It is worth exploring this question at more length because it places in context the trials that a woman player has in competing in the chess world today. Curiously, there has been no allowance for opportunity and equal learning. By this he means that male players get some satisfaction at being able to overcome the king or father figures, where the father figure also has a phallic symbolism. By this sort of reasoning, it is also logical that a woman should not find chess attractive, nor should she perform particularly well. However, there is a simpler theory.
Chess is a game of conflict, a game which thrives on aggression.
One player is trying to overrun the other and immobolize the opposing king. From time immemorial, the male has been the hunter and the fighter, and aggression has been bred into the male of the race. The accepted role for the female has been the homemaker. Thus, in the past, when women were not encouraged to take an aggressive role in society, the background of experience was not available to them in many spheres, chess being one. More reasonable men than Fine have different ideas, some which are so tenuous that they are difficult to counter.