I haven’t read the book yet, but I heard of a new book critical of the feminist movement. It’s Ceasefire: Why Women and Men Must Join Forces to Achieve True Equality (Free Press), by Cathy Young, a reporter for the Boston Globe.
The message of the book is relevant to women who play poker. The message is that the feminist movement has moved from a movement aimed at equality to one aimed at giving women the upper hand in society. Young thinks that’s a bad thing. Whether you agree with that or not, it has some relevance to poker, where women are often seen moaning about a lack of equality in poker rather than using the situation to gain an advantage.
Women poker players can usually profit by adjusting their game to exploit the foibles of male opponents. Different kinds of men call for different approaches, sometimes the differences between male stereotypes can be subtle. Two different kinds of men are those that I call chauvinists and those I call macho.
Chauvinistic men who tend to think all women are weak, predictable, tight players and that women have good judgment. He’ll tend to try to be tricky when playing against women and he’ll tend to ignore any information he might be able to get from observation of a woman.
Macho men can’t stand to let a woman win or take control of the UFA betting. This kind of man can’t stand to lose, and especially can’t stand to lose to a woman. He’ll tend to develop an acute case of FPS trying to outplay an aggressive woman. He’s usually doomed.
Playing chauvinistic men.
In a previous article, I talked about playing to exploit a chauvinistic man. They tend to react to aggressive women with hyperaggression of their own when they fear their hand is second best and that’s an easily exploitable tendency.
Playing macho man
You should play against a macho player in a similar way that you’d play against a chauvinist, but you need to be more careful. The macho player is not likely to try to play …