I just found the article today. Read it first and read my comments on the bottom of this page.
Chess is Unfair to Women
By Bruce Walker on Jul 06, 07
Chess is unfair to women. That, at least, is the only conclusion anyone can reach after perusing the latest rankings of the top one hundred chess players in the world. This is my fourth article on the topic that I typically call “Womenism and Chess Fairness.” Back in January 2003, it appeared I noted that there was only one woman in the top one hundred chess players in the world, Judith Polgar.
It is absolutely undeniable that Judith is a fantastic chess player and she has admirably declined to play in the “women’s only” section of the international chess world. At one time, Polgar was among the top ten chess players in the world, much higher than any woman has ever reached in chess rankings.
But as I noted in my last three articles, Judith has either stayed at the same level or dropped (which does not necessarily mean that she has lost games, but rather than other more active players have won games which moved them ahead of her.) The July 2007 chess rankings show that Judith, who had been the 13th ranked player in the world in April, had dropped to the 19th best player in the world.
Why has this happened? Men and women are different types of creatures. Womenists – those who pretend to carry the banner of equality of the sexes, but who actually are nothing more than a sordid special interest group that always advocates the case of women over men – have demanded, as a political matter, that men and women are equal in every way (except in those ways in which women are better than men.)
The very best woman chess player in the world is not competing against men who have had more advantages than her: quite the opposite. Judith’s parents are both outstanding chess players (1), her sister is an outstanding chess player (2), her father quit his job and pulled Judith out of school so that she could study chess fulltime (3). Judith Polgar had more advantages, more special help, better environmental conditions to be a great chess player than any of the ninety-nine men she competes against (4). Moreover, Judith has grown up in a generation that insists at every level of society that men are not better than women in any area of intellectual achievement.
Reality is very different. On average, men score higher on intelligence tests than women. This applies not only to mathematical and spatial reasoning, but also to language skills. The most gifted humans in history have almost always been men, even when they were men who rose from the most desperate conditions. Women, even when they grew up in privileged conditions (like Polgar) have almost never risen to the top in most intellectual fields (5).
The rest can be read here.
Facts:
1. My mother did not know how to play chess at all. My father was at best a hobby player at 1000-1300 when he taught me chess.
2. She has 2 outstanding chess playing sisters, not one. Let’s not forget that even when Sofia did not take chess as serious as Judit, she is still a multiple time Olympic Champion, has the best open tournament performance in history in Rome, and she was ranked as the #6 woman player in the world.
3. Judit was never pulled out of school. She was homeschooled all along.
4. ???
5. I am sure the people who attended the Polgar Chess, Education and Cultural Tour a few weeks ago will disagree. They saw the house we grew up in. We may have been middle class / a tad below in Hungarian standard. However, if you compare that to America, it would be considered poverty.
The article is actually interesting for discussion. However, there are a number of factual problems. This is a standard problem in chess. Many people come to conclusions without knowing the true facts. It is like thinking about your own moves without looking at what the opponents are doing.
This is similar to what I read all the time at various newsgroup and even in the USCF forums. Why not bother finding out the facts? Why not ask? People like to boast “Susan said this, Susan said that” when I said nothing and most of the things discussed have no basis.
Unfortunately, too many people like to make assumptions based on non-factual information and this is one of the reasons why animosity, hatred and political wars exist in chess among many chess leaders.
Leaving the factual information aside, what is your take on the article?
I disagree with the author. Women just do not care for chess as much. Men are more competitive.
Women find chess boring because of sexists and chauvenists. There’re too many obnoxious male players like Lafferty, Payne, Brenan, Sloan, etc. That’s why women stay away from chess. I wonder if these men abuse, insult and behave the same way toward their wives and daughters?
Women just don’t belong in chess or in chess leadership positions. Susan should go back to where she came from. I fully support Goichberg’s slate of Berry, Schultz, Lux and Jones. These are wise men who will do an excellent job running the USCF.
Who cares if the author didn’t get the facts right? Why do you insist that everything has to be factual?
Women are not good enough. They’re not smart enough. They should stay home to take care of their children and serve their husbands.
