Author: Albert Silver
Date: 05:51:50 02/24/02
Go up one level in this thread
On February 23, 2002 at 16:59:32, Uri Blass wrote:
>On February 23, 2002 at 16:29:54, Chessfun wrote:
>
>>On February 23, 2002 at 16:03:44, Mogens Larsen wrote:
>>
>>>On February 22, 2002 at 22:09:29, Albert Silver wrote:
>>>
>>>>I rather imagine that some of the non-male members of the forum would have
>>>>frowned somewhat on it, unless it was supposed to be a critique of FIDE, in
>>>>which case it would have been wiser (IMHO) to say so.
>>>
>>>It wasn't a critique of anything substantial and I'm not qualified as the role
>>>model of chauvenism. Just a bit of satire about the (men) note. If I had been
>>>sober enough to halve the men's requirements instead, nothing would have
>>>happened. And after all, I wouldn't stand a chance against any of the women
>>>here.
>>>
>>>Regards,
>>>Mogens
>>
>>I saw the post in question prior to it's being deleted, and admit that it never
>>bothered me. I saw it as a joke and as you say one if reversed wouldn't have
>>been so noticed. It's a rather sad reflection of our society.
>>
>>Sarah.
>
>I am not against jokes but I am against jokes against women.
>It was possible to use another version of it that is not against women
>and is not against men in the following way:
>
>"Beginner -- 2-10 pieces (women), always a legal position
>Beginner -- 4-8 pieces (men), always a legal position
>Intermediate -- 10-20 pieces (women), always a legal position
>Intermediate -- 8-22 pieces (men), always a legal position"
But then it wouldn't be a joke, and would mean that the poster seriously thought
there was a difference, which of course wasn't the case.
Albert
>
>Uri
This page took 0 seconds to execute
Last modified: Thu, 15 Apr 21 08:11:13 -0700
Current Computer Chess Club Forums at Talkchess. This site by Sean Mintz.