achieve it, and frankly is sometimes unsatisfying and harmful to people who have achieved it, all things considered. We gather benefits from great achievers not to deny their negative aspects, but in order to be constructive; we aren't thereby denying the existence of the ugly reality of it, or keeping it secret from men or women. We all generally want to be good at things but we must always recognize the tradeoffs and see what's best for us; we should not pretend that such tradeoffs don't exist and call such denial "encouragement."

Thank you. I'm a bit disapointed by the other comments. I'm really interested by the question but people seems to be satisfied with stereotypical answers, like it's just another example of the biological differences between men and women when in fact, sociological factors might be far more influencial regarding it. For instance, the video mentions women players being victims to stereotypical threats. Stereotypical threat is a very well documented phenomenon in which stereotypes function as self-fulfilling prophecies. The most well known example is math tests: men generally are better at those (that's the stereotype ; whether it's true or not, everyone "knows" it's true already). But when the examiner even barely reactivate the stereotype (like the person taking the test simply having to put his or her gender on the test), the difference between men and women results increases. Also, the more obvious the stereotypical threat (like "Boys, do the best you can and Girls, do your best but don't be too hard on yourself if you fail, boys are generally better at this"), the bigger the difference.

thought experiments aren't wisdom 🤣

@@dagbaramore3640 well, idk, seems like a lot of scientists, philosophers, and theorists endeavor in what is called hypothesis. And it seems like a person capable of arriving at the same conclusion internally, that instruments verify externally, possesses wisdom. that's more or less what new discoveries are, or where they came from. just some thoughts, monsieur amore, thanks for the discourse.

Good point but it's not an easy topic and most chess players literally don't care

@@Alessia_Santeramo *This massive discrepancy exists even though there is no gender bias in the law favouring females.* Whether you like it or not, the welfare system forces you as a man to pay for single women, many of whom, as you know, are degenerates. Without welfare and all kinds of affirmative action promoting women in the workplace, women can't support themselves. The feminist welfare state just distributes the burden of taking care of women to all working men. So you, as a man, have the burden of financially supporting these women without any benefit in return, women who will berate you and call you an incel if you disagree with how stunning and brave they are. Western liberalism forces you as a man to fund the lifestyle of women drinking, sleeping around with a new man every night, popping anti-depressants like candy, and going to the women's march on weekends to whine about how oppressed they are. You're subsidizing all that. Women being free is not free. Someone has to foot the bill. / *Islam says, no. No one gets a free ride. If you want to be taken care of, you have to be in a marriage as an obedient wife. And if you don't want to be an obedient wife, go be a burden on your father, who didn't raise you right. And if you don't want to live under your father's roof, go live in the wilderness or beg on the streets. See how long you last there.* .

Wait, are you saying Alessia isn't super popular?

Yeah chess is only about mental physich how about MMA the highest weight women vs the highest weight men

Chess is not even dependent on physical strength still women doesn't do well here, sed

No, she and her two sisters were trained from toddlers by their father Laszlo Polgar in an attempt to prove that prodigies are the result of intense training from an early age. Fischer for instance had, and admitted to, a terrible memory.

It's really highlighted for Magnus, but in reality most Super GMs remember most of the classical games they have played. It's not really something specific to Magnus.

@@lastsonofkrypton3918 Not only judit polgar was trained by Bobby fisher himself

@@viharikrishnan5588 Yes, but much later in her teen years. She was already a Grandmaster by then at age 15. In fact, she beat Bobby's own record for the youngest to obtain that title up until that time by a few months.

@@lastsonofkrypton3918 I don't think you missed main thing if magnus carlson and judit polgar is 5 years old both of them is trained by Bobby fisher who is going to be better when they turned 30 and breaking his record doesn't mean anything if they compete against each other out of hundred who is going to win majority

How much does IQ correlate to chess ability? I recall Hikaru only has 102, which is dead-on average.

@@beri4138 I don't think that's true... I find that really hard to believe... 102 IQ is not enough to get to that level... I could be wrong, but yeah i think that is very unlikely the case...

@@beri4138 he might be an anomaly or i dont think that's true data on hikaru IQ .

