What kind of smart am I if I’m not particularly good at academia, or math puzzles, but, like, I really wish I was smart while still holding the exact same beliefs.
Spatially smart
Aren’t you supposed to sort it to the middle tower?
Works hard kind of smart
vs
lazy, doesn’t try for more than 5 minutes, gets repeatedly told “you have so much potential if you would apply yourself” kind of smart
hardworking = easily exploitable
How is your life going for you so far?
Looks to me like it’s saying there two types of chess enthusiast and I’m not sure it’s saying one is better. If you’re trying to make the woman look dumb, would you include 110/100 grades…?
There are a few comments here that are sexist as shit, misandry and misogyny both. It boggles me that intelligent people who know that sweeping generalizations are bad when it comes to race and nation lose their fucking mind when it comes to biological sex.
Wait until you learn about “generations”.
Was on-meta in my high school to have >4.0 GPA. Assumed colleges wouldn’t take less. If you didn’t have at least one honors class the teachers kind of assumed you were never gonna drop out of Stanford.
‘Biological sex’ as opposed to the kind enabled by Hitachi?
Woman certainly have a different brain organization (emotionalº) due their biological rol, but this has nothing to do with the intellectual capabiliities. All the mentioned prejudices that are confirmed are caused by traditional education where girls are always put in their shema with toys that reinforce this expected role of them, the same with boys (dolls vs toy cars).
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0o7nJknQkOU
º “Women which gain weight live healthier than the man who mencioned it”
The reason chess is a segregated sport is because the male players couldn’t cope emotionally with co-ed.
Not only was their the sex-pest harassment stuff, but men who lost to women would become hysterical, hostile, and aggressive.
Women just needed clam, rational, and stoic people to play with, so they had to exclude men.
I especially like playing chess with clam people.
I like to play chess with people which are way better than I am in it
I like to play chess and stare at boobs
When my sister was on the chess team in highschool she would always wear a low-cut top with ample cleavage to the tournaments. She said it was very effective when her opponents spent more time staring at her chest than the board!
May be a gross oversimplification, simply because, ignoring everything else around professional chess, the world championship is technically open for all genders…
But considering how FIDE makes women gain ELO by taking it from other women in mixed tournaments, its 2023 ruling on transgender players, and how former World Champion Garry Kasparov reacted to losing to a women, it might as well be the truth.
In Kasparov’s eventual defense, he did say this after losing to Polgar:
“I was wrong about women playing chess. I gave an opinion a long time ago that I no longer believe.”
and later in his book wrote:
‘I won’t hide from the fact that I did make regrettably sexist remarks about women in chess around this time. In that 1989 Playboy interview I said men were better at chess because “women are weaker fighters” and that “probably the answer is in the genes”. The possibility of gender brain differences aside, I find it almost hard to believe I said this considering that my mother is the toughest fighter I know.’
Thank goodness online adaptations allow people to play without having to consider the identity of their opponent (because I don’t mind who I play against).
The selection is already biased. High ELO ranked chessplayers are not all that stable to begin with.
Habing chess separated for gender is a huge red flag… i feel like both women and men are ok with it for some reason cause otherwise i dont know how this is still a thing in 2026I stand corrected
Chess is not segregated by gender. There are women’s tournaments and there are open tournaments. There are no men’s tournaments. Men are way overrepresented at all the open tournaments, but women do compete in all of them.
Women’s representation is increasing at the top levels but it’s a gradual process. Judit Polgar and Hou Yifan (侯逸凡) are so far the only women to reach the top 100 players in the world and regularly compete with success at the top open tournaments.
The main world championship and title of GM is open to everyone, so it’s not truly split.
There are FIDE women only tournaments but that’s due to there being less participation of women. When you have something like this where the skill distribution is gaussian, if you have like 50 women compete and 1000 men, you will notice that it’s extremely unlikely for a woman to ever reach 1st place just due to statistics. Replace women and men with brown hair and blond hair and you’d see the same phenomenon.
The tail of the statistics where you see extreme deviations of improved skill would be dominated by the population with much larger participation.
To counter this, they have women only tournaments so that you always have a woman in 1st place in some tournament, basically to improve participation and convince more girls to play when they’re young.
There are of course probably other factors but these things improve participation and are meant to help get more women in chess, not separate them out.
Yes, almost every sport where men are actually at an advantage allows women to compete in the “men’s” leagues as well. Only when they actually start winning against the men do the rules start excluding them
the school system grades you on conformity, not wisdom and neither of these people are correct and most ivy league grads are literally just there because theyre epstein-class legacy members
theyre just two people with different interests and goals, thats it
Yeah making this into a man vs woman thing is stupid, I took the original post just as a person saying “people can have different kinds of intelligence, everything should be respected”
Oh, so we should respect cops? Boot licker.
respect and love EVERYBODY but defend yourself with wisdom
Also, a lot of “stupid” behavior people do is a direct result of them being stressed, scared, tired, hungry etc. The more stuff you have on your mind to begin with because the world sucks the harder it is to pay attention to what you’re doing.
and children have these emotions amplified 10x and dont know how to control it and the school system thinks that they forget stuff and dont get good grades because theyre EVIL
They are also evil. Have you met a child?
theyre more whimsical, curious and unafraid of being “embarrased” so they seem like they “lack a filter” or are “evil”
They are also those things, in addition to evil. Yes.
how are they evil?
