First, thank you for your thoughtful post.

On my blog, I hyperlinked to the site so that anyone that was curious could easily take a look. I also didn't point out every issue with the site, like the fact that the Women's Sunday is currently listed on that page and here as having an $11K guarantee, when it is now has a $10k guarantee. That was because I wanted to only bring up the points I thought were the most constructive.


The bigger point that I was trying to make was that I think if they decide to reinvigorate PokerStars Women then I believe it will be worth it for them in the long run-- because I think that the next poker boom will happen because of more women playing poker.

She very obviously disagreed with a point that I had made several times in the thread by making it bold. I merely backed up the statement I had made, however thoroughly - and am hardly guilty of any of the things you are claiming I am. I may have made it a bit inflammatory, but I only did that because she brought up the obligatory rape comparison that happens when gender equality discussions happen; stuff like that is entirely irrelevant and is obviously only brought up to invoke sympathy to an otherwise impotent argument. There are plenty of examples of sexism to be used other than something as brutal as rape.

You need to stop being mad that people make posts that you disagree with.

And I feel like I should make it clear that the only thing I am disagreeing with here is that this is a 'women's issue', and that a random male's opinion on the subject is somehow less valuable than a random female's.

You're the one who made comparisons. Danielle just brought it up as an experience she had had. She didn't compare it to anything.

Sorry, I should have used a different word. At least you couldn't find anything that wasn't semantics to disagree with.

There wasn't much else to disagree with.
You merely stated that Danielle disagreed with your point and you attempted to back it up.
That's fact.
The point that you were so poorly trying to back up, however....

bj,

I have no idea who you are arguing with when you keep saying that men should be allowed to discuss this issue. I can't see anyone disagreeing with that. Someone saying "so and so is a woman with a personal perspective on this issue, her opinion should be heard," is not preventing men from participating in this discussion. When someone says something is a "womens issue," it means it concerns women, it doesn't mean it is only for women to discuss. I don't know why you are focusing so much on these 2 words.

And I am pretty sure you just asked me "you mad bro?" Not mad, I just disagree with you.

The irony in that sentence is amazing.

What Danielle said is all true and just because you can claim that men also experience those things too (laughable) doesn't change the massive degree in which women have to endure it compared to men.

It's not a stretch to see that everyone can and should be equal no matter the gender, but it's also not a stretch to have a little chivalry and try and protect women from an unfair barrage of sexual aggression and other negative things they have to put up with while also having a fair and level playing field.

As for the online women only tourneys, that's just a good marketing thing to do and not as much for creating a more comfortable environment considering the anonymity on the web.

If you're not, I apologize. You just started to attack me personally instead of the point I was making so I thought you were mad.

For the record, these are the posts which I originally disagreed with

I actually explicitly recognized in the post that I made that it was a larger problem for women than men.
I never said anything that disagreed with this.
Again, I'm in full agreement.

The whole schtick seems to be pandering to the fact that women get treated differently in the poker/online poker world. Which isn't exactly combating it in my opinion.

BJ, you seem to as Ansky pointed out, that you don't fully know what I meant by "womens issue." I wondered this myself when you said there was no such thing as a "womens issue." This could be a language barrier if English is not your first language.

Those posts showed that, as this thread started out, these threads are generally unproductive when the overwhelming voices are male. Thankfully, Katie and others have come in and had their voices heard and stated their opinions eloquently and have not been drowned out.

Sorry, but no.

You defined 'women's issue' as it pertains to this thread by calling the topic being discussed a 'women's issue', while simultaneously calling for the silencing of certain members of the discussion based on an arbitrary aspect of their identity.

I may have been the one who originally brought the discussion slightly off topic, but it would be ridiculous to let a bunch of people sit atop their high horses condemning misogynists when pretty much everything being said was misandry. The irony and hypocritical nature of the entire thing is absurd.

No, I did not. A "womens issue" is one that primarily affects women, not one that only they can discuss. This is a very simple definition and how it is always defined. You're the only one who somehow wants to define it differently, or stuff a definition into my words by the way of a strawman.

I said it was dangerous when an issue that primarily affects women is overwhelmingly debated by men. This is not something I am changing my mind on, but it is something you have generally seemed to disagree with.

That's an expert walk back to edit that now that you've probably googled "Womens issues" and realized that it's an actual thing to now accuse people of misandry. Way to show your hand. Please provide ONE example of people hating males itt. Note: Saying that women would like one tournament to sit and chat with just women isn't "hating men."

As for your first paragraph, there isn't a definition of 'women's issue' that you could have been referring too that is some sort of acceptable standard that everyone should have known that you were referring too. I mean, the first thing that comes up if you google 'define womens issue' is the wiki page for feminism. Come on.

I don't disagree with your second paragraph, except for the fact that we're in an internet forum, one about poker at that. Regardless of the topic, the discussion will be comprised of 90% male posts.

So for you to call wolf in this situation and say that women are being oppressed itt by overly vehement or misogynistic men posting too much is either disingenuous or ignorant of the situation at hand; there are few women here to post, but they very much have had what they had to say heard, and there hasn't been a huge amount of 'i hate women' posts.

This is not representative of the injustice you are claiming. A false claim, which, as is made evident by the story about the boy who called wolf, detracts from the legitimacy of actual claims of wrong-doing. Wrong-doing that you are supposedly fighting against.

Clever edit on your part too.

Unfortunately for you, you seem to have failed to notice that I used the word misandry in an earlier post. One that was in response to you. And both of the posts of yours that I quoted in my last response to ansky were clearly made by someone who resents men. You exaggerated what they were doing as well as said things were happening that weren't happening in order to vilify the men itt. If you don't hate men, what other reason would you have to straight up slander someone just because of their gender?