I find many of the comments tasteless.
If we give Susan 10 years to work with the next generation of young girls like Xie Jun did in China, I think the future of women’s chess in America will drastically change.
Sorry but due to some of the comments above (I just deleted some nastier comments), I have to put the moderation feature back on.
Thanks for your understanding.
Best wishes,
Susan Polgar
Good! I don’t think you should allow comments like these.
hahahahah..
just let me guess: is the author american?
hahahahah
you american people are so funny… guess what? i would like to know how many people in your country read and believe these things.
You guys should take a lesson or two from europe.
The article, which is factually incorrect and displays a level of reasoning we might expect from a a 13-year old, does in fact contain the seeds of an interesting topic for discussion. Let’s assume that the time and effort devoted by Judit Polgar is essentially similar (though not identical) to that of the other top 25 players in the world (is this a fair assumption?). What distinguishes the no. 3 ranked player from the no. 19? Is it genetic aptitude, better transing methods, or that the higher ranked person has in fact given a little more effort & time? What can Judit do to take the extra 1/2 step to get her into top 5 in the world and into serious contention for world chamption? I’d love to hear Susan’s input on this.
What I want to know is whether the anonymous troll who posts “I like Goichberg and hate women” in every thread is trying to make Goichberg look bad (because he’s so foolish he thinks people will believe the posts are genuine) or if he’s trying to make Susan look bad (since the posts are so obviously fake and he thinks people will blame her for them).
Either way, I don’t quite get why these escaped the Delete button when others didn’t. Surely, genuine or not, it isn’t acceptable discourse.
If anything woman have more stamina than men. This would be an advantage in chess.
But overall in society men are the leaders. They are physically stronger. It’s the history of humans.
They take time out of their lives to have babies. This is why there pay is less. Lost time on the job.
I have no doubt that if Judith or any young girl coming up could dedicate as much time as the men that they would have similar results.
I love what Susan brings to chess and wish her well in her efforts.
Don’t worry about these types of articles. In this age, we should accept the notion that many types of lives are possible for people. There are women plumbers and mechanics and male nurses and secretaries.
I cannot begin to understand the prejudices of some people.
1.”Who cares if the author didn’t get the facts right? Why do you insist that everything has to be factual?”
A – How can you say who cares? Would you care if the newspapers you read simply lied about the stories they promote? If the facts are not right then how can such an article ever be taken seriously?
2. “Women are not good enough. They’re not smart enough. They should stay home to take care of their children and serve their husbands. “
A – This is just completely sexist. You are obviously living with the mentality of someone living in the middle ages. There are a great many successful, highly intelligent women all over the globe. Your life is poorer for not recognising this.
Susan I am truely exasperated that you have to put up with such vile, misogynist attacks upon your person (and sisters). Is it any wonder that women do not succeed as much as men in the chess world when we have such bigots who seem to actively campaign against women in chess.
Best wishes to you.
Niall
This article is rubbish. The author clearly has no idea what he’s talking about. I found Susan’s comments quite refreshing and sensible.
Also, What on Earth is with the term womenism? As far as academia goes (I was a student of Management and Gender), this term simply does not exist.
I read this article in trying to find an answer:
http://www.conservativetruth.org/archives/brucewalker/07-14-02.shtml
It is disguting that this sort of vile rubbish (it is nothing more and deserves no merit) should ever be taken seriously by anyone.
It is quite evident to me that this person does not have a clue what feminism is.
Susan, you must continue to be strong in face of this bigotry.
