You need to take a nap, i, er, Hunter down, and apologise to her.
Dinner date ruined over chess remark
Sort:
I dont believe that story
Jun 1, 2022
0
#44
Gymstar074600 wrote:
I dont believe that story
I know right!? It's unbelievable that some girl who seems to be so perfect could make such a careless, dare I say heartless, mistake
Jun 1, 2022
0
#45
btickler wrote:
michaelcausey7 wrote:
If you are actually legit, I'll give you a bit of advise. Paul Morphy never beat a woman at chess in his life. He always played them to a draw...it's ungentlemanly. Don't beat up on girls...don't be a douche.
Ugh. Get thee back to the 1800s.
My point was that if he likes this girl it might not be a good idea to wipe the floor with her every time they play chess. If he does, guess what? SHE QUITS PLAYING CHESS WITH HIM.
Jun 1, 2022
0
#46
WowThisIsWeird wrote:
michaelcausey7 wrote:
If you are actually legit, I'll give you a bit of advise. Paul Morphy never beat a woman at chess in his life. He always played them to a draw...it's ungentlemanly. Don't beat up on girls...don't be a douche.
I disagree. How is it ungentlemanly? That's like saying that you should just go easy on women because they can't bear to lose. That is not true at all. Take Judit Polgar for example. Considered the best female chess player in the world, she even beat Kasparov!
So being easy on Judit Polgar would be gentlemanly? Of course not! It would just be a waste of her time.
Treating women as if beating them would kill them or something like that is just sexist itself. Treat women like you would treat everyone else. Women are not less smart, so they don't need to be treated like little toddlers who would cry if they lost.
It's really silly that some people, to stop women from getting "offended", end up really offending women who are actually serious about things (in this case, chess).
We're not talking about Judit Polgar are we? In fact, we're talking about a girl who apparently doesn't know much about chess at all. He's the member of chess.com, not her. And I never said women were less smart...Just this one doesn't seem to be as good at chess as the OP.
Jun 1, 2022
0
#47
michaelcausey7 wrote:
WowThisIsWeird wrote:
michaelcausey7 wrote:
If you are actually legit, I'll give you a bit of advise. Paul Morphy never beat a woman at chess in his life. He always played them to a draw...it's ungentlemanly. Don't beat up on girls...don't be a douche.
I disagree. How is it ungentlemanly? That's like saying that you should just go easy on women because they can't bear to lose. That is not true at all. Take Judit Polgar for example. Considered the best female chess player in the world, she even beat Kasparov!
So being easy on Judit Polgar would be gentlemanly? Of course not! It would just be a waste of her time.
Treating women as if beating them would kill them or something like that is just sexist itself. Treat women like you would treat everyone else. Women are not less smart, so they don't need to be treated like little toddlers who would cry if they lost.
It's really silly that some people, to stop women from getting "offended", end up really offending women who are actually serious about things (in this case, chess).
We're not talking about Judit Polgar are we? In fact, we're talking about a girl who apparently doesn't know much about chess at all. He's the member of chess.com, not her. And I never said women were less smart...Just this one doesn't seem to be as good at chess as the OP.
"women were less smart..."
I think you mean, "women were fewer smart..."
Read a book buddy!!
@Jalex13, post #2-----this is the kind of forum done by someone who obviously did NOT want to get laid...presuming of course that the reported botched dinner date actually *happened*... :thinker
Sep 11, 2022
0
#49
What is this, "laid"? Does this happen when I beat a woman at chess?
it means to have sex, genius!! How can you be American and not even know this very basic term for intercourse?! How about "horizontal hokey-pokey"?? Or for you younger people, "Netflix and Chill"...!!!...Satisfying the Biological Urge is what I call it...has a ring of science to it; makes ot less colloquial. But I digress...and I Unfollow...(in other words, don't bother with a reply, idiot!)...
Lmao
JohnNapierSanDiego wrote:
michaelcausey7 wrote:
WowThisIsWeird wrote:
michaelcausey7 wrote:
If you are actually legit, I'll give you a bit of advise. Paul Morphy never beat a woman at chess in his life. He always played them to a draw...it's ungentlemanly. Don't beat up on girls...don't be a douche.
I disagree. How is it ungentlemanly? That's like saying that you should just go easy on women because they can't bear to lose. That is not true at all. Take Judit Polgar for example. Considered the best female chess player in the world, she even beat Kasparov!
So being easy on Judit Polgar would be gentlemanly? Of course not! It would just be a waste of her time.
Treating women as if beating them would kill them or something like that is just sexist itself. Treat women like you would treat everyone else. Women are not less smart, so they don't need to be treated like little toddlers who would cry if they lost.
It's really silly that some people, to stop women from getting "offended", end up really offending women who are actually serious about things (in this case, chess).
We're not talking about Judit Polgar are we? In fact, we're talking about a girl who apparently doesn't know much about chess at all. He's the member of chess.com, not her. And I never said women were less smart...Just this one doesn't seem to be as good at chess as the OP.
"women were less smart..."
I think you mean, "women were fewer smart..."
Read a book bud
Depends. If she's a beginner, maybe i would draw with queen. If she's at least medium, i just CHECKMATE (not the name of da gaem)
If you are actually legit, I'll give you a bit of advise. Paul Morphy never beat a woman at chess in his life. He always played them to a draw...it's ungentlemanly. Don't beat up on girls...don't be a douche.
If you're hanging out with a girl who can't lose a chess game without taking offence, they're not worth spending your time around anyways. What good are they for you if you can't even play a board game with them ?