Is the Queen actually a man?

Hi all!
I just wanted to share a theory with you and ask your opinions about it. Recently, I heard from an eastern european friend of mine that the Queen is actually a man, just like every other pieces on the board.
The story goes like this:
The pieces are originally named in persian, and the Queen has the name Wasir (Vezir, Vazir, Vasir, etc.), which quite well translates to Counsellor or Minister. This implies that the piece is actually a man, because if we think about the time period that the game was most likely be invented in, well, I don't think that women had any political status and importance at all (correct me if I'm wrong).
According to my friend, the story goes like this:
Around the time before the Crusades, the game was brought to Europe, and a monk was asked to translate the pieces' name to Latin (the fact that we call the originally named 'elephant' 'bishop' supports this theory).
Since this monk didn't know persian/arabic that well (or maybe it was a political reason), he named the originally named Wasir 'Regina', which means Queen.
Maybe he thought if there's a King, there must be a Queen on his side? Who knows.

Anyhow, there are two thoughts that may support the theory that the Queen piece is actually a man.
1. Around the time the game was most likely created, why would they give a woman such power? We all know women didn't have political positions, so it seems very unlikely to make the most powerful piece a woman.
2. Artistic license, a subtle message. We all know this saying in some form: 'It is not the king that truly rules, but the one who's giving the advices'.

In a few languages, they still call this piece a man:
- Arabic : Vizier  و وزير
- Hindi: वज़ीर (Minister)
- Hungarian: Vezér (Chief, Leader [of an army])
- Indonesian: Menteri (Minister, Vizier)
- Polish: Hetman (it was the highest military rank)
- Thai: ตรี/มนตรี (Minister, Counselor)
- Urdu:  (Minister) وزیر

So, what do you think?
Is the Queen actually a man? Was it truly but a mistranslation?

'King', 'queen', 'bishop', 'knight', 'castle' and so on simply reflect the feudalistic conditions of the society which adopted chess.

Who the f cares?  He, She, It, whatever, has been the strongest piece on the chess board since 1475, and the weakest prior to that!

And watcha, it's a Rook, not a Castle.  Castle is the act of moving the King two squares and bringing the Rook to the other side of the King.

That's my point: even the action of swapping the rook and the king had to be called after some institution central to feudalism. Not only 'castles' but also 'castle position'. The rook somehow maintained its original form ('rokh' in persian).

Well, what if you are?  Your point?  There are many on this site, and roughly 50% of the world is women.

That's like saying "What if you're white?" or "What if you're Jewish?" or "What if you're homosexual?" or "What if you're wearing red today?"

This entire thread is absolutely pointless!  The bunch of you are just talking to talk, and common sense has just gone completely out the window.

You have made a good point when pointing out pointless talk.

Pointing out pointless talk is not pointless.

How did you know I was wearing red today?

Are you stalking me?

lol!!!!!!!

Yes and he's called Freddie.

Did she make a little speech then?

Did she try to make you say when?

I'm just going to say this to tick you off. There's actually 102 men for every 100 woman :P

The Queen is actually much shorter than we've been led to believe. Probably no taller than a pawn.

You have failed to tick me off! 

Keep in mind I said "roughly" 50%, not "exactly" 50%!

Oh, and it's every 100 women, not 100 woman!  Great job with the English there, NOT!

And for those of you keeping record:  I am White, but I'm not Jewish, Homo, or Wearing Red today!  And for those of you thinking I'm stalking, just like the fine print of any book would say, any items that happen to fit your description are strictly by chance, and have nothing to do with the plot of the post.

GnrfFrtzl, that was very interesting piece of info. Thank you. I had never considered that before.

I don't want to hijack your thread, but please allow me to post one more historic question.

All piece moves make sense even those that seem irregular at first sight. Ex, at some point chess was accelerated and that is why the pawns can move 2 squares from their original position, but e.p. is still viable because that special move is 2 consecutive regular one-square moves and not a 2-square move. Similarly, while castling the King may not go over a threatened square because he 's making consecutive moves.

The thing that I haven't been able tofind  a logical explanation to is the pawn promotion. Pawns when reaching the opposite 'camp' should be able to free one of the captured pieces and not magically transform into any piece leading to the absurb image of 2 queens, 3 rooks etc. For the very practical reason that sets do not have extra pieces this promotion irregularity is hard to believe that appeared without a reasoning.

Anyone have any idea?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Promotion_(chess)#History_of_the_rule

Many Queens are.

C'mon, we all see that lazy king (masculine) & a dynamic Queen (feminine).  it's a stereotype as old as chess itself & like all good stereotypes, it has some truth.  I quite like the way the king can 'sneak' into a game as a 'playing' piece.  It seems He's often over-looked as a powerful player.

Pal, a queen is a lady. Men perform better when a lady is watching.

...watching?  You mean playing.