@@beri4138 thats just a stupid IQ test he took online

@@beri4138 I don't believe that lmao

Ciao Federico, grazie mille per il feedback e mi dispiace per la risposta tardiva. Potresti mandarmi l'articolo a twitch.alessia@gmail.com?

Personality types is huge man I’m glad you mentioned it .. women that play chess are Also mostly INTJ,sand INTP . I’m an INtJ and I approve this message . There is a very small portion of this type for both men and women but women are also rarer .. you are 100% spot on .. people think that MBtI is crap science and I try to explain how accurate it is how Carl Jung was a genius discovering cognitive functions..I love the fact that you mentioned it ..

@@queensgambit4982 ... and ENTJ/ENTP. If I have to guess from what I am seeing, I'd say Alessia is ENTP. But I'll never know until she tells us. As someone said: "The problem aren't the types, the problem is the test". The cognitive functions and with them the types exist, but many people cannot see their real self and don't give the right answers. The acceptance for MBTI is also very different depending on the type, all the INxx do like it because it explains why they are so different from all the other people.

@@stephanbrunker correct .. I didn’t want to say anything at first , but I have studied the functions in depth and it is real .. at the university of California they hooked up computers to the human brain to track the activity of the different types to study wave brain ls and the validity of Carl Jung’s findings , and it turned out to be accurate .. in types like intjs infj intps and the like , that they were using the entire regions of the brain to solve problems , as a result allowed them to see deeper patterns . For intjs they dubbed it blue zen state , the brain accessed all of its regions to connect different patterns to figure out a problem .. many scholars don’t want it to be true Ana even Jordan Peterson a top clinical psychologists was asked not to ever talk about Carl Jung and his work… and to your point taking the test yield 75 accuracy because people don’t know how to take it because sometimes they want to be something else and don’t understand themselves as well , however you can tell what someone’s type is .. As you gain experience with how the functions work and their placement order of command you will be able to know what their type is without taking the test .. some of the stuff you mentioned that you were in doubt , you are are actually correct , and I also respected you because you didn’t memorize a fact you saw the patterns yourself and arrived at your own conclusions .. as a scientists myself scientific findings agree with you .. Carl Jung is a genius .I’m a complete intj because of him.. People can’t even tell that im introverted , they perceive me as an extrovert ..

@@queensgambit4982 It goes even further ... almost everything is connected to the personality types and their distribution in certain groups and the general population. It explains why there are so few women in chess and it goes as far as it explains politics and success, simply because ES... types make up such a great part of the population and they look after and get influenced from what a lot of people do. Just think of how a video goes viral ... as the number of views increases, the thought is: "i have to see that too, if so many people have seen it, it must be good/real ..." whatever. Since a few years, I am writing those observations in my blog www.intjblog.de . I just stopped translating all the articles some time ago because virtually noone is reading it, but it should work acceptable if you switch the language to "Deutsch" and let AI do the translation for you.

@@stephanbrunker man you are spot on .. I thought I was the only one seeing those connections man and patterns , I’m glad to see that someone out there really gets how deep this is .. the reason why they have nt been able to equalize stem fields is because most women are sensors … sensors learn by rote memory and instructions. They can apply and execute formulas established by others but are weak at creating formulas or new system ,most women struggle to create a system from scratch .. stem fields require creativity and coming up with things beyond known facts.. create something that does nt exist “ engineering .. the N types are the ones that have the ability to do so , that is also why most engineers are N types .. and most N types are men .. yet N types only represent 20-25 percent of the population .. Almost every person i know that plays chess well is An N type .. all the ones with N type reached 2100 plus ratings including myself 2207 peak rating .. yes ES types are the majority 75% .. I can’t believe someone out there saw the same patterns I did .. mBTI has allowed me to see and understand humans from a different lens.. i see and understand why people are diff why they act the way they act and i can predict their behavior based on their type .. Sometimes I shock them by explaining their bahvior or what type of problems they most likely have and I can also advise them on what to do .. MBtI tells you what makes you tick , what gives your energy and what drains you .. if people understood it they would be able to really help develop themselves and position themselves in successful endeavors that compliments their type temperament .. Fortune 500 comp use it , so as google , but they never talk about it and in psychology schools they dismiss it .. I think that they do this on purpose because educating people on it would ruin their social agenda … that is also why Jordan Peterson was told to never talk or credit Carl Jung’s teachings ..

