Upgrade to Chess.com Premium!

Chess

Jump to forum:
 
23rd November 2007, 04:31pm
#1
by gtrajan
visakhapatnam India
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 26

Is chess is male chauvinist game? Here,King does not move much and when it is mated every thing is over.

23rd November 2007, 08:19pm
#2
by Charlie91
Philippines
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 870
I guess it's just the naming of the pieces.  A king may be renamed 'monarch' as you may have male and female monarchs.  Then the queen may have to be renamed, etc.  So...  let's just leave it at that.  I don't think there is chauvinism here.  That's my opinion.
23rd November 2007, 08:27pm
#3
by StacyBearden
New Caprica United States
Member Since: Jul 2007
Member Points: 900
It's good to be the King.
23rd November 2007, 08:29pm
#4
by itaibn
Toronto, Ontario Canada
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 366
If you think the king doesn't move much, you seriously have to study endgames.
23rd November 2007, 08:45pm
#5
by Chessroshi
Indianapolis United States
Member Since: Aug 2007
Member Points: 739
If you waste time thinking about such trivial crap, like sexism or racism in chess, you are bound to suck at playing. Stop being such a philosopher and just play chess, it is a GAME.
23rd November 2007, 08:47pm
#6
by SIXGUNS
Memphis United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 88
Chessroshi wrote: If you waste time thinking about such trivial crap, like sexism or racism in chess, you are bound to suck at playing. Stop being such a philosopher and just play chess, it is a GAME.

 Good point!!!!-SIX


24th November 2007, 04:01am
#7
by gtrajan
visakhapatnam India
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 26
Anyway, Somebody may think a game itself is a waste of time.The question is when king is more powerfull for a decision making, why it's movements should be restricted to one square?
24th November 2007, 11:00pm
#8
by RooksBailey
Long Island NY United States
Member Since: Nov 2007
Member Points: 653
gtrajan wrote:

Is chess is male chauvinist game? Here,King does not move much and when it is mated every thing is over.


This has less to do with chauvinism and more to do with war.  Chess is, after all, a wargame.  Let's face it: back in the ancient and medieval world, if you killed the opposing king, that usually ended the war!  Wink 

25th November 2007, 02:24pm
#9
by batgirl
United States
Member Since: Jun 2007
Member Points: 6206

Two comments:

 

1. "If you waste time thinking about such trivial crap, like sexism or racism in chess, you are bound to suck at playing" is completely non-sequitor.

 

2. Jodabeni - porn links are a no-no, even if followed by LOL.

 

 

25th November 2007, 02:25pm
#10
by JuliusH
Denton, TX United States
Member Since: Sep 2007
Member Points: 204

It's interesting to note (historically) that the queens used to just be allowed to move one square diagonally. This was during the middle ages. It wasn't until the late 15th century that it got it's new power. Other pieces moved differently a while back as well. I've read that the bishop could jump over pieces like the knight.

 I'll leave those juicy bits for people who like the cultural influence on chess.

Oh I'd like to add that Batgirl is still the reigning queen of chess history.
 

Add your comment:

Join Chess.com for free to add your comment! Already a member? Then login now to comment.