top 50 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 136 points 1 month ago (9 children)

Both sides are just people with interests, i never understood the smart/dumb distinctions, there's just interests, dedication and morals

  • source
  • hideshow 13 child comments
  • [–] 36 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 34 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    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!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago (2 children)

    Pff amateur, I can even travel forward in time by slightly less than a second every second!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 18 points 1 month ago* (5 children)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 67 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 42 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    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.’

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • [–] 9 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    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

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (3 replies)
    [–] 58 points 1 month ago (10 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • load more comments (9 replies)
    [–] 51 points 1 month ago

    Spatially smart

  • source
  • [–] 39 points 1 month ago (1 child)
  • [–] 35 points 1 month ago* (2 children)

    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

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 16 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    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.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 29 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 24 points 1 month ago (3 children)

    I like both. I get the sentiment, but it is really sad that men and women's strengths and/or weaknesses are being used to wage a stupid war that serves no one.

    In my home we compliment each other super well. My weaknesses are evened out by his strengths and my strengths even out his weaknesses. It's great. Almost like that's the whole point of having a functioning society.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 23 points 1 month ago* (5 children)

    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

  • source
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • load more comments (5 replies)
    [–] 19 points 1 month ago (1 child)

    Me, offscreen to the right: internet argument smart

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 15 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago) (2 children)

    Somehow i don't see the meme as sexist until i read the comments

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • load more comments (2 replies)
    [–] 14 points 1 month ago

    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..?

  • source
  • [–] 11 points 1 month ago* (last edited 1 month ago)

    FYI: Sipnayan is a Tagalog word, originating from a 1969 attempt by a Filipino language committee to replace the Greek/Latin-originated matematika with low level of success, much like courriel etc. pushed by the French Academy

  • source
  • [–] 10 points 1 month ago (4 children)

    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.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (4 replies)
    [–] 7 points 1 month ago (7 children)

    Oh, oh honey, no. Academia requires years of dedication, hard work, and money. Lots and lots of money.

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (7 replies)
    load more comments
    view more: next ›