CHESS PLAYERS DON'T GET LAID

At first I did not see any harm in the fact that I was not introduced by M. to her attractive sister and half-sister. She apparently did not like the idea of becoming related by marriage; that happens! Until I actually asked her outright, when M. declared that she did not think that a professional chess player would be a good partner for a lady. That kind of attitude had struck me before in Dutch ladies, both experienced by myself, and as related to me by colleagues. Are these occurrences due to chance or could we speak of a signal that indicates a structural prejudice? (as IM Frans Cuijpers then would say in plain language: "Is that so?"). The time had thus come for some scientific research, in which the method was to be used as recommended by the lamented, recently deceased prof. A.D. de Groot (* 1). This method consists of a hypothesis, then determining a research method, then the actual testing after which conclusions can be made, possibly followed by wording of a rule.

There is a suspicion that the occupation of professional chess player has a more negative image than other professions for Dutch women. "Other professions" is indeed a wide notion. A chess player is -- as a matter of course -- less popular than a film star and more attractive than a junkie. Therefore, it ought to be a profession of the same order; the researcher (* 2) consequently wanted to compare the profession of chess player with the arbitrarily chosen profession of psychologist.

Research took place by means of so-called "impersonification." The researcher posed on one internet dating site as a chess player and on the other one as a psychologist. (* 3). The frequency and nature of the contacts with the other sex served as parameters from which figures as regards as popularity could be deducted.

The results were unambiguous: as a psychologist the researcher received significantly more reactions (about three to one) when he requested contact; some women even took the initiative to get acquainted, and he managed to realize actual dates. An implicit problem in this was that the researcher did not practice the profession of psychologist and solely could furnish information about his feigned occupation relying on common sense. This sometimes led to remarkable correspondence and contacts. Scientists tend to bury these kind of irrelevant data in an appendix (* 4).

The researcher came into contact with test subject D., previously lesbian; but to speak with the words of a popular Dtuch writer: you got to be well-disposed to converts. He was careful in the beginning and they talked about art, but rather quickly he tried to entertain her with filthy intrigues at the faculty of psychology. The researcher described his place of work as a kindergarten where the ladies and gents academics practised their wildest fantasies at heart on computer simulations and test subjects. It was a breeding ground for incest. You could not keep up with who did it with whom, let alone why, and the researcher was of course just as guilty. The only unwritten rule was that you did not do it with students who wanted a higher mark, but to speak with a person he shared a room with: "the flesh is weak." Funnily enough, D. confirmed this picture; she herself was after all connected with the university and well-informed about internal relational developments. She was posting with a homosexual colleague on Gaydar (* 5) and students were "reviewed" at the photocopier.

This encouraged the reviewer to add more fuel: a female colleague of D., who had already embarked on a work-related amorous involvement, could safely visit his place of work. And otherwise his room mate would know how to handle it. They were in the meantime such a good team that they would arrange their "sharing" through eye contact. Thank goodness they never had an argument about it, the quota of his room mate was higher, but then again he would take care of the problem girls. Of which quite a few walked around at the faculty of psychology, the fruitcakes who did a study in psychology not because they were interested, but as self-analysis . His room mate would listen long hours to their monologues and would tolerate crying spells (respect!) before he finally would get his way. Why did the researcher write all this to D.? Undoubtedly, it did not contribute to the positive image that he wanted to paint of his place of work, let alone of himself. Anyway, it was clear that the researcher was on good mailing terms with his test subject, they were steering towards a visual continuation in their relationship, when D., because of negligence on his part, managed to find out the complete name of the researcher. Google again proved to be an instrument to uncover the truth.

By living and learning one becomes wise, also in science. In his next email contact with test subject R., the researcher was on his guard and managed to secure a date. This date went exceptionally smooth. The test subject did not doubt his identity and after a few alcohol consumptions, the voyage proceeded to the domicile of R. in her car. The researcher realized that all indications pointed to a one night stand, save for the fact that he had allowed himself to be drunk under the table in the course of the evening. When he came to, he was worked out of the car in a suburb of the city without having the feeling that it had come to an ejaculation in the previous hours.

The hypothesis that the occupation of professional chess player has a more negative image for Dutch women than any other arbitrarily chosen profession, in this case psychologist, turned out to be correct. This evidence could be extrapolated to other professions. Statements in this regard will be left to dr. H.I. Oei, expert in the field of assumptions.

The conclusion invites additional research e.g. towards the situation in other countries. There are figures that suggest that the profession of chess players is more respected in Eastern Europe, let alone the way one is addressed in German speaking countries: "Herr Großmeister."

The prejudice of Dutch women as regards chess players is another interesting field of research. Scant data point towards a general disinterest as regards cultural activities as well as fear of intellectual dominance. M., mentioned in the introduction, preferred e.g. - when asked - a professional soccer player over a chess player. Do Dutch women rather not have difficult conversations and do they therefore prefer "Dutch boys" with brains that are affected by alcohol abuse and with very low marks for the Dutch language? Exceptionally intriguing all of it! The only thing left to do for the researcher is to formulate a rule: Chess players don't get laid (except by female chess players). Drunk psychologists don't get laid either.

Notes:

1. See his standard book on Methodology: grondslagen van onderzoek en denken in de gedragswetenschappen 1961 (i.e. foundations for research and thinking in the behavioural sciences 1961).
2. The researcher is of course me; but in a scientific treatise it is chic to talk about yourself in the third person.
3. Internet dating -- frankly spoken -- an excess of the detestable modern society, is to be utterly condemned. As Dante wrote when he descended to hell: "Lasciate ogni speranza voi ch'entranza" (Abandon all hope whoever enters here). The importance of science, however, makes these kind of escapades bitter necessity.
4. Appendices normally are found at the end of an article, but I have nothing to do with this at all.
5. Gaydar, the Utrecht chess forum of the Gay-scene (www.utrechtschaak.nl).

Karel van der Weide

http://www.karelvanderweide.nl