How To Be A Man In Chess

From the article:
"I remember I used to cry. I cried when I lost races, competitions. I cried when I fell off my bike. And then I hit puberty and the concept of being a man and crying became incompatible.
...
But none of that mattered. Because I was a man. And this is how men faced life, unfazed and emotionless..."

Sounds like biology to me. Evidence shows that testosterone inhibits crying. The hormone prolactin is higher in women and that hormone has been found to increase the amount of emotional tears produced. The impact of testosterone in animals shares many similarities to it's impacts in humans. In other words what's observed in men is not just a societal construct.

@WhzYerDaddy said in #30:
> ... not. Utter rubbish.
>
> Sorry to see lichess.org turning into something other than simply a nice place to play chess. Suggest sticking to chess and staying away from "social engineering."

Do you mean bread and games should be enough? I guess I found a community here too. nope.. arena, not satisfying.

The very idea to come here and read stuff written here... indicates that a subpopulation of lichess, does also want other dimensions of interactions. And helping each other be more performing in the improving hole trail (tired phonetics), is maybe not the only reason (if it were, I guess, I guess the limited horizon aspirations--- damn another lapsus... sounds like some chess engine departure from Shannon type of stuff). limited horizon aspiration, that is only on chess behavior type to aspire to (hence the choice of word about respiration analogy, on the intake more precisely, in case no one noticed...).

where was I? oh yes. I am far too much enjoying the communicating sub population feature on lichess to think this is just about anonymous robotic gaming.. and the ladders on the lobby don't really fool me.

@replaced said in #31:
> From the article:
> "I remember I used to cry. I cried when I lost races, competitions. I cried when I fell off my bike. And then I hit puberty and the concept of being a man and crying became incompatible.
> ...
> But none of that mattered. Because I was a man. And this is how men faced life, unfazed and emotionless..."
>
> Sounds like biology to me. Evidence shows that testosterone inhibits crying. The hormone prolactin is higher in women and that hormone has been found to increase the amount of emotional tears produced. The impact of testosterone in animals shares many similarities to it's impacts in humans. In other words what's observed in men is not just a societal construct.

ahum.. what evidence. of course "not just a social" construct.. but also not a a one hormone one biological 0 or 1 value. many tissues are involved in complex higher brain functions such as emotion and social communication.

and boy are biologically retarded in such aspect for many years. To have made such delay a hallmark of manhood sounds as dissonant, as the donated rib story. sound made up to justify a public social power order that is not exactly a reasonable assessment of the situation. Maybe force is usurping intelligence. And as a grown man, I value intelligence over force. I value better communication, and my own emotional integration with my whole intellect.

Yes, i could be disconnected in an emergency.. Is that such a great ability to have it frozen for life. We can accept different trajectories. Maybe girls like to play with dolls on average more than boys, who have little social awareness, not even of familial unit yet. so boys may have more time to tumble, and bumps into walls, explore locomotion or physical 3D action more, by default.

But there is no reason to amplify that culturally. Let it run its course, and let the more likely natural population diversity variation of multigenic traits (specially in higher brain functions) emerge for what it is. The social construct is to think that what is a necessary development difference of path, girls being more mature about certain realties sooner (this is not about puberty being early, this is about very young having better language skills on average sooner, and generally picking up relational clues, I think that is why they play with dolls, mirroring their family model, because they are aware of such interpersonal interactions already. Yes it might give times for the boys to develop motor skills of different nature. The social construct is to make a freezing snapshot of that. and perpetuate it to adulthood and public roles.

also. what evidence.. I think you last point about "not just social construct" does not need that evidence to be discussed. I almost missed it.. because of that weak argument, yet.. please do share.. It sound dissonant with what I know.. (receptors in many tissues, and high brain function, and population quantitative traits genetics). but maybe there is a statistical relation. dimorphism can be 2 very close normal densities... with big spreads.

So much white cis dude fragility in the comments... Guys you should listen to your own words. All of you whining because someone challenges your wiew on Manliness.

@AirborneWarrior1974 said in #18:
> it's hard enough being a white bloke nowadays anyways without being told being a bloke is a bad thing.

What kind of Warrior are you if you struggle with.. Being a White dude? I'm gonna assume cis het as well in light of your content.
You are not the only fragile "alpha male red pill TopOfTheFoodChain" with uninformed and toxic comments on this thread.
But you might be the funniest!

Claiming to be strong and stoic, but getting triggered by the mere exposure to the idea that maybe your wiew on masculinity is wrong, and advocating that lichess should "protect" you from them by not "getting woke" and "sticking" to be a place to play... How ironic.