Yes it's natural that every gender and every person choses what to do with his/her life... I don't get why we must ENCURAGE women to do (let's say chess or STEM) if they just don't want as much as men do... we should just strive to DON'T DISCURAGE, instead of "ENCURAGE" that I see as forcing. Otherwise why we don't talk about the fact that we must ENCURAGE boys and men to become elementary school theacher, given the fact that too few men are school teacher? Or why we don't talk about the fact that we must ENCURAGE girls to become construction workers given the fact that it is an industry dominated by male workers?

yes... but i think we just have that innate competitive spirit...we hate losing. it is how it is. we die in battles. for me chess is like a boxing. now im more into pro League of Legends games.

*Let's offer a course on Western/liberal marriage:* _*Lesson #1: Don't ever argue with your wife because that is emotional abuse, and she will call the police and accuse you of hurting her. Police don't need any evidence to arrest you, so enjoy your stay in prison. Lesson #2: Don't you ever dare to deny your wife having sex with others. You don't own her. If you're a real man, you'll help her find a boyfriend or two and let them use your bed while you sleep on the couch. Lesson #3: Be fair to each other, but remember, she can accuse you of abuse at any time and destroy your life. Lesson #4. Your wife is tilth for all men (and women). They will use her as they please. Enjoy your married celibacy. Lesson #5: If your spouse wants to change "their" gender, don't argue. Just be happy for "them," you transphobe. Lesson #6: Want a divorce? Don't want a divorce? Doesn't matter. She can leave you for any reason or no reason at all. She gets to take at least half your wealth and custody of your children, and you pay all her legal fees. She might even end up living with her boyfriends in the house you bought with your kids.*_

@@d.bcooper2271 i am married but life in central europe where people are not crazy, but thank you.

@@CaitSith87 Nice to hear that

@@CaitSith87 *This massive discrepancy exists even though there is no gender bias in the law favouring females.* Whether you like it or not, the welfare system forces you as a man to pay for single women, many of whom, as you know, are degenerates. Without welfare and all kinds of affirmative action promoting women in the workplace, women can't support themselves. The feminist welfare state just distributes the burden of taking care of women to all working men. So you, as a man, have the burden of financially supporting these women without any benefit in return, women who will berate you and call you an incel if you disagree with how stunning and brave they are. Western liberalism forces you as a man to fund the lifestyle of women drinking, sleeping around with a new man every night, popping anti-depressants like candy, and going to the women's march on weekends to whine about how oppressed they are. You're subsidizing all that. Women being free is not free. Someone has to foot the bill. / *Islam says, no. No one gets a free ride. If you want to be taken care of, you have to be in a marriage as an obedient wife. And if you don't want to be an obedient wife, go be a burden on your father, who didn't raise you right. And if you don't want to live under your father's roof, go live in the wilderness or beg on the streets. See how long you last there.* .

However, preferences and interests are learned behaviours, and strongly affected by wider social and familial expectations and pressures.

@@marthalea876 Not fully true. Having young children of each gender you can quickly see stereotypical preferences in toys. As an example we have both boys and girls toys and the kids at the baby and toddler stage still gravitated toward toys that are stereotypical for their gender.

If that is the case, what can be done about it? I've read about neuroplasticity where one can change their brain structure by practicing new habits. Isn't it possible that, in this case, women can train aspects of their brain to match that of men (maybe with spatial awareness training)? The same goes for men training to have the natural talents of women. To use an RPG analogy, wouldn't it be like men have a head start over women in one category but they share the same level cap of potential in said category?

@@cadethumann8605 no its not possible, u are talking about hundreds of thousands of years of evolution, and millions when u include our ancestors, women can't simply think themselves into a different brain 🤣🤣

right so ovbiously all the differences you see are all biological and society plays 0 role in anything. Sociology is for SJWS, men go smart woman go cook, arent yall bored of these anti-intellectual takes?

@@briansmusicchannel2998 do u know how misandry west education system discriminate against boys

@@briansmusicchannel2998 the difference in ability between the sexes are just general correlation trends. They are not at all causative. The biggest factor that you're missing here is that girls are far far less likely to participate in the sport for a variety of cultural reasons. Culture is ultimately the biggest factor -- it explains, for example, why India and Russia have the most grandmasters, because it is a strong part of the culture there. And discrimination also will be a factor -- listen to the stories of chess players like Anna Cramling, who was hit on by older men plenty of times even when she was a child

To make it shorter woman wants to be masculine by beating a man, while men wants to improve the game.

