Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Chess

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

    #31
    Originally posted by everything bagel View Post
    No one wants to unpack this, huh?

    I mean, a woman exists as some kind of objectified support structure for man's success until she doesn't? Then she's a rotten bitch out to take all of your assets? The irony here being that the 1st part of this statement suggests a man can't attain things like assets without the support of a woman. But then she's a rotten bitch if she wants these assets he couldn't attain without her support?

    None of you want to touch this?
    No one felt the need to touch it because 1) its 6-eyed who states such absurdities in abundance and gets set straight in topical threads often, and 2) it was in reference to the queen piece in the chess game
    But you are right, if ment in all seriousness its a sign of a pathetic man.

    Comment


      #32
      Originally posted by everything bagel View Post
      No one wants to unpack this, huh?

      I mean, a woman exists as some kind of objectified support structure for man's success until she doesn't? Then she's a rotten bitch out to take all of your assets? The irony here being that the 1st part of this statement suggests a man can't attain things like assets without the support of a woman. But then she's a rotten bitch if she wants these assets he couldn't attain without her support?

      None of you want to touch this?
      I have yet to play the actual game, so I cannot really comment on the analogy. I would like to think that if I do have a queen that get's captured, I might say something like "Dammit, why did I make that move" or "Fuck, I didn't see that" but who knows, maybe I will go "Damn that rotten bitch".

      Comment


        #33
        Originally posted by everything bagel View Post
        No one wants to unpack this, huh?

        I mean, a woman exists as some kind of objectified support structure for man's success until she doesn't? Then she's a rotten bitch out to take all of your assets? The irony here being that the 1st part of this statement suggests a man can't attain things like assets without the support of a woman. But then she's a rotten bitch if she wants these assets he couldn't attain without her support?

        None of you want to touch this?
        if you notice, i was gently teasing about it.
        it's a TERRIBLE analogy, because life is just not that simple. as in my last post before yours, i applied the analogy to a situation where i had just lost my Queen early.
        it's also a very male-centric analogy, obviously, and hard to apply to a straight female player.
        but yeah, i had planned to keep poking fun at this for a while rather than attack it outright. because come on, it's so silly that it's funny.

        Comment


          #34
          since everyone agreed that no-one touched it, my hilarious poking fun at it was all going to be wasted anyway, so nevermind : )

          Comment


          #35
          Originally posted by Audiogen View Post
          Jessica
          radical spirit
          Jessica Maybe you can help me out with this. I understand, on a surface level at least, most of the capabilities of the different pieces, promotion, capture, castling, en passante?, Check and Checkmate but I don't really understand how a Stalemate works.

          It seems like with the tutorial if a King was the last piece standing for one side and the other side didn't have a move that could immediately capture the King, then it resulted in s a stalemate, regardless of the pieces remaining for the other side. Can the King not move or be captured if there are no other pieces remaining or something?
          stalemate would be you are not IN check, on the square you're on, but there is nowhere you can move without getting into check, and no other pieces you can move, either because they don't exist (you have nothing left except king) or they can't move... like say, you have a pawn but there is a piece blocking it from moving.

          More concise: Stalemate is having no legal moves you can make, but the other side doesn't have you in check.

          you can be left with just king and just have to move it about until the other side gets you in check or stalemate. i hate that, it's so boring. i usually actively help them get me in check if i end up in that scenario

          Comment


            #36
            Originally, the queen could only move one space along a diagonal. The bishop only moved two spaces along a diagonal, jumping the intervening square.

            Comment


            #37
            Originally posted by tumbling.dice View Post
            Originally, the queen could only move one space along a diagonal. The bishop only moved two spaces along a diagonal, jumping the intervening square.
            then feminism happened and she could go anywhere she wanted!

            Comment


              #38
              I will play chess with you sometime Jessica. Do you let games sit and open for days sometimes or do you do it all in one swoop? I use to play it online with some people. They would travel and not have time to make their next move, so it sat in wait at times.

              Comment


              • Jessica
                Jessica
                radical spirit
                Jessica commented
                Editing a comment
                currently mostly playing in one swoop.. but since it's a computer sometimes i have left it for a bit, while doing other things. i'd feel less comfortable doing that with a human player.. although if they need to do that, I have no issue playing a game over days

              • 6-eyed
                6-eyed
                Shit Disturber
                6-eyed commented
                Editing a comment
                What’s your chess.com username Beachball?