Regards,
Niall
OOOPS – what a foolish article … the wanna be journalist “forgot” to mention the main reason GM Judit Polgar “lost” some rating points compared to her “male” competitors:
She gave birth to two lovely children (as her sisters did, didn’t they?)- and the ability to give birth to children is – in my opinion – the main – not only – but most striking difference between Adam and Eve …
what a nonsense story!
to me (who has lost tons of games against female players…) the most convincing argument, why women are less represented in “chess rating top lists” is simple:
girls hit puberty some years earlier than boys – that’s why they are tempted (forced by biology?) to stop working hard on their chess a few years earlier than comparable male competitors… (which are tempted to stop working hard in an age of 14 – 16, not in an age of 12 – 14). Every year counts – in my opinion…
adolescence (with it’s significant change not only in hormone levels, but also in interests!) is one of the main reason, promising chess talents (all the same male or female!) do not reach grandmaster or WCCh level – IMHO
just my two pence!
greetings
Look, the guy probably writes articles for a living, and will not budge unless it is done in a suitable manner. There are some things of value interspersed in this article.
However, the article is decidedly superficial; so much so, that it caused Mrs. Truong to step forward here.
Maybe it is even provocative by design.
A petition to the author for the purposes of a “part 2” on the same subject would be a compliment to him, and appropriate; one that included input from Mrs. Truong as an eyewitness accounting to the history angle.
From most academic perspectives, writing is considered successful when it captures the imagination of the audience on a subject.
However, some features about developing a subject seem to be in order after reading this (and the stated facts in Mrs. Truong’s response).
Can it be done in a positive manner?
Here are some initial thoughts:
– Men and women as complementary genders, the strengths and weaknesses of each studied and highlighted, and how they might shape and impact future chess improvement initiatives
– How meeting the needs of children through the building of a strong family is a prime ingredient in any noble endeavor in life
– How men and women have both subverted chess in the past for an agenda, and how these kinds of problems can be preventatively mitigated
– Gender integration in professional chess without destroying competition or offending those with whom we might differ
– How men and women *together* are the only hope against the corrosive effect of a reductionistic computerization in chess
the one who sad women dont blong in chess n she should go back to where she came frm who r u god wht matter afraid u mite get beat by a woman shame on u hipicrit gro up face reality n remember never ever under estimate power polgar women just like hillary will b 1st woman president
I note that SP is happy to leave patently absurd criticisms of her candidature in these comments, when more reasoned and reasonable criticisms of her approach to the USCF are censored out.
The author seems very mixed up, and not getting one’s facts right rather undermines whatever is built on them.
In previous times, I suspect female chessplayers were not given the competitive opportunities that they deserved. FIDE repaired this in part by recognising that some players were ‘GM standard’ even if their ELO ratings did not say so: they were satisfied that those players had more than earned their recognition as GMs.
Today, to argue that the ELO rating system does not reflect competence, one has to show that e.g. JP’s rating should be higher.
I don’t know what SP’s ELO rating is now, and whether it should be higher or not.
It is this kind of cave man attitude that most women don’t want to deal with – and why should they when there are so many other wonderful and interesting things they can do with their time than deal with neanderthals (although that’s giving neanderthals a bad name, poor fellows). If the “man” who wrote that piece of drivel can read, I suggest he take a look at today’s Wall Street Journal, not exactly a bastion of liberalism, and check out the article in Section B “Study of Kids’ Brains Hopes to Answer: Waht Is Normal” – and pay particular attention to the last four paragraphs. The study included boys and girls from 12-18 years of age:
–gender differences and income disparities matter less than previously believed and health mattes more, project researchers reported recently in the Journal of the International Neuropsychological Society
–Healthy girls and boys do equally well on most cognitive tasks. Boys perform better at analyzing and manipulating shapes and patterns, while girls perform better on processing speed and motor dexterity. No differences were measured in calculation ability, suggesting boys and girls have an equal aptitude for math
It seems likely that the “man” who wrote that drivel blog article masquerading as “news” has not read the Chabris and Glickman study either, or any of the study’s many abstracts available online (or if he did, he did not understand it).
It’s an unfortunate fact of life that ignorant, prejudiced people such as the author of that piece of dreck will always be with us, but these days we won’t sit silently by and let them spew their poison unchallenged.
