Funny , just like the original question.
Is chess racist?
Sort:
Jul 12, 2010
0
#23
what did you even post this for? if you dont want to play, just dont play!
Jul 12, 2010
0
#24
Anoia wrote:
I'm never going to play chess again!
I just realized that, in addition to it being racist and sexist, it discriminates against non-Catholics! I mean, come on... "bishops?"
On that note, what is that bishop doing to that young pawn?
Actually historically the Bishop is supposed to be an elephant, but at some time in Western chess, the tusks were mistaken for a Bishop's mitre and the name stuck. That is why some figurative chess pieces have elephants instead of bishops.
Anyway if the Bishop were doing what you infer to that pawn, I would rather have it done to me by a bishop than by an elephant!...
Jul 12, 2010
0
#25
I don't think chess is rascist. the pieces on the board aren't human.
we play by the rules.
it would be a shame if suddenly we have to change the change pieces to blue and red because someone did put something wrong into the chess.
it may be a stupid question but if the question is out there we risk one day that the color of the pieces change.
therefore It's important to answer him in a way he can understand that chess isn't rascist. I think the chess community well come players of all nations white or black.
I've seen snack change name because someone thought the name was rascist. I thought the arguments used was stupic but I have to respect not to use the name anymore.
Perhaps towards the end when the pawns race towards the 8th rank.
bobbyDK wrote:
I've seen snack change name because someone thought the name was rascist. I thought the arguments used was stupic but I have to respect not to use the name anymore.
Personally, I think it's more important to stand up to political correctness and extreme word play sensitivity than to respect it or abide by it. I don't have to do anything, regardless of what the nitwits think is off color. Also I think that adults have already learned how to speak and write, and interpret things and actions. I have no need to have an other adult correct me and tell me how to do those things or think about those things, especially on politically motivated grounds, or even "progressive" grounds. It's jackboot strides in reverse (or red-shirt strides forward maybe) to keep making concessions. It's also cultural destruction. Discussion is one thing. Left-Wing arm twisting is another. "Resistance is not futile". So resist!
henri5 wrote:
Actually historically the Bishop is supposed to be an elephant, but at some time in Western chess, the tusks were mistaken for a Bishop's mitre and the name stuck. That is why some figurative chess pieces have elephants instead of bishops....
In India the rook is called hathi (elephant) and bishop is called oont (camel).
Chess was invented in India and the name given to the game was "chaturang" which became shatranj by the time it reached Arab land and became chess via Egypt, Europe over a period of centuries.
In Indian epics and stories the phrase "chaturangi sena" is common which transalates into an army with 4 different type of forces - elephants (rook), Horses (knight), oont (camels) and paidal (soldiers on foot - pawns).
According to the history in Wikipedia, the first move for White did not become standardized until the latter part of the 19th century.
xbigboy wrote:
Purple is red + blue, or communists at the bottom of the sea
Lol
yes chess is racist cause white goes first and white always has the advantage!
RACISM FTW.
just kidding.. its a pretty pathetic question.
Well, black is fighting for equality...
How can chess be racist? Because the light color pieces and squares are called White and the dark color pieces and squares Black? At the beginning of the game, the forces are exactly balanced. To start the game, one side has to make the first move, then the other side, alternating until the end of the game.
The rules say White makes the first move. I am going to assume that White was chosen because of a religious or spiritual bias of the era when chess was first created: White represented the 'light' side of man. His good, honest, respectful, creative, and altruistic nature. Black represented the 'dark' side of man: greed, lust, selfishness, distrustful, and destructive. Basically, White was the side of good and Black was the side of evil. I believe it is a tenant of human psychology that every human being thinks of themselves as on the side of right.
As an aside, has anyone else noticed that books on trying to teach the chess openings usually have White as the side that is to be winning?
Another thought. If White moving first is racist, what about the situation where Black has the first move of the game? What is the difference? (In chess.) As I said above, both sides are exactly balanced. Any move, by either side, upsets that balance. The only way to perserve that balance is for either side NOT to move.
jona004 wrote:
Alot of my friends when i tell them i play chess, tell me that chess is racist because the white pieces always go first. They reckon it should be decided on the toss of a coin. What do others think?
A lot of your friends need to get some common sense, and find something more intelligent to think about. The piece color has nothing to do with race. Next they would be screaming about the white square always being on the right.
Correction; on the far right. Because that's just how whitey rolls.
theoreticalboy wrote:
Correction; on the far right. Because that's just how whitey rolls.
Never heard of white communists ? 
defrancis7 wrote:
...
The rules say White makes the first move. I am going to assume that White was chosen because of a religious or spiritual bias of the era when chess was first created: White represented the 'light' side of man. His good, honest, respectful, creative, and altruistic nature. Black represented the 'dark' side of man: greed, lust, selfishness, distrustful, and destructive. Basically, White was the side of good and Black was the side of evil. I believe it is a tenant of human psychology that every human being thinks of themselves as on the side of right.
...
By the logic of the OP's "friends", doesn't that just make that spiritual bias racist?
You're saying they're not all Chinese?
jona004 wrote:
Alot of my friends when i tell them i play chess, tell me that chess is racist because the white piecesomes always go first. They reckon it should be decided on the toss of a coin. What do others think?
finally some one else thought of that!
But when slavery was there didnt the white people start it