In a summery, Women are tends to act more immature and toxic

@@darksoul6482 what the hell 😂

The reason is male brain superiority 💪🏻

No, the reason is men developed strategically minded brains through evolution while women did not.

@@jackjurphy5020 it's both, yes men are naturally better at chess for evolutionary reasons but when u add the fact that women are not interested in anything like the numbers that men are u have the explanation as to why no women are in the top 100 players in the world

@@briansmusicchannel2998 they aren’t interested because they aren’t built for it just like I’m not interested in ballet. It’s a chicken/egg situation

@@jackjurphy5020 I know some men that love ballet and some women that love chess but I agree that men are naturally wired for chess in a way that women are not

There are lots of very high rated women on every chess site.

@@beri4138 not even close to top rated man

@@beri4138 average gm destroys top rated woman

@@masterblaster3653 okay.. So can u provide some data of matches where a average GM is destroying top rated women like Hou Yifan, , koneru humpy, judit polgar?

@@RahulSharma-oq2ut just go to their account and check their, there are so many 2600 GM's who would probably destroy these players online no doubt

*Let's offer a course on Western/liberal marriage:* _*Lesson #1: Don't ever argue with your wife because that is emotional abuse, and she will call the police and accuse you of hurting her. Police don't need any evidence to arrest you, so enjoy your stay in prison. Lesson #2: Don't you ever dare to deny your wife having sex with others. You don't own her. If you're a real man, you'll help her find a boyfriend or two and let them use your bed while you sleep on the couch. Lesson #3: Be fair to each other, but remember, she can accuse you of abuse at any time and destroy your life. Lesson #4. Your wife is tilth for all men (and women). They will use her as they please. Enjoy your married celibacy. Lesson #5: If your spouse wants to change "their" gender, don't argue. Just be happy for "them," you transphobe. Lesson #6: Want a divorce? Don't want a divorce? Doesn't matter. She can leave you for any reason or no reason at all. She gets to take at least half your wealth and custody of your children, and you pay all her legal fees. She might even end up living with her boyfriends in the house you bought with your kids.*_

you put misogyny in quotation marks. enough said.

Sono concorda… direi anche che avevo cominciato ad interessarmi agli scacchi quando avevo nuove anni- giocavo con la mia cugina Cameron e perdevo a ciascuna volta😂 (sapevo solo come se muovevano le diverse pezze ma non conoscevo qualsiasi tecnica di gioco), ma dopo, avevo smetto di giocare… è solamente da la seconda mezza di quest’anno (è un po’ di l’anno scorso)che mi sono ossessionato veramente con il gioco di scacchi. Aggiungerei anche che, addirittura se non vedi risultati subito quando sei imparando a migliorare la tua capacità di tattica e di strategia , gli benefici si faranno sentire non molto dopo- una riconoscenza di modelli accentuata, un spirito che sa quando deve sacrificare le truppe le più importante per forzare una sconfitta.. e tante di cose che facciano unicamente aumentare la nostra abilità ti analizzo, il processo di decisione giuste.. etc.

Just to be clean and clear, when I say women aren't built to compete with men I'm not saying that men are better, I'm just saying that we are built for different things and men are hugely more competitive than women on average, so women generally would enjoy more non-competitive things were their emotional and creative nature can bless the world better.

Ya men and women are awesome in our own way

Why though?

@@LolLol-ow5tp simple. en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Testosterone

@@LolLol-ow5tp differences in male vs female brains. males are deductive problem solvers by nature, women are not. males are much more logical thinkers, women are more emotional. women don't have the innate drive to become, conquer or achieve because they are born with their value, men must create their value. while women can become very good, they cannot become world champion in any competitive field with male competition because of biological differences.

@@LolLol-ow5tp because men and women are different

@@viharikrishnan5588 i get it physically but mentally also?

Just play a tournament, i bet you will change your mind

Emotionally intelligent feminist use that that's not true just because women cry that's literally the opposite of emotional intelligents

I agree and merely add that testosterone makes males more competitive.