Janet Newton
Susan,
I find the author’s comments to be horrifing. I don’t think in a sport such as chess there is any real difference between men and women. Yes it is true that men and women’s brains are “wired” differently, but based upon my wide range of experience from serving with women in the military, to become someone who studies human behavior and development for a living this difference does not make one sex better at anything than another! Men and women always get to the same point even if they take different roads to get there! This is the kind of foolish thinking that brings down people and makes the world a worst place to live. I think in chess it is more a matter of breaking traditions which has only recently began. I mean when I think about it you and your sisters are on the vangard of breaking the male dominated tradition in chess and you are younger than I am and I am not that old. I think it is just a matter of training ones mind to do what you wish to accomplish, not what sex you are. Heck, even I could be a chess master if I applied myself more and I am the worst chess player in the world:)
Good topic today! Keep up the good work for I always enjoys your blog even if I don’t say much:)
Enjoy,
The Worst Chess Player in the World!
It’s pure baloney. It reads as utterly antedeluvian, the part after your notes. Countless women have risen to the top of their fields, and science has shown, as everyone knows, that men are not more intelligent than women, or vice versa. Maybe you could find slight differences overall in specialised aspects of intellligence.
I care that the author didn’t get the facts right, because a false statement can’t support a thesis, but I don’t believe anyone had insisted that everything has to be factual. The person who wrote the comment I’m talking about might have been joking I guess, but it’s kind of fun to try and pick it apart.
Dan Hore
Hi
Why women don’t appear in the top guns is a genuine question – since there’s no physical reason – like with golf, tennis etc.
I wrote an article about this many years ago in the Glasgow Herald. At that time, Kasparov was taking on Karpov (I think), and at that time there was only one woman in the country rated above me – which I used as the premise, ‘cos I’m not very good.
Those were the facts – but I hope the article was much more pleasant than this one (or some of the comments – but are they so bad that they’re kid-on?). After some playful beating around the bush I decided that a)men are more likely to take more seriously a “trivial” thing such as chess than is a woman who b)is usually more concerned with more important/necessary day-to-day things and c) is more likely to lack the nasty killer-instinct that you probably need to succeed at chess.
I still got in trouble.
I still think it might be right.
Banjanx
The person who wrote this article clearly is a complete d**bass!
I bet his wife/gf is not a very happy woman (assuming he did manage to fool someone into marrying or dating him!)
wow, what some people write on here is mind boggling…either they are below the age of 15, drunk, mentally unstable, or just complete idiots (or any combination of the above)…maybe you should be blocking their comments…then again, they sound stupid enough so they may just sink the candidate they say they support
as for the article, it’s pretty stupid…men and women are different, our brains are different, and that’s ok…trying to generalize the relative intelligence between the sexes is pointless, it really depends on the persons.
Susan, there are always exceptions to the authors views.
I don’t like the moderation feature…. I’m always polite btw 🙁
Anyways: Judit is an exception! She is a SUPER woman chessplayer! She is like Kasparov being 2850 while the rest was only 2770. She is 2700 while all the other women are only 2500….
It is weird but there still IS a difference… What exactly is it? Maybe as some mentioned: men are more competitive?! I dunno…
I guess women are not (naturally, most of them) war-driven you know….
I think this is part of evolution. It was always: men go hunting for food, while women do housework, feed children, make food, organise things,….
u know…
Judit is a great player and for sure an exception among women players. She is the best ever woman player!!!!!
So yes, there is still a difference….
BUT: we also have to take into account the factor that women players (adults) are still only a few % of all players, u know./…. There’s not many of them….. So statistics are a little bit flawed that way…. also as a young woman, being the only female player in a complete tourney…well…. is not that attractive to female players… The social part, u know….
There are a lot of girls (very young devisions) playing chess, but when they are late teens, most female players quit the game….
now WHY is THAT!?!?!
ps: moderation is NOT COOL!
OK, so i post something, …wait….. refresh the page…. wait some more….. nothing….
OK, so i leave the page…..
Moderation kills the coolness of blogging! Why not just moderate like this: just delete the rude ones? instead of screening everything, which is way too slow!
I totally agree with ‘chess freak’ !!! It’s all about the work with juniors/girls!
It’s all about education. Susan is doing a splendid job there! She will make a good new generation of young players in the US! Let’s hope other parts of the world will follow that example!
