Invisible pieces

Discuss anything you like about chess related matters in this forum.
Post Reply
Kevin Thurlow
Posts: 4196
Joined: Wed Apr 30, 2008 12:28 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Kevin Thurlow » Sat Dec 19, 2020 10:28 am

"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."

Quite - their silence is completely understandable.

But whatever anyone thinks, they do not have the right to shout down people who disagree with them.

John McKenna
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by John McKenna » Sat Dec 19, 2020 10:47 am

:arrow: "... 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."

Right here, very early on, at the start of the pandemic I was pilloried by certain individuals - who shall remain nameless (and clueless) - for saying I would consider avoiding, on a case by case basis, " any given individual" of Chinese ethnicity.

A rational discussion of controversial subjects is just not possible with certain individuals who constantly post here in an attempt to "shut up" those whose statements they disagree with.

Thus do they try to remake the world in their image - as every misguided missionary has done since the beginning of human discourse.
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

User avatar
Gerard Killoran
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Gerard Killoran » Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:02 pm

Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that discriminating against people on the basis of their ethnicity is racism?

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

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Roger Lancaster » Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:26 pm

Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that, in this country, it is increasingly difficult to have a rational discussion about race without one party to the discussion calling the other "racist"? Much the same applies to sexism which I believe was the topic here.

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

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:43 pm

Hi Justin,

I was advised to read the forum posts at that site where the article is posted.

NOW I understand the need for anonymity, it's not for fear of being found 'dead in a ditch.'
but the anonymous needless slagging they would receive.

https://lichess.org/forum/general-chess ... ?page=2#12

People are very brave with their words and views when hiding behind a nickname,
there you have the unknown being flamed by the unknown, it all rather sad.

They could have posted it here, without getting blasted, the no nickname policy here stops all that.
Recall Sabrina posted something along similar lines a few years back. That was discussed in a fairly
reasonable and civil manner. Of course differing opinions appeared, but that is what an open forum is for.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5593#p117241

There again not posting here attracted the, thankfully what appears to be a minority, response
the author was mentioning and fully expecting, so I guess that point was proved.

Simon Rogers
Posts: 1021
Joined: Tue Apr 21, 2020 4:30 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Simon Rogers » Sat Dec 19, 2020 3:01 pm

Thanks Geoff for posting the Sabrina link.
I have read the thread.
I didn't know anything about this as I only started to read forum posts last year. I was wandering why Sabrina left chess suddenly.
A terrible and heartbreaking story. A great shame she left Chess in such a way.
I met Sabrina along with Jovanka at the British Chess Championships in Sheffield 2011.
Two very pleasant people. I enjoyed watching the Sabrina coaching sessions with the Juniors at Sheffield and learnt a lot from her, which I have used when teaching the children at Cleveleys. Which I will never forget.
At our junior club we have about a 50/50 split of males and females and a very cosmopolitan International club.
We also have a couple of female helpers in their 20s.
I understand Sabrina has a successful career now away from Chess.
The problem is the bullies have won and British Chess and especially women's Chess has lost a great asset.
Last edited by Simon Rogers on Sat Dec 19, 2020 5:31 pm, edited 1 time in total.

John McKenna
Posts: 4393
Joined: Tue May 17, 2011 2:02 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by John McKenna » Sat Dec 19, 2020 3:17 pm

Recall Sabrina posted something along similar lines a few years back. That was discussed in a fairly
reasonable and civil manner. Of course differing opinions appeared, but that is what an open forum is for.

viewtopic.php?f=2&t=5593#p117241
Joking apart, the following can be found in there -

"You may have a view. It is your idea that you are thereby speaking for the whole country that strikes me as a bit wrong "

To which a typically dismissive reply was posted -

"Yawn end of sub topic"

And,

"Since the moderators are out in force today they ought really to delete the previous two pages of this topic (including my post) which seems relatively important and is quickly being derailed before it has been properly discussed."

One contribution reads -

"Carl also needs to invite those people criticised to defend themselves if they wish to do so (it's worth noting that the director who comes off worst in Sabrina's events does contribute to this forum but rises above the mudslinging)."

Another poster adds this complaint -

"Carl, I just want to add: I can't help but feel victimised once again, that you moderated my post, but not those that have slagged me off. It shows a double standard on your moderation part and implies that what they have to say is more important than what I have to say. The way that you treat people differently, when you pick and choose to, reminds me of something.... that's it - you should work for the ECF!"

A folliow up -

"I don't want prolong this thread as I don't think it will do anyone any favours. However as I was the person who made the `other side of the story` comment I'd like to reply... Some things Sabrina says surprise me slightly. Others (particularly ageist, racist attitudes within chess) do not surprise me at all."

A gentle chiding was called for -

"... suggest you might have a quiet word with these two people, `off aire` and lets see if some kind of amicable peace can be restored.
Can we please have just a semblence of goodwill and certeousy here...."

A lamentation -

"... I've no idea how one continues from here, infact I don't think it should continue. Wounds will be inflicted that will never heal..." (Geoff Chandler)

Need I say more?

