Geneva, Saturday 2 May 2020

There is a park between us and downtown Geneva. I must have cycled through it a thousand times. In one corner by the main gate is an area dedicated to big outdoor public chess. Normally, on a Saturday morning, it would be heaving with enthusiasts locking intellectual horns. This morning, here it is in lockdown. 

One thing I have noticed over the years is how very rare it is to see women playing chess here. I often wondered why this might be. I’ve had a look around on-line. Women represent less than 5% of registered tournament players worldwide and only 1% of the world’s grand masters. There are several theories behind why chess attracts so many more men than women. 1) Women always rank higher than men on an “agreeableness” factor. This means that when confronted by another person, women – unlike men – tend not to try immediately to outsmart the other person. 2) Testosterone… yes, the T-dog!! That hormone that drives, among other things, competition – both physical and non-physical – and aggression. Normal testosterone levels in men lie between 280 and 1,100 ng/dL and for women between 15 and 70 ng/dL. Men tend to have and enjoy a rush of testosterone before an important chess tournament. 3) Gender stereotyping leads to boys starting chess earlier in life and girls being less welcome in chess clubs at school. 4) Young women who play chess at a high level tend to stop competing when they have children. As with so many other aspects of human behaviour, the correct answer will comprise genetic components and social / environmental components. 

My on-line research led me to some other fascinating gender-related chess issues. A study by Dreber, Gerdes and Gransmark reported in a 2013 edition of the Journal of Economic Behaviour and Organisation found that “attractiveness” of the opponent influenced game strategy. The 626 participants in a tournament had been rated for attractiveness as part of  a large marketing survey. The researchers found that male players choose riskier strategies when playing against attractive female opponents. Their riskier play did not improve performance. Women’s strategies and performance were unaffected by the attractiveness of their opponent. In another study reported in a 2007 edition of the European Journal of Social Psychology, Maass, D’Ettloe and Cadinu found that gender stereotyping is a factor behind women’s underperformance in chess. They pitched 42 men and 42 women in an on-line chess tournament. When players were unaware of the sex of their opponent (the control), females played as well as males. In the experiment, when women knowingly played against men, they showed a dramatic drop in performance. When they played against men but were made to believe they were against women, they performed as well as their male opponents.

While we’re on gender differences, a report in Science News on 23 April, reported different COVID-19 mortality rates for men (around 60%) and women (around 40%.) This also has yet to be fully explained and there are certainly genetic and environmental factors at play. Purportedly, women mount a stronger immune response than males and so are likely to be less susceptible to viral infections. This is thought to be due to the immune response being driven by a gene or genes on the X chromosome of which women have two copies while men have one. Extrinsic factors will include the higher rate of heart disease and hypertension in men that, in turn, is associated with their higher levels of obesity and smoking. 

I have been wondering when to stop writing the Lockdown Diary; probably on 11 May. This is the date on which we should be able to play golf; a pastime not really compatible with the notion of lockdown. However, need I remind you, dear reader, that on a global scale this pandemic is far from over. Many countries are still booming. Here’s the hard truth.

Wishing you a peaceful weekend and hoping you are safe and well.

Geneva, Friday 1 May 2020

A cold damp morning. I cycled into town; lots of people about given the weather. Shops are re-opening. I found myself in Place Bourg de Four; right in the middle of the old town. I had to say hello to “Clementine,” a bronze sculpture by Heinz Schwarz. 

Clementine is exquisite. She is sad, delicate and beautiful in her budding adolescence. She stands fully and unashamedly naked. Schwartz’s masterpiece has become an international symbol of solidarity for women and girls, especially those trafficked or forced into prostitution. Outside the time of lockdown, there would be floral tributes strewn at her feet.

It is a shopping day. I was speaking to a friend by phone. I said that I hoped it wouldn’t be long before we no longer needed to rinse the groceries under a cold shower. He couldn’t believe I’d been doing this throughout the lockdown.

