http://cardplayerlifestyle.com/why-d...te-for-change/
If you don't feel like reading the article, the cliffs are very simple: Men are sexist assholes at the poker table, and this is the main factor keeping women out of the game.
Surprisingly, this article was not written by one of the feminists in the poker media, but rather a dude named Robbie Strazynski.
I disagree with the basic premise of the article.
I will concede that there is plenty of sexism in poker. There are men at the table who feel women "don't belong". There are men who don't take losing against women very well. There are men who have a hard time facing rejection when making romantic overtures to women at the table. All of this especially increases when alcohol is involved.
Do I believe that such behavior has driven some women away from poker? Yes.
Do I believe that, absent of such treatment, we would see a huge increase in the number of women at the table? Not at all.
The important factor being ignored by this article is how many women have tried playing in the first place. After all, to be driven from the game, you need to have played the game at least once. I assert that a large percentage of women have never tried poker, and another big group of them tried and just didn't find it that interesting, for reasons having nothing to do with sexism.
The bottom line is that, for the most part, women just have much less interest in poker than men. There are, of course, exceptions, but in general poker appeals far more to men.
There are some major differences in the sexes -- some societal, some natural, which predispose our genders to different preferences in recreational activities. For example. you see almost no men in needlepoint. Even if the social stigma of men doing needlepoint were removed, you still wouldn't get many men interested in it. The activity of needlepoint is simply not something likely to appeal to men. Similarly, something like playing football will never appeal to many women. Men and women are different, and there's nothing sexist about saying and acknowledging that.
So why is it so hard to accept that poker might just be a game that appeals more to men?
Benjamin's mom is a good example of a woman with zero interest to play poker. She is a very smart woman, and in fact has a mathematically-oriented mind, and could probably learn to play the game well. However, she has no interest. It's just not something that appeals to her at all. She understands it enough to watch me play, but she doesn't have the desire to play a single hand of it. I have to assume that the vast majority of women feel this way. They aren't keeping away from poker because of sexism at the tables, and in fact most of them aren't even aware of such sexism, because they've never even tried to play. They just don't want to.
Something that has annoyed me over the last 2 decades has been the politically correct notion that there is no difference between the wants, desires, and abilities in the human sexes. Anything enjoyed by a male has to be equally enjoyed by a female, and if you say otherwise, you're a sexist. Any skill possessed by males has to be equally present in females. It's just not true. The sexes are very different, and while there are outliers, it is ignoring reality to state that women are staying out of poker simply because of sexism.
Finally, the article ignores some advantages enjoyed by women at the table, especially attractive women. Men will often soft-play women, hoping to gain their favor. It's much easier to get staked if you're a woman (provided you're under 40 and at least average looking), for the same reason. It's far easier to get sponsored if you're female, again especially if you are under 40 and at least semi-attractive. While women face some challenges from sexism at the poker table, they also can gain from their gender, as well.
Reply With Quote
Originally Posted by GaryQQQ
