Fide sparks anger for ‘misogynistic’ deal - Chess Forums - Page 13

lighthouse · 2021-10-01T17:26:36-07:00

https://www.theguardian.com/sport/2021/oct/01/fide-sparks-anger-with-gross-breast-enlargement-sponsor-for-womens-chess Chess governing body derided for ‘misogynistic’ deal Just came across this in the guardian newpaper ! For a sport that has struggled to attract female players, the news that chess h

allgoodpeople23

Oct 6, 2021

0

#241

batgirl wrote:

@allgoodpeople23 -- are you a Yes-man?

Oh definitely. Also my favorite chess-themed song of all time!

PRWoodpusher

Oct 6, 2021

0

#242

llama47 wrote:

batgirl wrote:

DjVortex wrote:

And once again they don't care what the word "misogynist" actually means. They just throw it around because of its connotations, rather than whether its meaning actually fits or not.

I pretty much agree. I think this is more along the lines of objectifying women than some disdain for the ladies.. I really don't think people use the term misogynistic because they don't know the meaning since the meaning is pretty clear and well known., or because they're attempting some verbal legerdemain, but more likely because they can't think of a word that correctly fits what they're trying to express so they grab the nearest one available. So I believe it's more an error of convenience than one of intent of ignorance.

Looking at the article for their source

However, several female players, speaking to the popular site Lichess, believe the move is blunder. “Shouldn’t chess – a game reliant on brains rather than breasts – be distancing itself from that kind of reductive and misogynistic line of thinking?” one anonymous female player said.

In other words the reporter read it on the lichess forums. This seems extremely lazy. Am I the only one annoyed that they're pretending this is news? How much is this journalist paid?

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

allgoodpeople23

Oct 6, 2021

0

#243

PRWoodpusher wrote:

llama47 wrote:

batgirl wrote:

DjVortex wrote:

And once again they don't care what the word "misogynist" actually means. They just throw it around because of its connotations, rather than whether its meaning actually fits or not.

I pretty much agree. I think this is more along the lines of objectifying women than some disdain for the ladies.. I really don't think people use the term misogynistic because they don't know the meaning since the meaning is pretty clear and well known., or because they're attempting some verbal legerdemain, but more likely because they can't think of a word that correctly fits what they're trying to express so they grab the nearest one available. So I believe it's more an error of convenience than one of intent of ignorance.

Looking at the article for their source

However, several female players, speaking to the popular site Lichess, believe the move is blunder. “Shouldn’t chess – a game reliant on brains rather than breasts – be distancing itself from that kind of reductive and misogynistic line of thinking?” one anonymous female player said.

In other words the reporter read it on the lichess forums. This seems extremely lazy. Am I the only one annoyed that they're pretending this is news? How much is this journalist paid?

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

The obvious possible answer: because the anonymous poster identified themselves as female?

IMKeto

Oct 6, 2021

0

#244

batgirl wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

batgirl wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

batgirl wrote:

IMBacon wrote:

For the last couple of months i get a stationary bike at the gym

I like a mobile bike on a country road.

Who wouldnt

Do you mean Pete Townsend or all the Who?

Well I said "Who" and not "The Who".

You also wrote "wouldnt" not "wouldn't," so Who knows?

Spell check and I had a falling out awhile back, and im a walking target for grammar nazis.

jetoba

Oct 6, 2021

0

#245

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

PRWoodpusher wrote:

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

The obvious possible answer: because the anonymous poster identified themselves as female?

That would answer the question "How would they think they knew". To actually know would require verifying that the anonymous person identifying as female actually was female (I have heard a vague rumor that people sometimes pretend to be of a different gender when creating an account).

llama47

Oct 6, 2021

0

#246

TCSPlayer wrote:

, which minority?

The majority of people in the US think COVID is real, that vaccines are good, and masks are good.

A minority of people in the US boof livestock dewormer and inject bleach.

Unfortunately, this is not killing them quickly enough.

llama47

Oct 6, 2021

0

#247

PRWoodpusher wrote:

llama47 wrote:

batgirl wrote:

DjVortex wrote:

And once again they don't care what the word "misogynist" actually means. They just throw it around because of its connotations, rather than whether its meaning actually fits or not.

I pretty much agree. I think this is more along the lines of objectifying women than some disdain for the ladies.. I really don't think people use the term misogynistic because they don't know the meaning since the meaning is pretty clear and well known., or because they're attempting some verbal legerdemain, but more likely because they can't think of a word that correctly fits what they're trying to express so they grab the nearest one available. So I believe it's more an error of convenience than one of intent of ignorance.

Looking at the article for their source

However, several female players, speaking to the popular site Lichess, believe the move is blunder. “Shouldn’t chess – a game reliant on brains rather than breasts – be distancing itself from that kind of reductive and misogynistic line of thinking?” one anonymous female player said.

In other words the reporter read it on the lichess forums. This seems extremely lazy. Am I the only one annoyed that they're pretending this is news? How much is this journalist paid?

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

They don't know, but for the sake of the article it's convenient to say the source is female.

allgoodpeople23

Oct 6, 2021

0

#248

jetoba wrote:

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

PRWoodpusher wrote:

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

The obvious possible answer: because the anonymous poster identified themselves as female?

