Maybe it just looks that little bit worse next to Joaz's crass post?

_________________
North Lecale

Joaz is right that some women may be less inclined to enjoy go, overall. There are exceptions, of course.

But it's also possible that women can be turned off from go not only because of that which is go, but also because of the men that play it.

So I think daniel_the_smith is right on. We should try not to offend women that join, but it's not necessary to make special cases for them.

_________________
be immersed

I'm reminded of Gandhi, when asked what he thought about Western civilization: "it would be a good idea." *

* Apochryphally. But really, it's too good not to use.

_________________
Occupy Babel!

One example of encouraging women to do quite challenging intellectual effort, such as go, is the GWU summer program in math, where they bring in women college juniors and have them listen to exceptional women mathematicians, participate in problem sessions and beginning research, and just get used to the idea of the graduate math department as "their" comfortable place. It gives the women a certain ownership.

Wouldn't this be a really good thing for the AGA to do? I mean, on the 40th anniversary of Title IX, we really should support this! I wonder if some of the brilliant women go players and teachers would participate if their expenses were supported a bit.

Women are quite well-represented in bridge and mahjong (not sure if there is competitive mahjong) right? But less so in chess and go. Are the communities' aesthetics different?

_________________
Revisiting Go - Study Journal
My Programming Blog - About the evolution of my go bot.

why does the ratio of men to women players matter? I wouldn't care if most of the players were women. I just enjoy the game.

I definitely agree with the second part, but the ratio of men to women players matters because it may suggest that there's an issue with getting/retaining a significant portion of the potential players base.

I think you are asking the right question here. This is going to open a can of worms, but... women don't seem to be as underrepresented in Europe as they are in the US. This is not just in Go, but also Chess. I think it would be useful to compare the board game culture in countries like Russia and Romania with the US.

In America, board games are much less popular. This seems to be because many Americans have short attention spans and would rather be entertained than do something that actually requires them to think. This means that those that do play are much more likely to be programmers/geeks/intellectuals, and this may contribute to a less inviting atmosphere to some.

In Europe, board games seem to be more of a social event, and are thus more likely to involve both genders. Also, many in Europe, esp. Eastern Europe, do not have the aversion to intellectualism that Americans often do. This likely creates a more inviting, diverse atmosphere.

_________________
"Those who calculate greatly will win; those who calculate only a little will lose, but what of those who don't make any calculations at all!? This is why everything must be calculated, in order to foresee victory and defeat."-The Art of War

I'm a programmer/geek myself, and perhaps a bit socially awkward, but I actually prefer to the social side to the game.

I don't play online -- too cold, not easily social
I don't play in tournaments -- too quiet, serious, and competitive

I enjoy teaching beginners. I like to talk during games, to take back moves (usually my opponent's bad moves ) and explore other options and not just wait until the end and then try to replay the game and review in excruciating detail of each and every possible variation. I'd much rather laugh and talk and explore a few immediate learning opportunities during the game.

As the proverb says, "play go to make friends"

I'll never be a pro player, and I may never even reach dan level. I enjoy my current level, its good enough for now. I enjoy a good game with friends.

I read it as "some" in the first place. But I am not aware of any, so I want to ask which go organizations banned Women's championships?

Maybe ban is too strong, but certainly the UK abolished their national women's championship.
'There is no British Women’s Championship as the BGA believes that men and women should play Go on an equal footing.' is in the championship rules.

There is no corresponding statement in the policy pages, I had wrongly thought that there was, and they are sending a women's team to the World Mind Sport Games.

_________________
North Lecale

My wife says: Go is against female nature, because:
- it is about killing and dying
- it is about playing against each other and not with each other
- there is not much happening, you are just sitting around
- females would rather be talking to their friends
- females do not have/do not take the time for playing such a time consuming hobby

(And as those of you who are married already know: the wife is always right. )

But I think there is still hope: some years ago nobody would have thought that so many women would be watching soccer!

_________________
Stay out of my territory! (W. White, aka Heisenberg)

I've attached a picture from a British Go Journal to illustrate tapir's post

_________________
North Lecale

Very interesting … I’d probably reply, “Uhm, yes, sort of: It’s about life and death. It’s also about finding out how to do the right thing.”

“I play with my game partner and against their colour. And the game’s a lot about supporting my folks, my stones, and strengthening the weak, and enabling my, uhm, place, my space, my people to live.“

<sigh> (Thinks “Yeah, but better than Solitaire.”

<shrug> “We often talk while playing!”

“Mh.”

My last reply, though, would be that the majority of Go players I personally know (and play) IRL are women, so these male vs. female generalizations might have to be revised.


All that said, sighed, shrugged and grunted, I admit to you that I’m not married and never have been. (Don’t—I’ve already heard every possible ironic reply to this )

_________________
“The only difference between me and a madman is that I’m not mad.” — Salvador Dali ★ Play a slooooow correspondence game with me on OGS?