Both sides are just people with interests, i never understood the smart/dumb distinctions, there’s just interests, dedication and morals
Lots of upvotes, but that’s simply not true. It is true that people can be gifted in one area and not in others, but those people can excel in those areas more than someone even more passionately interested could ever hope to.
I knew a guy named Joe Rohde. You can look him up, he ended up being a head of imagineering at Disney. When I knew him, he was a high school art teacher, and then just starting at Disney. His aptitude for art was off the charts, and his mom said that was true when he was four and able to draw 3D renderings when his peers couldn’t do stick figures. Sure, he practiced and developed skills, but his ability to hold a 3D image in his mind, tweak and rotate it, and then put it on paper, is something innate. He was absolute crap at math.
I spent 40 years at a company that mostly made rocket engines for NASA and the DoD, working with literal rocket scientists. I met all sorts of very smart people. Some were the stereotypical scientist that were geniuses in a particular area but had no skills outside of it, but others were just simply brilliant at anything they turned their mind to. Many of them defied the stereotype and also has great social skills.
It might be nice to think that anyone can be truly great at anything they put their mind to, but I’ve seen too many people who are truly great at things to believe it. Some people are just wired differently.
Edit: and none of the above mentions gender because gender doesn’t factor into it.
True, and it actually makes up the majority of the skill as well, i just don’t like to look at people as gifted or lucky because it’s unfair, it’s kind of sad hahaha
I get easily conquered by defeatism if it’s done through pure logic and there’s no doubt about luck being a huge factor in skill! And in life in general, So i just kind of look away and continue grinding what i enjoy, because it’s the only thing you can do to enjoy competitive activities
Right but only one side is compensating.
I think you’re lucky if you’ve never had an interest you weren’t smart enough to enjoy properly.
Clearly you have never met stupid people. Lucky you.
I was once interested in time travel. My dedication was boundless and my morals were questionable. I only got smart enough to know I’m too dumb to make it work.
Good news, I figured out the secret to time travel. I’m now travelling forward in time by a second, every second! Pay $999 to learn My secret!
You’ve never met someone who’s just plain dumb? I have bad news.
Nah, that would be great news. Being dumber than anyone you’ve ever met makes you less responsible for things like climate change and political violence than the people around you (morally, at least; you’re probably literally more of a cause, because you’re more likely to be right wing, but if you’ve already jumped that hurdle, maybe you aren’t). Plus, if your own life is a wreck, it feels better to blame an inherent limitation than something you could change, if only you had the discipline. If your own life is great, you’ve overcome a serious obstacle and should be proud of yourself.
finally someone gets it
Yeah but some are able to get better at them than others. Talent does play a role and it’s best if interests align.
It says “chess enthusiast” on the left, but shows a chessboard on the right. Sounds like these two have more in common than they see.
It also says chess enthusiast on the anime boy. Might just be a watermark.
I ship it
Well you see, KNOWING ABOUT chess is superior to PLAYING chess, as chess is just a silly little toy.
It’s different because… Umm…
the creator of this meme is pointlessly trying to divide people into anything but a class warwait uhhhhis rage baitreasons.
Not the towers of hanoi!
you won’t believe this but I bet the guy on the right could write a Python script to solve it in 4-6 business weeks
Society needs both.
We desperately need people playing with toys. Society needs it.
we desperately need people with logic
In all seriousness, studies show that chess skill does not translate to other types of non-contextual intelligence (like memory and reasoning).
More to the point, what we need are people responsive to empirical and normative facts — rational people. Not logic zombies.
Technically, the idea that chess players are automatically smart outside of chess is worse than false. I’ve seen studies where smart kids were less likely to improve in chess because they are so curious about the real world (you know, philosophy, art, science).
well-meaning nuanced opinion on lemmy???
we need curiousity and whimsy
Oh, oh honey, no. Academia requires years of dedication, hard work, and money. Lots and lots of money.
Depends where you live in fairness.
Edit: on the money front only. The rest is definitely correct.
I actually want someone to test this scenario:
Universities don’t ask for ID when going into individual classes, what classes are at what hours can be found online in their semester coursebook, and all textbooks are available on annas-archive.
So can any dedicated person with enough time, at the cost of school supplies and maybe a parking pass, just go complete a degree plan?
It’s called auditing a class, pretty much every university has a mechanism for this. Otherwise though you’d get caught pretty quick when it turns out I don’t have a record of you. In some 600+ person weedout class you wouldn’t, but any smaller group lecture you’d get noticed on the 1st day when taking roll for waitlist placement.
Me, offscreen to the right: internet argument smart
Me, offscreen to the left: imaginarily smart.
How it feels to be interested in a subject you suck at.
The duality of lemming.
