You can believe what you would like.
keep the hope alive.
maybe one day soon we will have a female pro.
I truly hope so.
I just dont like the connotation that shits on all the woman who came before.
"They were not the right woman for the job"
"they didn't train hard enough"
"You only had 100,000 woman to choose from and none where t1 material"
It's not my intent to shit on those who've already tried/are trying
To me it's a statistics game.
By a huge margin, more men play video games than women.
Of the minority of women that play video games, only a portion of them play PC games
Of the women that play PC games, only some of them play FPS games
Of the women that play PC FPS games, only some of them play Valorant
Of the women that play video games, happen to play PC games, happen to also play FPS games, and whose main game happens to be valorant, only some of them actually have the money required to buy the right equipment to train on to go pro.
Of the women that play video games, happen to play PC games, happen to also play FPS games, whose main game happens to be valorant, and who have the money required to buy the necessary peripherals, only a minority of them have the desire to even go Pro in the first place
and of the women who meet all the above criteria:
only a portion of them have the determination to keep going despite everyone around them telling them they are at a biological disadvantage and with absolutely no precedent to draw from that they will ever reach their dreams.
There are 48 teams in T1, with 5 spots for players each. That's 240 slots for players to make it to Tier1.
Assuming men outnumber women even 10000-1 after all the above filters, then that means for every one of those 240 spots in Tier1, there's a 0.01% chance that it will go to a woman (Ignoring the small possibility of blatant sexism from teams in player selection).
You tell me the probability of a woman making it into tier1 all those factors considered, and under the assumption that women=men in average potential (which I personally believe to be true)
instead of writing a book read this instead
https://pmc.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/articles/PMC4129348/#:~:text=These%20cognitive%20attributes%20are%20different,abilities%20%5B2%2C3%5D
Read your own fucking article you imbecile. It only says females have disadvantages in cognitive tasks only during their period, but have identical cognitive ability while not in their period.
"Male cognitive functions were comparable to female preovulatory phase cognitive functions. However, females, during postovulatory phase of their cycle, may have advantages in executive tasks (Stroop test) and disadvantages in attentional tasks (VRT), as compared to males."
read this goofy
https://www.frontiersin.org/articles/10.3389/fnbeh.2019.00128/full
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S0022096500925943
https://www.jstor.org/stable/40296069
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/22390656/ https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0026141
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5999374/
https://stanmed.stanford.edu/2017spring/how-mens-and-womens-brains-are-different.html
https://www.researchgate.net/publication/284542074_Gender_and_Gaming_A_Literature_Review
Article 1: Don't have access
Article 2: "On this basis, we performed a correlation analysis of gender differences and age and found that gender differences in individual spatial ability increased as individuals grew older. Due to the complex interaction of other factors like individual differences, growth environment and experimental conditions, this finding may not apply to all meta-analyses, but the high correlation index represents and explains the development and growth trend in connection to gender differences in individual spatial ability."
Article 3: Don't have access
Article 4: This is a study on rats dipshit
Article 5: This is also a study on rats
Article 6: "The commonly reported pattern of decreasing RT mean and variability in childhood and adolescence, followed by an increase in mean and variability through adulthood and into old age, was confirmed. Greater intraindividual variability for females in SRT and CRT was observed in adults but not in children. Males had significantly faster mean SRT than did females across the life span, but there were no sex differences in mean CRT."
Article 7: "Reaction time
The ANOVA on RT with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=73.66, P<0.001, ηp2=0.725. A t-test for paired samples showed that the RTs were higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P≤0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. For the factor sex, there was no main effect of sex on RT: F(1, 28)=0.287, P=0.596, ηp2=0.01 and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.487, P=0.591, ηp2=0.02."
"Accuracy rate
The ANOVA on the accuracy rate with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=24.59, P<0.001, ηp2=0.468. A t-test for paired samples showed the accuracy rate to be higher for the angular disparity of 45° compared with 90°, 135° compared with 180°, 225° compared with 270°, and for the angular disparity of 270° compared with 315° (all P<0.001). All other consecutive comparisons did not show any significance. Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on the accuracy rate: F(1, 28)=0.114, P=0.738, ηp2=0.004, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=1.130, P=0.346, ηp2=0.039."
"The ANOVA for the number of fixations with angular disparity as the within-participant factor and sex as the between-participant factor showed a main effect on angular disparity: F(7, 196)=80.71, P<0.001, ηp2=0.742. A t-test for paired samples showed the number of fixations to be higher on each consecutive angular disparity up to 180° (P<0.001) and lower on each consecutive angular disparity from 180° up to 315° (P<0.001). Because of multiple testing, Bonferroni correction was chosen and the significance standard was set to α=0.007. There was no main effect of sex on fixation numbers: F(1, 28)=0.048, P=0.829, ηp2=0.002, and no significant interaction between both factors: F(7, 196)=0.34, P=0.754, ηp2=0.012."
Read your own fucking articles dumbass
Discord