Good job, Susan!! Nevermind the bad posts sometimes! People are just jealous cause you’re succesful!
🙂
And my regards to Szofi. I wish we could see more pictures of her and also of her paintings! :))
cheers!
Isn’t it interesting how many of the bigoted chauvinists who post these deprecating remarks about women and chess, have no stomach for telling the world their true names–BUT they have no qualms in expressing their opinions.
Of course the answer to meaningful equality is to make no distinction between the sexes (genders)–though the selection of girls/women as a “target” for retainment and encouragement to partake in chess is endorsed(by suan and others)and is worthy of support.Ultimately the world championship should have no bearing on one’s gender.This is I submit because in chess unlike tennis the two genders given equal opportunity are excatly well matched.
“Who cares if the author didn’t get the facts right? Why do you insist that everything has to be factual?”
They say there are no dumb questions. I always thought that was true till I read this one.
My take on that article is, that it can safely be ignored. 🙂
Currently, our national master is a woman, IM Eva Moser. She has won Austria’s chess championship of 2006, ahead of nine men. Although, I shouldn’t omit that most opponents were in the 2350…2500 range. But she is in the FIDE Top-100 woman now.
I think that basically (and in average) the sexes’ potential for chess is equal. It has to have social or traditional reasons why fewer woman play chess – which is the only, or main reason why fewer rise to the top ranks, than men.
The censoring of feedback on this blog is clearly taking out the ‘middle ground’ of constructive criticism, leaving only the clearly pro-SP and the clearly-lunatic.
Well one has to read the entire article by this man.
It reminds me of shock radio and shock journalism. The author says the most outrageous things.
Russ Limbaugh, Howard Stern then divide people they do not bring them together into unity. They polarize which brings about wars.
I ignore such peope with their pseudo intellectualism. They get attention like all trolls with outrageous statements.
The only way to handle Trolls is to ignore them.
the 2nd post at the top here the person
I wonder if these men abuse insult and behave the same way toward their wives and daughters?
I can answer that. Yes of course and also to their secretary and a waitress and all women they come in contact with. To hide their true nature many will show up the first time with flowers and candy. They will overflow with seeming kindness which is all a baited trap.
I believe most of the obnoxious postings here are the same people who oppose susan on the uscf forums. they will stop at nothing to attack susan.
Imagine how poorly they must treat those they are close to. Abusers always justify their actions as the fault of the one they abuse. “She deserved what I did to her.” is the famous battle cry of the abuser.
In reply to “Who cares if the author didn’t get the facts right? Why do you insist that everything has to be factual?”
If you prefer to read articles which aren’t ‘factual’ and in cases down right lies then ok -but most people like to read the truth of the matter.
As one who attended the Polgar Chess, Education and Cultural Tour last week I stood outside the house where the three Polgar sisters grew up.
I doubt if few of Judith’s men opponents were brought up in a small house which had so few rooms and a a factory wall a few yards opposite.
The ‘better environment conditions’ and ‘privileged conditions’ in which Judith is stated to have grown up is in fact nonsense – and the exact opposite.
She could have hardly have had much worse ‘environment conditions’ to learn chess.
In your statement you said “why not bother finding out the facts? Why not ask”? Whenever I ask you a question you ignore me. I was one of your biggest supporters!?
You said that compared to America you grew up in poverty. Why compare your situation to America? America has 0 great players that were actually born there. Also the author said most of the top playing men chess players were born in very poor countries.
It is not important if male or female or black or white is better.
Chess is fun and if someone is better he still needs to respect the loser, because without the losers there are no winners.
Fabio
From some of these comments, it’s hard to believe the year is 2007 and not 1807, etc. I apologize on the behalf of stupid men everywhere, since they’ll never do that themselves.
I clicked on the link to the whole article and found that that website seems to emanate from Idaho, a bastion of backward reactionism, home of many neo-nazi and white supremacist groups (with apologies to all of the truly decent people in that state).
The author is clearly a misogynist who doesn’t care if he gets his facts straight. He doesn’t even know English very well, e.g. “womanist” and “hardily” (instead of heartily).
