Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s some kind of tortured reasoning. They are just being bullies. It’s acceptable to harass transgender people and so now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I simply don’t understand how anyone can be so cruel. There’s not a lot of acceptance of being transgender as it is and it’s gratuitous to keep piling on.

Replace "transgender" with "black" and step back 70 years and nothing would have changed.

There are so many people on this forum who would be dumping milkshakes on sit-in protestors and cheering the dogs and fire hoses if they had been born in the 1930s.

They'll try to tell you "oh no, I'd be all for civil rights if I was around back then, but this trans thing is different!"

It's not, and they wouldn't, but it's what they have to tell themselves to believe they're good people despite their bigoted beliefs.

No it’s not. Stop comparing your imaginary oppression to to the heinous discrimination faced by black people. Trans people have full civil rights under the law, and this absurd analogy is highly offensive.

Good lord, nobody is saying trans people literally have the same or worse oppression as black people did under Jim Crow. Talk about "imaginary oppression!"

The analogy is simply that like civil rights, this is an issue where people currently believe their bigotry is normal but in time will be looked at as decidedly the wrong side of history.

Funny. I think history will look back on this period and think.... "What the hell? A man can claim to be woman and compete with them in sports and use the locker rooms designated for women?"

"Claim to be a woman." You make the experience of a trans-person sound so frivolous. Like they're just making shit up so they can get kicked around extra hard by the world.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s some kind of tortured reasoning. They are just being bullies. It’s acceptable to harass transgender people and so now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I simply don’t understand how anyone can be so cruel. There’s not a lot of acceptance of being transgender as it is and it’s gratuitous to keep piling on.

Replace "transgender" with "black" and step back 70 years and nothing would have changed.

There are so many people on this forum who would be dumping milkshakes on sit-in protestors and cheering the dogs and fire hoses if they had been born in the 1930s.

They'll try to tell you "oh no, I'd be all for civil rights if I was around back then, but this trans thing is different!"

It's not, and they wouldn't, but it's what they have to tell themselves to believe they're good people despite their bigoted beliefs.

No it’s not. Stop comparing your imaginary oppression to to the heinous discrimination faced by black people. Trans people have full civil rights under the law, and this absurd analogy is highly offensive.

Good lord, nobody is saying trans people literally have the same or worse oppression as black people did under Jim Crow. Talk about "imaginary oppression!"

The analogy is simply that like civil rights, this is an issue where people currently believe their bigotry is normal but in time will be looked at as decidedly the wrong side of history.

Funny. I think history will look back on this period and think.... "What the hell? A man can claim to be woman and compete with them in sports and use the locker rooms designated for women?"

Anonymous wrote:I commend this group from taking this approach.

Instead of reflexively bowing to the current trend, they are taking a "time out" to research the issue further.

Good for them.

Anonymous wrote:"Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, including mental rotation, which is the ability to identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in space. Now, a University of Iowa study shows a connection between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of skill."

An ability that would seem very useful in chess.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217124430.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s some kind of tortured reasoning. They are just being bullies. It’s acceptable to harass transgender people and so now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I simply don’t understand how anyone can be so cruel. There’s not a lot of acceptance of being transgender as it is and it’s gratuitous to keep piling on.

Replace "transgender" with "black" and step back 70 years and nothing would have changed.

There are so many people on this forum who would be dumping milkshakes on sit-in protestors and cheering the dogs and fire hoses if they had been born in the 1930s.

They'll try to tell you "oh no, I'd be all for civil rights if I was around back then, but this trans thing is different!"

It's not, and they wouldn't, but it's what they have to tell themselves to believe they're good people despite their bigoted beliefs.

No it’s not. Stop comparing your imaginary oppression to to the heinous discrimination faced by black people. Trans people have full civil rights under the law, and this absurd analogy is highly offensive.

Good lord, nobody is saying trans people literally have the same or worse oppression as black people did under Jim Crow. Talk about "imaginary oppression!"

The analogy is simply that like civil rights, this is an issue where people currently believe their bigotry is normal but in time will be looked at as decidedly the wrong side of history.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The International Chess Federation is banning trans-women from competing in women's chess tournaments. A woman who holds a chess title and then transitions to male will have their title "abolished." However, if the gender change is from male to female the titles will remain intact.

https://www.cnn.com/2023/08/17/sport/fide-bans-transgender-women-chess-spt-intl/index.html

When restrictions are placed on trans-women competing in something like swimming, I at least understand the rationale. Hormones can arguably provide a physical advantage for biological males who transition to become women. (Although my understanding is that the evidence for this is not as robust as one might think.) But what the hell is the rationale here for chess? You don't need a big old bicep to move the bishop across the board.

Agree this is different from swimming, but I don’t even care anymore. Trans people lost support from me in this area when they did the extreme sports stuff. I’m done.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s some kind of tortured reasoning. They are just being bullies. It’s acceptable to harass transgender people and so now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I simply don’t understand how anyone can be so cruel. There’s not a lot of acceptance of being transgender as it is and it’s gratuitous to keep piling on.

Replace "transgender" with "black" and step back 70 years and nothing would have changed.

There are so many people on this forum who would be dumping milkshakes on sit-in protestors and cheering the dogs and fire hoses if they had been born in the 1930s.

They'll try to tell you "oh no, I'd be all for civil rights if I was around back then, but this trans thing is different!"

It's not, and they wouldn't, but it's what they have to tell themselves to believe they're good people despite their bigoted beliefs.

No it’s not. Stop comparing your imaginary oppression to to the heinous discrimination faced by black people. Trans people have full civil rights under the law, and this absurd analogy is highly offensive.

Anonymous wrote:I am not familiar with the reasons behind the female chess series, but I am familiar with an all-female series in motorsport, a feeder series sponsored by F1 currently called the F1 Academy.

Now you might imagine that would be unnecessary, as the car is doing the hard work. And TBH it's mostly true although it is a more physical sport than you would guess.

The major issue, and the reason why the F1 Academy is needed, is that young drivers (and by young I mean 10-17 year olds) need incredible levels of sponsorship to go through all of the levels from junior karting up to F2, the last step on the ladder to F1. All along the way they face discrimination from potential sponsors, driver academy programs run by the major F1 teams, as well as disparagement from their peers. It's a very elitist sport and the simpletons will say "golly which woman is ready for F1" and everyone with half a brain knows it's because female drivers got weeded out long before that.

It's possible that chess faces similar barriers. I don't really know how that works. I have not spoken to female chess masters about their experience going up the ranks.

Anonymous wrote:"Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, including mental rotation, which is the ability to identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in space. Now, a University of Iowa study shows a connection between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of skill."

An ability that would seem very useful in chess.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217124430.htm

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Chess is not a physical sport. WHAT THE FUQ DIFFERENCE DOES GENDER MAKE IN CHESS?

This is pendulum idiocy.

By this reasoning, then, we should abolish HBCUs. Either being a discrimated-against minority comes with downsides that can be mitigated by having single race, or single sex environments, or it doesn't.

Anonymous wrote:Chess is not a physical sport. WHAT THE FUQ DIFFERENCE DOES GENDER MAKE IN CHESS?

This is pendulum idiocy.