Right. I'm not saying that American clubs aren't social, or criticizing anyone's preferences, but comparing the public image of the game. In Europe, these things often start at home with friends and family. The Polgar sisters learned from their father, as did Diana Koszegi I believe. I think this is much less true of the US, and that the level of women's involvement is lower because of the less inviting (to some) image.

_________________
"Those who calculate greatly will win; those who calculate only a little will lose, but what of those who don't make any calculations at all!? This is why everything must be calculated, in order to foresee victory and defeat."-The Art of War

Seriously, this is horrible. Ladies night at bars is put on to attract more males as they know that there will be many inebriated women there compared to other times.

Is a go center the same as a bar? Do they share the same objectives?

If you went to a church and saw a sign which said they were having a Ladies Night Out meeting with drinks provided, would you automatically assume that the church is trying to get the ladies drunk?
http://myflock2.com/cgi-bin/menu.pl?chu ... page_id=6k

JUNE 8th
"Praise God for the Ants"
1 Thessalonians 5:16-18
Ladies Night Picnic in the Meadow
Bring your favorite salad to share / drinks provided
6pm at the home of Jacque Anderson

-------------

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ladies%27_ ... mbiguation)

-------------

I would think Javaness2's attachment to illustrate tapir's post is showing a very explicit way of attracting more go members and such a way is a really bad precedent to show on L19. It's surely turning the thread into something which L19 should not cross into. Would Javaness2 be happy if someone posts something which further illustrates his post in greater detail and gets banned for it?

-------------

Javaness2 started the thread about "positive discrimination in go", which by itself is talking about gender discrimination. If a go center has a series of events where they invite pros to only lecture female members or prospective female members, is that really fair to the rest of the membership who are excluded because of their gender?

Would Javaness2 dare suggest to wms to provide KGS+ lectures freely to female members so KGS would become a driving force in promoting more females to play go?

_________________
http://tchan001.wordpress.com
A blog on Asian go books, go sightings, and interesting tidbits
Go is such a beautiful game.

EDIT: Nevermind, don't even want to get involved in this thread.

But is it a hard question?

Joaz pointed out that it's not a matter of women not having the opportunity, and that if we want more women to play because we think it's good for them, then that's a rather patronizing attitude. Although social conditions could be preventing women from enjoying something great which might justify a certain amount of reverse discrimination, I generally agree with Joaz. More women aren't playing go because more women don't want to. But back to the question. If our goal isn't to increase women's opportunities, and it isn't to make them better people, why do we care if only a few women want to play go?

It seems that what we're left with is that we (or those who do) specifically want more women go players (as opposed to just more players) because we (or they) think that that would be nice for us guys. Go is something that most of us do in our free time, and wouldn't it be practical if it also helped fulfill some other social needs? If this is the case, I think we should own up to it, admit that we don't know how we're going to meet any ladies if they're never at the place where we spend most of our free time. If this isn't the case, and loftier reasons predominate, then please elaborate! Otherwise, why not be honest and say that we like to be around women, that we particularly like to be around women who play go, and that we especially like to be around women who like guys that play go and more of any of the above would be a step in the right direction.

So, what's to be done? While any effort to make go more popular will increase the number of women who know about go, who play go, and who appreciate how truly cool go players are, but if we specifically want more women to play, we need to ask: what's in it for them? As BobC suggests, many women would prefer to chat with friends than to sit around with a bunch of silent, brooding men. But go is by and large a non-verbal pastime. We might be a chatty bunch of guys, but not when we're in the middle of a game.

It would be fair at this point to accuse me of stereotyping women as people who tend to prefer their cerebral pleasures in verbal form, but when addressing a general question such as how to get more women to play go, such generalizations can be useful. In this case, they indicate that there is a disparity that needs to be bridged, between time spent talking and time spent playing go. I personally doubt that this is a bridge many of us feel the need to cross. If women want to cross it, I'm sure they'll say so.

When we watch a movie, we are by and large silent, but afterwards we have something to talk about and everybody's happy. Go is different. After a game, interest tends to range between playing or watching another game and destroying furniture. Talking is pretty far down on the list. What I'm saying is that this seems to be a case of wanting to have one's cake and eat it too. If we want to spend more time with women, maybe we should take up some other hobbies.

That said, women tend to look favorably upon men spending time with children, so offering more children's activities might be a roundabout way of getting more women involved.

_________________
Patience, grasshopper.

It's pretty clear that women in general have less time than men, because they are the ones who mostly take care of children and the house, along with working outside the home. So maybe women do 2/3 of the world's work? Anyway, that won't change until men take their fair share of the childcare/housework burden, which frankly I doubt will happen soon. People in power never give it up voluntarily.