| Tim Hanke 2005-01-18, 12:45 am |
| "Nick" <nickbourbaki3@yahoo.co.uk> wrote ...
quote:
>
> Thanks to Tim Hanke for the information about his chess club.
Nick,
You're welcome.
quote:
> "It is a cross-section of society", according to Tim Hanke, but would
> about half of the players in that 'cross-section of society' be female?
> If not, then would it not be more accurate to have described it as
> 'a cross-section of *male* society'?
>
> I am *not* saying that it's the fault of Tim Hanke (or of any other
> individual male chess-player) that there are not more women in his
> (or in most) chess club. But I think that it would be better for
> chess if we should recognise that there tends to be a significant
> subculture of sexism in many, if not most, chess clubs.
I hear this canard from time to time--that chess clubs, or chess as a
subculture, discriminates in some way against women. I don't believe it. In
every chess club where I have played, I believe there has been general
regret (if not always voiced) that so few women play chess. Whenever women
do show up at a chess club, they can be guaranteed of getting extra help and
extra attention, because everyone wants them to come back.
Whereas a male chessplayer must usually find his own way, and may well be
ignored unless he is a "good player."
At the highest level, look at Judit Polgar and her sisters: they have gotten
far more attention than most male chessplayers at similar levels. I don't
necessarily begrudge them the extra attention, but let's at least admit the
fact.
Personally, I try to give a little extra attention to any new player at my
club, to encourage them to return. Because I perceive the interest (and
self-confidence) of female chessplayers as especially fragile, I give them a
little extra dose of attention, over and above the usual.
Tim Hanke
|