Too bad that there may be many others who think like him and agree with his nonsense.
Regards,
Eri
I clicked on the link to the whole article and found that that website seems to emanate from Idaho, a bastion of backward reactionism, home of many neo-nazi and white supremacist groups (with apologies to all of the truly decent people in that state).
The author is clearly a misogynist who doesn’t care if he gets his facts straight. He doesn’t even know English very well, e.g. “womanist” and “hardily” (instead of heartily).
It’s too bad that there may be many people who agree with his nonsense.
Regards,
Eric
Why need to be ‘the best’ !?!?!
Nr.19 in the whole world is for me an equally big achievement than being nr3 !!!!! Especially if you are a woman among men!!!
2 thumbs up for Jutka! 2 thumbs down for the writer of that article!
I’ve always thought there are more Geniuses and Idiots among men than women. In the US boys tend to do better on the Math SAT and girls do better on the verbal. Are boys inherently better at math and science, or do they just like it more? He has something of a point when he says the greatest achievers in various fields are nearly universally men. But it’s hard to draw any conclusion when so few women have gone into fields like math, physics, chemistry, etc.
In any case as far as chess goes, intellect isn’t anywhere near as important as memorization, spatial recognition, and hard work. And there’s no reason to think girls are any worse than this than boys. He also shows virtually no knowledge of Judit or what chess ratings mean. Judit’s rating has stayed more or less the same, but inactivity and an influx of new people have pushed her down the list a bit. Big deal.
I’d say the main reason girls don;t do as well as boys in chess is the lack of interest, and girls getting into it, for whatever reason. Boys are just more likely to take it seriously.
Which might be related to the only advantage(disadvantage?) boys may have over girls in chess and other fields… they tend to have single-minded obsessions when it comes to activities like chess. It’s ALL they think about. Every chess burnout I’ve ever known was male.
This article is pointless and serves no purpose.
Women should be playing chess for the same reason as men play chess, and for the same reason as the game exists: to have fun and derive enjoyment from it.
Who cares if they are in the top 10, 100, or 1000 in the world.
At scholastic tournaments when I watch young girls who have won their games and have received a trophy return to their seats, the smile on their face and the sparkle in their eye tell you why they play chess, regardless of where they rank in the world or relative to the boys.
I support Sam Sloan, Joe Lux, Don Schultz and Stephen Jones. I think we need these men to run the USCF. This is the United States Chess Federation. It’s not the Hungarian, Vietnamese or Russian Chess Federation. Polgar, Korenman and Truong don’t belong on this board.
The author is right on. Women can’t play chess. That’s a fact.
I congratulate the author and Susan for bring up the hot topic whether it is true or not. It hits 50 comments or more in Susan’s Blog!
Susan, what is your record of comments in one posting?
hIn a rational and peaceful world, I think every individual would have the undisputed right to develop their talents to their fullest.
While I believe that women are as potentially capable as men to excel in chess, it shouldn’t be necessary for fair-minded people to agree if they would at least stand for giving everyone a fair chance.
I believe that it is good for the individual as well as society as a whole if all people have the chance to develop to their fullest potential.
Susan, You are an awesome person :).
Its unfair to base an arguement on one person alone. Its easy to target Judit because shes the most successful, but you really have to take a step back and look at the numbers. There are so many more men in top competitive chess that it stacks the odds highly in their favor of having the top rank. I’d say she’s risen to the top by just being in the top 10. 😛
This just simple and plain rubbish as Susan has plainly shown. Women have always stood equal to men in intellect. There are simply more men playing chess than women at the moment.
Someone suggested why worry about facts? Then why write the story? So it is fine to base your whole essay on a false premise? Without facts the story as no basis and only serves to bash women.
Men (and I am one) think about who bore you, who fed you and who comforted you. Think about your own mother before you write rubbish like this.
P. S. A few little Facts.
1) There are now more women in college than men.
2) Girls in general do better in school than boys. Simply look over your local newspaper listing valedictorians and saletorians from high school. Dominated by boys? No more likely women.