@TurtleMat said in #34:
> So much white cis dude fragility in the comments... Guys you should listen to your own words. All of you whining because someone challenges your wiew on Manliness.

Yes, "fragility", one of the favourite labels of femtards. Well, everybody couldnt be a solid "trans homo".
Dishes are fragile.
If you didnt get it, nothing wrong with being strong and stoic I guess, what is wrong is unsolicited patronizing how straight men should be (which is allowed today only against them).

I think feminists should get the Nobel Prize for the cure for men's psychological problems, especially suicide: enough to make men cry from the morning to night.

@AlanBeguivin said in #35:
> what is wrong is unsolicited patronizing how straight men should be

Good, We agree opn this point! Are you gonna stop saying/implying/thinking that straight men should be strong and stoic?

@AlanBeguivin said in #35:
> femtards

Great way to insult feminists and people with mental disability at the same tine ;) You surely feel real strong right now.

Thanks for the whining and supporting my point by the way :)

@szczyk said in #29:
> I'm here to play chess that I play for fun. Don't care about my opponents sex, gender, nationality, age or anything else. Why should I treat women better than men? There are no men or women at all, just people. You are trying to get out of one pattern of masculinity and you don't see that you are creating another one. Don't tell me what should I do in my life. Don't tell me "how to be a men" - I am men without your advices and don't need them. Not every people must be an activist. I'm not responsible for other men's bad behaviour just because I'm a man too. So stop blaming me for things did by people I even don't know. Just play chess. Peace.

Of course you can ignore problems and pretend to "not see gender" (same as some people "dont see black people") because you belong to the privileged end of the problem. Easy for you to just sit back and say "no problem here". The right thing to do would be to speak up and actively be anti-sexist, if you want to get to a point where gender isn't an issue anymore.

@Rob_AOE said in #38:
> Of course you can ignore problems and pretend to "not see gender" (same as some people "dont see black people") because you belong to the privileged end of the problem. Easy for you to just sit back and say "no problem here". The right thing to do would be to speak up and actively be anti-sexist, if you want to get to a point where gender isn't an issue anymore.

1. My philosophy is to be a good man and respect all and treat them as individuals. "Lead by example". As I said before: not everybody has to be an activist. With such posts you are polirazing the community - "you are either with us, or against us".

2. What are the real problems of women in chess? But not such like: there are a lot of man so woman who want to play feels weird. On Lichess play people from all over the world, so don't look through your own prism, your filter bubble. Maybe we should boycott tournamens in some muslim countries where the woman rights are limited? That's the real problem, don't you think? I don't see more problems besides the silly commentaries from some elder men but to ignore that is sometimes the better way than get provoct and starting the fight. Are you arguing with every drunk uncle at the party?

3. You said that I'm priviliged. Man, you don't know me, how can you know if I am not treated worse by someone from some reasons? Did you only deduced this from the fact that I am a guy? The problem with this topic is that there are a lot of groups of people that may need help: you said black people, okay, and what about aspergers, introverts and people with other problems with socialization you can't see at the first sight? What about bigger problems like poor or sick people, ppl from countries with war, hunger or violation of human rights and so on? Is it that from now lichess is going to post about all of this problems and we have to "speak up and actively be anti-[place what you want]"? Or we choose only being anti-sexist?
Is it place to play chess or to - I don't know - political agitation?

4. The biggest problem I got with this article is that - as I said - author is trying to get out of one pattern of masculinity and he don't see that he is creating another one. Why it is not article like: "hey, there are some problems like..., please be good for women and do some more stuff to help them if you could"? Instead it is: "how to be a man? You are man so you are guilty. Behave! If you want to be a real man do this, this and this. Otherwise you are not good man at all". I just cannot agree with collective responsibility, especially myself with people I don't even know and probably I don't indentify with.

5. Last thing is just about the argumentating: just because sth is easy doesn't mean it's wrong.

"Of course you can ignore problems and pretend to "not see gender" (same as some people "dont see black people") because you belong to the privileged end of the problem. Easy for you to just sit back and say "no problem here". The right thing to do would be to speak up and actively be anti-sexist, if you want to get to a point where gender isn't an issue anymore."

Do you know him? How is he "privileged", if it is a man? Is he beginning games with more pieces? :)
No, it will probably be more about another feminist meaningless cliché which "explains" everything.
BTW What "anti-sexist" means? (Do not distinguish women from men?)