That would answer the question "How would they think they knew". To actually know would require verifying that the anonymous person identifying as female actually was female (I have heard a vague rumor that people sometimes pretend to be of a different gender when creating an account).

Well, let me ask you this: how does one "verify" that a person "actually" is female, even if the person is standing in front of them?

IsraeliGal

Oct 6, 2021

0

#249

You can pretty reliable verify such things just by looking at bone structure, size, frame, etc.

It's really not that difficult, despite how feminine some men can appear these days. The legs are a big give away if the face isnt obvious enough lol

allgoodpeople23

Oct 6, 2021

0

#250

Soniasthetics wrote:

You can pretty reliable verify such things just by looking at bone structure, size, frame, etc.

It's really not that difficult, despite how feminine some men can appear these days. The legs are a big give away if the face isnt obvious enough lol

Sorry to be all scientific and all, but how are you measuring the reliability of your bone structure, size, frame, etc. methods for determining a person's gender?

IsraeliGal

Oct 6, 2021

0

#251

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

Soniasthetics wrote:

You can pretty reliable verify such things just by looking at bone structure, size, frame, etc.

It's really not that difficult, despite how feminine some men can appear these days. The legs are a big give away if the face isnt obvious enough lol

Sorry to be all scientific and all, but how are you measuring the reliability of your bone structure, size, frame, etc. methods for determining a person's gender?

well for example, men have much more sharper features than women when it comes to the face, but a man could easily have surgery to remedy that. However this applies to other parts of the body. I'm not an expert on the human body, but if you know the general differences, like for example women having naturally higher body fat, less broad shoulders, less muscle, no adams apple, etc, then you can pretty much get their gender right every time.

For the average person, you might struggle on certain people, depending on how much effort they put into their appearance, but theres always signs.

Pulpofeira

Oct 6, 2021

0

#252

Could have been a phone call.

IsraeliGal

Oct 7, 2021

0

#253

jesus

TCSPlayer

Oct 7, 2021

0

#254

, I asked you how do you count? What is your source telling majority think masks are good?

Also if majority thinks eating shiit is good does it mean it is good?

TCSPlayer

Oct 7, 2021

0

#255

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

jetoba wrote:

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

PRWoodpusher wrote:

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

The obvious possible answer: because the anonymous poster identified themselves as female?

That would answer the question "How would they think they knew". To actually know would require verifying that the anonymous person identifying as female actually was female (I have heard a vague rumor that people sometimes pretend to be of a different gender when creating an account).

Well, let me ask you this: how does one "verify" that a person "actually" is female, even if the person is standing in front of them?

A grown-up person who lived many years in human communities asks this. I think even dogs, apes, and generally, the majority of animals have the capability to distinguish men from women with very high precision.

allgoodpeople23

Oct 7, 2021

0

#256

TCSPlayer wrote:

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

jetoba wrote:

allgoodpeople23 wrote:

PRWoodpusher wrote:

so they are quoting an anonymous poster, yet they state the poster is female?

How would they know?

The obvious possible answer: because the anonymous poster identified themselves as female?

That would answer the question "How would they think they knew". To actually know would require verifying that the anonymous person identifying as female actually was female (I have heard a vague rumor that people sometimes pretend to be of a different gender when creating an account).

Well, let me ask you this: how does one "verify" that a person "actually" is female, even if the person is standing in front of them?

A grown-up person who lived many years in human communities asks this. I think even dogs, apes, and generally, the majority of animals have the capability to distinguish men from women with very high precision.

You're just giving me your opinion, your belief. Focus. I was asking how one KNOWS one's belief that visual information is reliable in determining birth gender. Jeez, these days everybody seems to think that because they believe something is so, that makes it so.

allgoodpeople23

Oct 7, 2021

0

#257

rich wrote:

BishopWhacker2 wrote:

Typical FIDE. But you gotta admit, women and chess? Hahahahahahahahahha

But you're rating level is awful. I bet I could beat you with my a pawn removed. No f pawn removing it's to unsound, and at least I can mobilize my a1 Rook into the game faster.

It's a fair point. You'd think somebody who casts aspersions regarding women and chess would at least be good himself.

ChampoftheBepoCamp

Oct 7, 2021

0

#258

Soniasthetics wrote:

jesus

Flying Spaghetti Monster!

ChampoftheBepoCamp

Oct 7, 2021

0

#259

Chess is not for wo/men anyhow you got better things to do!

llama47

Oct 7, 2021

0

#260

TCSPlayer wrote:

, I asked you how do you count? What is your source telling majority think masks are good?

Also if majority thinks eating shiit is good does it mean it is good?

This is not a serious line of questioning, so it's hard to respond to you seriously.

But for example, if a majority believes something then that doesn't prove something is true.

It also doesn't prove it's not true. A lot of right wing stuff in the US is just as thoughtless in its reactionary stances... a perfect example in the US being that liberals took COVID seriously, and for no other reason than that, conservatives decided to pretend it was a hoax.

And in case that wasn't clear enough for you... pretending something is a conspiracy or hoax because a lot of people believe it, or because you saw it on TV, is just as dumb as pretending something is true for those reasons.