I thought it was kinda normal if one was concerned about a bug doing the rounds. That’s what we used to do “out there” on top of the standard “clean it, boil it or leave it.” I read somewhere that it is not a disinfectant measure (obviously) and may not reduce your chance of picking up the coronavirus; but, given that we talking about droplet spread, it can reduce the viral load ingested and so, theoretically, reduce the impact of the infection if you get it. Maybe one day soon, the stats will be there to tell me whether this is a valid precaution or not. Now, talking of stats….

I am fascinated by the evolution of how pertinent epidemiology stats are presented to the general public. Six weeks ago, the focus was on total cases and deaths per country. There was talk of us climbing to the epidemic peak and the need to “flatten the curve.” Now there are explanations of the R value that indicates how contagious the disease was and is now with lockdown measures. (In the beginning this value was around three meaning for every infected person, the virus would be passed on to three others. Effective lockdown measures aimed to and did pull this number to less than one where it has to stay.) There are also concerted attempts to establish the mortality associated with COVID-19 by comparing countries differing mortality rates. If this is not possible for a given country, it can be estimated by calculating the “excess mortality” within a population over the period in question. From what I can see on-line, we are likely to find that the mortality associated with the disease is between 2% and 4%. This pursuit of such figures is not an academic exercise. The more accurate our understanding of the R values and the factors behind the differing mortality rates, the better equipped governments will be to make the important decisions about loosening lockdown measures. 

I am fascinated also – and horrified in equal measure – by President Trump’s unceasing accusations against China that the pandemic is the result of a leak – accidental or intentional – from a laboratory in Wuhan. He uses increasingly inflammatory language. His own intelligence agencies don’t believe this and have stated that the virus is most likely of natural origin. The UN Secretary General, Antonio Guterres, as politically deft as he is wise, has let us all know with well chosen words just how irresponsible it is to foment this spat at precisely the time that powerful nations should be leading the world in a coordinated response to the pandemic. Go, Toni!

Surgeon: “Well, I’ve got some good news and some bad news.” Patient: OK, Doc! Give me the bad news first.” Surgeon: “We’re going to have to amputate both your legs.” Patient: “Oh no! What’s the good news then?” Surgeon: “You see that gorgeous nurse over there…. I’ve got a date with her on Friday!”

Geneva, Thursday 30 April 2020

We had a quiz the other evening via zoom. It was us against two locked down nephews aged 10 and 13 years in the UK. We were beaten by unfair tactics. Each team had to come up with ten questions. We focused on wholesome subjects with educational merit such as: Who invented the steam engine? (“James Watt” they cried.) and: How many times does the International Space Station orbit Earth in a day? (“Sixteen!” they cried.) With them having answered nine of our ten questions correctly and us being reluctantly impressed, they put theirs to us. On which planet was Luke Skywalker born? (… Duuurh!) How many Star Wars spacecraft are made by Lego? (…… Uuuurmh!) Youngsters these days!

Heavy rain has meant that we have had to move the putting mat indoors.

My wife wins on the first play-off hole. The running total: me -19, she – 10.

Yesterday evening there was a loud bang in the kitchen. We ran through to find that Boris the sourdough starter had blown the lid off his jar; small tid-bits of sourdough were sprayed onto the wall and work surface. By quite some coincidence, his namesake’s son was born yesterday. Maybe this augured well for we made a couple of delicious small loaves from his discard today.

You’ll spot my temporary desk. I have been working on a different image-making project. I’m not sure if it’s a painting or a collage. Maybe it’s a collage of bits of my lockdown paintings. 

You may recognise bits of “Pigeon Love” from Day 23 of the Diary. This got chopped into squares and so we have “Pigeon Love Deconstructed coz The Boys Are Back in Town and Girls Just Wanna Have Fun.” 

South Korea and New Zealand have both reported zero new cases of COVID-19 in the last 24 hours. These hard won achievements will not be relinquished easily. Countries that have got on top of the pandemic cannot be far from declaring a ban on all visitors until a vaccine is widely available. We were hoping to reschedule our cancelled New Zealand holiday for December.

Hoping the readers of this Diary are well, safe and surviving the lockdown in good spirits.