              #39
              Originally posted by Jessica View Post

              if you notice, i was gently teasing about it.
              it's a TERRIBLE analogy, because life is just not that simple. as in my last post before yours, i applied the analogy to a situation where i had just lost my Queen early.
              it's also a very male-centric analogy, obviously, and hard to apply to a straight female player.
              but yeah, i had planned to keep poking fun at this for a while rather than attack it outright. because come on, it's so silly that it's funny.
              It isn’t easy to apply to a straight female player because Chess was a game invented by a man. But if you really wanted to get politically correct, you as a woman could theoretically switch the roles of the King and Queen when you play on a chess board.

              But it would be very confusing for those of us who are traditional players to challenge you. LOL

              To further add to my analogy, the queen resembles your (as a male) significant other, because your enemies want to take her down to make you (the king) a vulnerable target. Or get your woman to betray or cheat on you. Losing a queen in chess is one of the hardest things; it’s kind of like losing a girlfriend.
              6-eyed
              Shit Disturber
              Last edited by 6-eyed; 11-08-2020, 02:26 PM. Reason: Sentence structure problems

              Comment


              • Jessica
                Jessica
                radical spirit
                Jessica commented
                Editing a comment
                lol, i don't mind being a male role. i still think it's over simplifying life.. but I do get what you mean.
                i used to more imagine I was like an overseeing God figure, controlling my armies to protect my king. I didn't used to relate myself to any of the pieces.

              • Din Djarin
                Din Djarin
                Senior Member
                Din Djarin commented
                Editing a comment
                Jessica
                radical spirit
                Jessica Your initial perspective does makes the most sense naturally. You are the general/king (not the piece but the one who controls your army).
                Losing a queen in a chess game is more like losing your most important instrument in the field, like a deadly sniper or a most effective captain or other army tool.
                The only sensible connection between losing a queen and a gf is that they're both women :P

              #40
              Originally posted by everything bagel View Post
              No one wants to unpack this, huh?

              I mean, a woman exists as some kind of objectified support structure for man's success until she doesn't? Then she's a rotten bitch out to take all of your assets? The irony here being that the 1st part of this statement suggests a man can't attain things like assets without the support of a woman. But then she's a rotten bitch if she wants these assets he couldn't attain without her support?

              None of you want to touch this?
              ‘‘Twas only a matter of time before someone got offended lol

              Theres just no winning with some people.
              6-eyed
              Shit Disturber
              Last edited by 6-eyed; 11-08-2020, 02:11 PM.

              Comment


              #41
              Originally posted by Din Djarin View Post

              No one felt the need to touch it because 1) its 6-eyed who states such absurdities in abundance and gets set straight in topical threads often, and 2) it was in reference to the queen piece in the chess game
              But you are right, if ment in all seriousness its a sign of a pathetic man.
              Click image for larger version

Name:	C30662C2-333C-4E9A-8CA1-42EF336B184C.jpeg
Views:	89
Size:	170.6 KB
ID:	49606

              Comment


                #42
                Din Djarin
                Senior Member
                Din Djarin I’m all out of white midgets. However I’ll offer you two Asian midgets for the price of one.

                Click image for larger version

Name:	EB874AF8-4B6C-4C1E-9327-6EB81A85D64A.jpeg
Views:	84
Size:	318.3 KB
ID:	50323

                Comment


                #43
                Are you still into this idea, 6? I sent a game challenge to you.
                Now I have a better phone that can handle it, I'm playing a lot more than I did when only on my laptop.

                Comment


                #44
                Originally posted by Audiogen View Post
                I signed up yesterday, I've never played so I'm going through the tutorial.
                Did you tutorial yourself into good enough to play?

                Din? Undies?
                You both said you know how to play.

                Come on everyone. Play chess with meee.
                ​​​​​​

                Comment


                • Jessica
                  Jessica
                  radical spirit
                  Jessica commented
                  Editing a comment
                  I changed my username since I posted before though. It's driftwiththeflow.

                #45
                I play chess also just been a few years. Not easy to find people to play with

                Comment

              Working...
              X