3) The strongest piece on the chess board is the queen. That tradition has origin in the rise of women monarchs in mideveal Europe.
A friend of mine told me that GM Donner asserted that women would never be able to play chess as well as men. Obviously, Donner had never heard of the Polgar sisters. He also apparently made similarily dumb remarks about blacks.
Some of the remarks remind me of the archane views about the role of women in the professional world in general, in politics, and in the sciences.
It time for men to get over these prejudices and welcome women to the chess board.
Sincerely,
Dr. Karlsson
P. S. I am looking forward to seeing the new SPICE girls prove that they can play chess on par with men.
This discussion gave me an idea.
Do you want to see women on par with or regularly beating boys and men at the chess board?
If so throw your support behind Susan and SPICE.
Let Tech officials know that you support their efforts in promoting women’s chess.
Sleepless in Lubbock,
Dr. Karlsson
About the idea the last poster had:
Why not something like this:
organise a tournament type (kids chess) like this:
GIRLS – BOYS
LOL
let’s see who’s the best!?!?! Girls will be motivated and try hard to prove they are not less good! And at that level there might be not a difference yet!!! Many girls will even be better than the boys!!! :))))
Now that would be fun and also motivation for the girls to prove themselves and be motivated!! :)))
?!
The best proof that women are more inteligent than men, is that they stay away from chess…..
Dear Polgar sisters,
You are great and extraordinary persons for the chess future and history. There is no doubt about that. I believe one day your achievements will put an end of all speculations on this topic.
Best regards,
Nikola
as a man i can state that women are definitely better than men concerning humanity and rescueing our planet. history shows that almost all evils came from men.
the iq tests cant be an adequate measure for human beings, we are too complex. these tests only cover a limited side of our capabilities. we have so much capabilities that cant be measured, take all the different kinds of social talents.
as someone addicted to beautiful arts i can say that judiths creations of art are one of the most beautiful in all chess history. kramnik stated once: “analyzing tal’s games is tantamount to discussing what God looks like” that also pretty good describes judiths achievements. i love her
Comment to some comments:
Of course i am not in agree with the author of this Article.I See that many are offensive to Susan,and her Sisters.
I Didn’t read all the comments about this post but Susan has really a lot of patience.
How you have the rights to put expression as:”Susan should go back to where she came from?”,and whith presuntion:”This is not Hungarian,Vietnamise,Russian Federation??”….
I Hope that you’re Joking!,or simply provoking.
Excuse me a bit but…Where do you come from??
Witch are yours Horigin?
Is Not U.S.A the land of Freedom for all Peaple of the world?
A large part of U.S.A Citzens are of European Origin.
How you could pretend to tell to Susan:”You Should Return from where you come from????”
Excuse me:From where are your ancestor??
Your mentality is daughter of W.A.S.P,prejudices,and very restricted.
All the peaple here Must Thanks greatly Susan for what she has doing for YOUR COUNTRY.
Without Susan,NEVER UNITED STATES,would grow up in Chess.
Of course you could reply: But Fischer….
Fisher was born in America but her father and mother were both Europeans,but not W.A.S.P.
The peaple of America has no rights to insult peaple(man or women) that come here for work for benefit of Their nation!
If i were American,i would be grateful to Susan,because she decided to be U.S Citzen.And the same Paul Thuong.
I’m European and i belive that Susan and her sisters are one of the Symbols of ours area.Because of course Susan is American,but first of all she will be for ever European.
United States have only to tell Thanks to Europeans Asians,Latin American,Jewish,Arabs,Chinese Vietnamese ect.Because For is for them That they exist.
I Think that U.S.A must remember their history,and learn a lot from Europe.I don’t like the sence of superiority of some U.S Citzen towards Europe
If United States(that of course is Not all the America),will became racist or in flavour of sexual discrimination!! or have prejudicies regard something they will die.
Hate without reason,Jelousy,Racial sexual,ethnical,social and personal prejudicies are tragedies
P.S I Hope to see,more polite comments in future.
Proud to be European,and to be born in the “Sea of History”
Antonio.