"Your claim that people have explained the difference between men and women in chess by statistics is not admissible because it doesn't make sense."
Sure it makes sense. I have seen people say things like "The difference between men and women is just a matter of statistics." That's literally all I was saying. I was talking about claims I have seen people make. I didn't say I agreed with them.
"This is a matter of substance and not semantics."
Yet, you put a very strong focus on the semantics of the words "explain" and "indicate," despite having very little to do with the points being discussed as a whole. So, I'm not sure how much you believe that statement.
Nope, that doesn't make sense and the difference between explain and indicate are not semantics. Maybe if you simmered down and got your emotions under control you'd have the strength to learn something
I mean, it's not really emotional to respond to your points Then I guess you're emotional, too, by that logic. But, not much sense in this discussion, perhaps, as I'm not sure how I could prove to you what my emotions are.
But onto the rest of your post: yes, I would very much say that we were discussing semantics when it came to "explain" and "indicate." To show me how one could explain without indicating or vice versa, that all depends on what those words mean and in which situations they apply or don't apply, etc. That's about as semantics-heavy as you can expect a typical conversation to get
It is emotional to become upset, defensive and passive aggressive. If you lose your composure, interest or happiness so easily perhaps chess and forums are not for you. If you want to become a healthier person that can handle either, I have shown all of the virtues you lack and you can take some cues.
Again, I stopped reading at "It isn't emotional to respond to your ..." That was enough to see you didn't get over it or yourself just yet.
We seem to disagree as to whether saying something is not emotional means that you're emotional 
Again, though, there is not much I can offer to this point, as I can't prove to you what my emotions are. I see you have your own ideas on how to detect emotion from posts -- fair enough, I have mine. Even as someone who likes to dissect things and argue about points, I see very little progress that can be made on the discussion of this issue. And trust me, that's saying something! I can argue about just about anything
Oh my, TheTaleOfWob. You definitely make these discussions less enjoyable. Not sure what you get out of that? But, of course, it's a public forum, and people have freedom, so I put up with it, even though I don't approve of your condescending approach. I still like to discuss, and ultimately get enjoyment from being here oftentimes. In fact, that's kind of why I haven't been here in a while I get sucked in too much. It's a lot of fun for some reason, but it can suck time like an addiction. Enjoy being able to bash me straight to my face while you can, is perhaps your logic
Clearly you weren't too concerned with the discussion, you're moaning about me and that I make them less enjoyable? I stopped reading there, clearly you are just in tantrum mode and so I bid you goodbye. If you want to be more mature and seek edification, you can probably win my help but you're gonna have to show that you're ready to be a big boy and at least *try* to amount to and contribute something good.
Well, actually, it's pretty easy to simultaneously state what I think of your behavior and also be interested in the discussion. After all, I have still responded to some of your intellectual points, so I have clearly done both. I mean, no one would enjoy it if during nearly every post, the person made an insult to add to it. Personally, I found it interesting to comment on what I think of that behavior of yours. I also think the topic of women and chess is interesting, hence, I've been commenting on that too.
It's not either or
I'm interested in speaking about both of these dynamics to our conversation 