*Let's offer a course on Western/liberal marriage:* _*Lesson #1: Don't ever argue with your wife because that is emotional abuse, and she will call the police and accuse you of hurting her. Police don't need any evidence to arrest you, so enjoy your stay in prison. Lesson #2: Don't you ever dare to deny your wife having sex with others. You don't own her. If you're a real man, you'll help her find a boyfriend or two and let them use your bed while you sleep on the couch. Lesson #3: Be fair to each other, but remember, she can accuse you of abuse at any time and destroy your life. Lesson #4. Your wife is tilth for all men (and women). They will use her as they please. Enjoy your married celibacy. Lesson #5: If your spouse wants to change "their" gender, don't argue. Just be happy for "them," you transphobe. Lesson #6: Want a divorce? Don't want a divorce? Doesn't matter. She can leave you for any reason or no reason at all. She gets to take at least half your wealth and custody of your children, and you pay all her legal fees. She might even end up living with her boyfriends in the house you bought with your kids.*_

@@d.bcooper2271 What does that have to do with anything? We all read those incel rants before.

@@ruffianeo3418 *This massive discrepancy exists even though there is no gender bias in the law favouring females.* Whether you like it or not, the welfare system forces you as a man to pay for single women, many of whom, as you know, are degenerates. Without welfare and all kinds of affirmative action promoting women in the workplace, women can't support themselves. The feminist welfare state just distributes the burden of taking care of women to all working men. So you, as a man, have the burden of financially supporting these women without any benefit in return, women who will berate you and call you an incel if you disagree with how stunning and brave they are. Western liberalism forces you as a man to fund the lifestyle of women drinking, sleeping around with a new man every night, popping anti-depressants like candy, and going to the women's march on weekends to whine about how oppressed they are. You're subsidizing all that. Women being free is not free. Someone has to foot the bill. / *Islam says, no. No one gets a free ride. If you want to be taken care of, you have to be in a marriage as an obedient wife. And if you don't want to be an obedient wife, go be a burden on your father, who didn't raise you right. And if you don't want to live under your father's roof, go live in the wilderness or beg on the streets. See how long you last there.* .

Just filled with excuses

No problem but some feminist say the we are equal and stuff and that's not true

Madame Curie exists

​@@masterblaster3653another 100000 and more male scientists exist

Why is always the reason men like to use for everything? Most disavantages women face are not due to their biology, but because of centuries of patriarcal cultures.

You did research and developed a personal opinion instead of a factual one? Don't think u can call that resea3

In content creators are Men too

Because chess is not played a lot in East Asia. They play Go and Shogi in Japan.

@@Thebuzzof yep. also, chess is not played a lot by women.

And in other words man was made in the image of God and women was made in the image of man.

@davew4303 Read my reply on your misogynistic comment.

I Just want to mention that I have no problem with people that are creationists (even though evolution has been proven time and time again). I am just sick and tired of people that are justifying outdated and sexist views against women because of their religion. Men are NOT superior to women, women are NOT second-class citizens and women SHOULD be respected and equally valued in our society. Men are NOT the standard and women are NOT men’s helpers/maids. Women are their own individual beings with their own goals and ambitions and to simply say that women were made to serve men is APPALLING.

@@sonjagrobler827 that would be a possibility had u left a reply other that “read my reply” I don’t see the need to communicate any further

@davew4304 Are you not able to see the replies that I made on your misogynistic standpoint? “I don’t see the need to communicate any further”. That is because you don’t have anything to say/type. Just accept it that you CANNOT control or have authority over a woman simply because you were born with XY chromosomes. Women are grown adults that are their own individuals, with their own responsibilities, goals, ambitions and opinions. We are not second. Throw that whole “superiority”complex, that you so strongly believe in when it comes to women, out the window and you’ll see that your life will change drastically for the better once you accept the fact that women have equal grounds/value. Stop blaming your mediocrity on women and simply start bettering yourself as a human being.

she is a chess experiment

@@mahatmagandhi2434 she was born with higher IQ. So it has nothing to do with experiment.

@@Egg-wt1pk chess has literally nothing to do with IQ

@@kartikeyatiwari2502 It does. Chess is highly corelated with IQ.

@@Egg-wt1pk not at all lol. Chess has zero link with IQ