Well, yes - some of the clueless do not understand the actions and arguments of others because they have redefined words to mean exactly, and exclusively, what they want them to mean and they try to impose their definitions, and agendas, on every other person who they interact with. And, they cannot and will not be reasoned with in their terminal decline.
To find a for(u)m that accommodates the mess, that is the task of the artist now. (Samuel Beckett)

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

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Geoff Chandler » Sat Dec 19, 2020 3:42 pm

HI John,

Yes: "... Wounds will be inflicted that will never heal..."

I've noticed if people fall out on a forum then it can years to get them back on civil talking terms again. (if ever)

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

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by JustinHorton » Sat Dec 19, 2020 3:46 pm

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:26 pm
Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that, in this country, it is increasingly difficult to have a rational discussion about race without one party to the discussion calling the other "racist"?
Guess that depends what you mean by "rational discussion" Roger.

Anyway, just to point out that what has happened on this thread is what always happens, which is that when the question of women in chess comes up, it is very swiftly diverted into a discussion about how women are apparently treated too fairly in chess, and isn't it actually unfair that the men who say so get criticised for it.

In other words, every attempt to provide some space for women's experiences in chess to be discussed is instead converted into a space for men to complain about women.

This is deplorable, and for that matter shaming and embarrassing, but it's more than that, because if you read not just the Invisible Pieces account, but various accounts of how women feel about their reception by the (overwhelmingly male) chess community, it's very much this kind of conduct - belittling them, their opinions and their experiences - that helps drive women away. So it is destructive too.

I don't know what to do about this, except to spell out what I have just spelled out and to call it what it is, but can I endorse the opinion Brian posted above.
Brian Egdell wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 10:13 am
. 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.
"Do you play chess?"
"Yes, but I prefer a game with a better chance of cheating."

lostontime.blogspot.com

User avatar
Gerard Killoran
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Gerard Killoran » Sat Dec 19, 2020 5:05 pm

Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:26 pm
Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that, in this country, it is increasingly difficult to have a rational discussion about race without one party to the discussion calling the other "racist"? Much the same applies to sexism which I believe was the topic here.
If one party is promoting discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, what would you call it?

User avatar
Gerard Killoran
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 11:51 am
Contact:

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Gerard Killoran » Sat Dec 19, 2020 6:05 pm

Nigel Short reposted an article which included a number of scientific claims, including the following:
Men and women have such dissimilar brains it is implausible to expect their cognitive functions to be identical. For a start, men have roughly 6.5 times more grey matter; women have 9.5 times more white matter.
Well, that would be a real clincher, but what's the evidence? The statistic seems to come from a single study from 2005.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2 ... 100142.htm

Where we find...
In general, men have approximately 6.5 times the amount of gray matter related to general intelligence than women, and women have nearly 10 times the amount of white matter related to intelligence than men.
...which is something quite different. Not only this, but for what it's worth, other studies even show women having more grey matter, relative to men, not less e.g.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3110817/

So why did Nigel Short leave out the reference to 'general intelligence'?

This not to say that the study is unproblematic, quite the opposite.

The lead author, Richard Haier uses IQ as his measure of intelligence and writes for such hard-right publications as The Federalist and Quillette. (The latter has as its London Editor, the eugenicist and all-round buffoon, Toby Young)

Haier has even written an article for Quillette defending the racist 'Bell Curve' publication and its author Charles Murray:

https://quillette.com/2017/06/11/no-voi ... g-iq-race/

For this reason I don't think we can rely on any of the scientific claims made by Nigel Short until he tells us where he got them from.

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 3576
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Dec 19, 2020 6:24 pm

Gerard Killoran wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 5:05 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:26 pm
Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that, in this country, it is increasingly difficult to have a rational discussion about race without one party to the discussion calling the other "racist"? Much the same applies to sexism which I believe was the topic here.
If one party is promoting discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, what would you call it?
Trouble is, too many people have convinced themselves that anything short of herding people into actual death camps "is not racism".

That doesn't just happen out of nowhere, you know - it is the culmination of a lengthy process.
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

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

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Tim Spanton » Sat Dec 19, 2020 6:41 pm

Matt Mackenzie wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 6:24 pm
Gerard Killoran wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 5:05 pm
Roger Lancaster wrote:
Sat Dec 19, 2020 12:26 pm
Is it really necessary in this forum to point out that, in this country, it is increasingly difficult to have a rational discussion about race without one party to the discussion calling the other "racist"? Much the same applies to sexism which I believe was the topic here.
If one party is promoting discrimination on the basis of ethnicity, what would you call it?
Trouble is, too many people have convinced themselves that anything short of herding people into actual death camps "is not racism".

That doesn't just happen out of nowhere, you know - it is the culmination of a lengthy process.
And too many people make ludicrous claims, and then get upset when someone points out how ridiculous they are being

John Moore
Posts: 2062
Joined: Wed May 14, 2008 6:33 pm

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by John Moore » Sat Dec 19, 2020 6:50 pm

Rare indeed that I agree with Tim but that post was over the top in my view, Matt

User avatar
Matt Mackenzie
Posts: 3576
Joined: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:51 pm
Location: Millom, Cumbria

Re: Invisible pieces

Post by Matt Mackenzie » Sat Dec 19, 2020 7:10 pm

Well, one might have thought the second part of it at least was difficult for anyone to argue against in good faith.

(the first was indeed provocatively worded, not my usual style on here - but in this case that was fully intentional)
"Set up your attacks so that when the fire is out, it isn't out!" (H N Pillsbury)

Post Reply