BJ, you are the only person itt or that I would ever run into that would see the phrase "Womens issue" and then think "An issue only women are allowed to have an opinion on."
For example, your googling should have found that The Economist and many other similar sites have full womens issues sections of their websites!
I never claimed women were being oppressed.
I only edited my post because I saw your second paragraph after I had made my post.
Saying anyone has spouted any misandry itt is a stretch.
I never claimed there were any injustices, beyond that this is a community that isn't well represented by women, and the OP is an attempt to fix that very thing.
We've gone over your weird definition and misunderstanding of "womens issues," we might have to do the same for "misandry' and "slander."
Words have meaning and the meaning you are ascribing to these words just doesn't fit how they are used.

But, this is probably the first time in 2p2 history that someone that has ~13,000 posts exclusively in a sports forum that boasts absolutely zero female regulars has been accused of hating men. If I hated men, I'd probably spend more time with my gf then on fantasy sports or something?

@ open letter: imo Katie is "wrong".

PS knows the numbers and i guess it's a no brainer to pick mothers day in uk over international womens day (which is, what i heard/read, pretty important in countries like russia and ukraine)

that PS reduces the womens content is another thing ... PS never said they rescheduled out of respect, so comparing both things just doesn't makes any sense.


anyway

@ femenism/whiteknights/general misunderstandings itt

men don't understand, what privileges they have. sure women 'have equal rights' (at least in most/some countries), but we're far away of an equal society. i don't want to derail much, but thinking women's event are useless, is imo stupid.

like danielle pointed out, there's a ultra aggressive behavior on poker tables. so bringing in new players with these 'special events' is definitely a good idea and should be accepted.

there's a quite interesting video made about women in gaming, which is just fine for this discussion

Nobody likes to hear bad things said toward them at a table live or online, I have very rarely seen "fish" return (not just to the table but to the place online or live) after that happened. I support about anything that brings more women into the game. (fwiw, I don't want to be in a game where people berate each other or someone inappropriately says things like previously mentioned either even it's not directed at me). I really don't get the hate for things like womens only events. (I guess it's jealousy because they get a few softer games a year we can't). I feel we should be listening to what they have to say in this thread because they have a perspective that the rest of us can't have.

I don't know if it's worth it for stars or not from a business perspective (especially since they've kept lowering the perks) but it does feel like we're at the point where losing anyone just keeps snowballing worse games.

Unfortunately, this is the internet, and first in tend to troll or just feel like they can get away with saying some things because majority are dudes, so it's tough to get a productive conversation out of stuff like this.

Bunch of idiots and white knights itt

Listen to the last weeks Pokercast (352) from 2hr 28.

The Pokerstars rep claims that it is out of respect but I think it's clear what the actual reason is.

okay, i was referring to the posting - sry

Seems like more of a societal issue than a poker issue or boys club as you refer to it. This stuff happens everyday by the idiot populous of America. I could care less if there is women only tournaments but it's not like poker spawns some misogynist behavior that is greater than other workplaces.

The dozer, she is available for coaching for the meagre sum of 100 dollars an hour.

I've long believed the latter, and I cross my fingers that it will happen.

I just suspect that the PokerStars Women campaign didn't move the needle enough, and reviving it (at least, to its peak form) will not do much unless external issues change. After all, online poker absolutely should be a gateway for women, if in fact the oft-cited reasons of intimidation and hostile environments in the live setting are what has kept women from getting into the game.

So perhaps there are cultural forces between the two genders — and I mean genders in the sociological sense, as opposed to sexes in the biological sense — that need to be overcome. For example, poker rewards aggression and risk aversion, two traits that in patriarchal societies are praised in men and scorned in women. On the other hand, empathy has tended to be a feminine trait in Western culture.

The best female players are those who have managed to eschew those cultural norms and adopt those skills, at least at the table. If there is any truth to this particular hypothesis then that should be the message PokerStars and/or its player representatives hammers home.

Just as a quick aside, I once had the unusual task of teaching hold 'em to our women's soccer team, mostly as a team-building exercise. A couple of them had played poker, a few others had watched it on TV, but most of them were noobs (and it showed). I didn't bother getting into any strategy nor did I provide any tips (which also showed). Just the basic rules and mechanics of the game.

Whatever stereotypes people have about female players did not exist in this room. They were LAGgy to the point of reckless, although part of it was not really having any grasp of starting hands. There was trash-talking and angle-shooting. One of our defenders, Julia, was particularly ruthless at making big raises if she smelled any fear from her weak-tight teammates; our assistant coach (who dealt the other table) could see her cards and told me later that she never once had a hand in any of the times he spotted her bombing the pot.

Now that I think about it, I wonder if PokerStars Women could further its mission by targeting more female athletes from team sports (e.g. more Fatima Moreira de Melo types). If gender-based cultural constraints are what has kept women from embracing or excelling at poker, this group would already be well-versed at breaking such barriers once the light of competition has flickered on.

Women will never be on mass playing on-line poker it will never happen. From what i've seen from the younger generation of women that play live casino poker is that they are what i like to call seekers....which is a slang or shortened version of attention seekers. They like the attention of the male sex, and do not get as much attention in more varied locations, bars and night clubs etc

This is from what ive experienced first hand , and im sure there are women at home studying training sites, grinding icm calculations and progressing there game, and good luck to them.

I think its disgusting that men enter womens only events, jesus just let them play the game. There are some men that are just parasites .