Invisible pieces

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
John Moore
Posts: 2062
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by John Moore » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:08 pm

Let us say, a very unfortunate turn of phrase. I rather wish Nigel hadn't reposted this journalese.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2409
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:16 pm

Hi Justin,

It's just a rant but some unknown person. How can the chess community help by quoting an unnamed source.
If the lass had added her name and stood by her convictions things would get done and some male players
would start to feel very uncomfortable and guilty. Some of these fools may even think what they are up to is harmless banter.

Staying anonymous won't do anything to curb what is apparently happening, in fact you could say it may encourage it.
It's a shame but perhaps the best solution is as the poster suggests use a non-female nik on the net.

Or start up, or threaten to start up (that will work) a female only or invite only chess site with, like here, no niks.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8255
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:20 pm

Woman afraid of violence, man tells her how not to worry about it, it really ought to be possible to see how unpleasant that is
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2409
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:36 pm

...and who is this woman who is rightly afraid of violence, and who suggested she ignore it.

Name them, report them. I hope she tells her friends who they are and lets these people who she thinks will do her harm
know that others know about them. What more can anyone do or suggest? It's apparently from some woman somewhere.
As I said she should not feel the need to stay anonymous, if she does feel threatened then it's a police matter, not for some chess site.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8255
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:42 pm

Geoff Chandler wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:36 pm
As I said she should not feel the need to stay anonymous
You know what "mansplaining" is Geoff? (But really, Geoff, shut up. Know when you've said too much eh.)
Last edited by JustinHorton on Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:44 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2409
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:43 pm

Phew Nigel, a wee bit of editing to put a space here and there would have help these tired eyes.

No doubt that piece will be cherry picked and bits taken out of context.

I agree there should be no such thing as a female only prizes in open events.
Everyone accepts women are equal to men in playing ability so why the female only prize.
The claim it attracts more women to the game is not valid, it attracts the best female players
knowing they can come nowhere near the top 10 places and yet walk away with a pocket full of cash.

This bit caught me.

"The point is not that women are incapable of playing good chess - because clearly some
of them can - rather that they are less likely to do so, on average."

it carries some weight that one. Of course you could have added that Judit Polgar only became better by not
playing in women's tournaments because the female opposition would hinder and not help her development.
Female players would not be a sufficient challenge to her.

Of course that would have attracted more howls of disbelief and despair so it is just as well you never said it.

Judit said it!

"I could never have reached those heights if I had only been interested in winning women’s titles.
In fact, I was only a teenager when I last participated in a women’s tournament – representing Hungary,
with my older sisters Zsúzsa and Zsófia as my teammates, in the 1990 Women’s Chess Olympiad. It was great fun,
but the chess itself wasn’t very challenging.

I always knew that in order to become the strongest player I could, I had to play against the strongest
possible opposition. Playing only among women would not have helped my development"

The Guardian, 30th November 2019.

Good Luck.
Last edited by Geoff Chandler on Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:26 pm, edited 1 time in total.

NickFaulks
Posts: 6138
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:57 pm

Perhaps I am the only person here who had not previously read Nigel's original article, to check whether he actually said the things he was reported to have said, but just in case here it is.

https://en.chessbase.com/post/vive-la-d ... VK0_dQgcDY
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

Geoff Chandler
Posts: 2409
Joined: Mon Jul 06, 2009 1:36 pm
Location: Under Cover
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Fri Dec 18, 2020 8:01 pm

Hi Justin,

mansplaining - if it reads that way it's not meant that way. (in fact it does not read that way at all.)

I'm showing empathy. If you disagree, then you disagree.

We are like the those two experts disagreeing....'cept I'm right because I wrote it.
(remember your earlier bit 'because they say so' I just said so. I must be right!)

NickFaulks
Posts: 6138
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:23 pm

JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:20 pm
Woman afraid of violence
The actual quote is

"Of course it’s complicated, though, evidenced by the fact I’m writing this anonymously. I would quite genuinely fear for my safety if I wrote this under my username. That, in itself, is indicative of a huge problem, and I hope that if nothing else, you internalise the fact that I, and all the female chess players I’ve spoken to about this article, thought that there was a non-zero chance that I’d end up dead in a ditch if I used my name. It’s very easy to dismiss this as baseless paranoia"

So, every female chess player believes that, if they mentioned that an ( unidentified ) octogenarian male opponent had made a lewd remark, they might end up dead in a ditch. Does anyone know a female player who believes that? I don't think I do.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

Tim Spanton
Posts: 822
Joined: Thu May 01, 2008 11:35 am

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Tim Spanton » Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:30 pm

NickFaulks wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:23 pm
JustinHorton wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 7:20 pm
Woman afraid of violence
The actual quote is

"Of course it’s complicated, though, evidenced by the fact I’m writing this anonymously. I would quite genuinely fear for my safety if I wrote this under my username. That, in itself, is indicative of a huge problem, and I hope that if nothing else, you internalise the fact that I, and all the female chess players I’ve spoken to about this article, thought that there was a non-zero chance that I’d end up dead in a ditch if I used my name. It’s very easy to dismiss this as baseless paranoia"

So, every female chess player believes that, if they mentioned that an ( unidentified ) octogenarian male opponent had made a lewd remark, they might end up dead in a ditch. Does anyone know a female player who believes that? I don't think I do.
Perhaps they are fearful of the consequences of taking you into their confidence

NickFaulks
Posts: 6138
Joined: Sat Jan 02, 2010 1:28 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by NickFaulks » Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:36 pm

Tim Spanton wrote:
Fri Dec 18, 2020 9:30 pm
Perhaps they are fearful of the consequences of taking you into their confidence
I suppose that must be it.
If you want a picture of the future, imagine a boot stamping on a human face — forever.

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8255
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:29 pm

Men laughing at women's fear of male violence, all very healthy
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
JustinHorton
Posts: 8255
Joined: Mon Aug 04, 2008 10:06 am
Location: Somewhere you're not

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by JustinHorton » Fri Dec 18, 2020 10:32 pm

Women who say things that displease men get threatened with violence on social media. That's a fact. Don't belittle it, don't belittle women's experience, don't belittle women's fears.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

Roger Lancaster
Posts: 1074
Joined: Tue Mar 17, 2015 2:44 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Roger Lancaster » Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:58 am

The fear that men in general are violent towards women might be irrational but the fear that any given man might be violent is rational - in the same sense that avoidance of all other humans in the belief that they are all infected with corona virus might be irrational but avoidance in the belief that any given individual might be infected is rational. The fact that the individual in question is not violent/infected, as the case may be, is neither here nor there.

Brian Egdell
Posts: 17
Joined: Sun Apr 15, 2018 2:38 pm
Location: The Netherlands

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Brian Egdell » Sat Dec 19, 2020 10:13 am

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 9:58 am
The fear that men in general are violent towards women might be irrational but the fear that any given man might be violent is rational - in the same sense that avoidance of all other humans in the belief that they are all infected with corona virus might be irrational but avoidance in the belief that any given individual might be infected is rational. The fact that the individual in question is not violent/infected, as the case may be, is neither here nor there.
Yes, and violence is the extreme end of a very unpleasant scale of intimidation.

When I first read the article linked by Justin Horton at the start of the thread, I was shocked and saddened. For just a moment I thought: maybe some women here in the English Chess Forum might talk frankly about their own experiences too in this thread. But I quickly told myself not to be silly. This forum does not allow anonymity, and how likely is it that one of the many women players who are registered here is going to put her head above the parapet in this male dominated environment and get shouted down by those who can't see what the problem is.

If we're not victims ourselves, the best thing we can do is listen.

Post Reply