Members · Prefs · Collections · Openings · Endgames · Sacrifices · History · Search Kibitzing · Kibitzer's Café · Chessforums · Tournament Index · Players · Kibitzing User Profile Chessforum
Member since Jul-29-04
Hello there! Who I am really goes without saying: I am just one of over seven billion people on Earth--very statistically insignificant, a tiny spec of dust in the Universe, just like everyone else, perhaps with the exception of you. So instead I will just talk a little bit about my perspectives on the world around me--stuff that most people find very boring, irrelevant and of no interest, but hopefully with the exception of you.

I believe that people should be able to freely say and express whatever they want in society (within reason, whatever that means) without fear of censorship, threat of violence, slander, or being bullied, intimidated, or harassed into silence. I am particularly skeptical of movements, organizations, and people who are thoroughly convinced that they are on the side of angels or in the right, and thus believe their ends justify their means. In the U.S. today, these include most third-wave feminists, so-called "social justice warriors" (have little in common with people like MLK), religious zealots, far-left and far-right political ideologues, etc. On a personal level, I like to question views that I've been brought up to believe as true without close examination and open exposure to opposing viewpoints, such as the good old, "Democracy is the best form of government," "women in the U.S. currently [still] have it worse than men," "communism is bad/evil", "the United States is the greatest and most free country on Earth," "life is 'good'", etc.

Too much is censored for the sake of protecting some people's delicate feelings. Too many people are silenced, ostracized, censured or demonized simply for holding opposing views.

I am always willing to change my views if I am shown to be wrong through reason, logic, facts, and evidence--not through mere "confident" assertions or claims, appeal to authority, ad hominems, "I am super smart, so take my word for it," "I am extremely well-educated on this subject, and have more life experience than you, so take my word for it," "You know me, so take my word for it", or any logical fallacies. However, people are free to criticize me in whatever way they wish.

<Of all tyrannies, a tyranny sincerely exercised for the good of its victims may be the most oppressive. It would be better to live under robber barons than under omnipotent moral busybodies. The robber baron's cruelty may sometimes sleep, his cupidity may at some point be satiated; but those who torment us for our own good will torment us without end for they do so with the approval of their own conscience.> -- C.S. Lewis

>> Click here to see knight13's game collections. Full Member

   Knight13 has kibitzed 11823 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Nov-25-15 optimal play chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <optimal play> Understood.
   Nov-24-15 TheAlchemist chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <TheAlchemist> Another reason for using taxes is that the country will need children whether women personally choose to have children or not. So everyone should chip in, not just companies.
   Nov-24-15 Fusilli chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <Fusilli> You are welcome. Happy Thanksgiving to you as well. I will just be spending the week with my mom and dad right here in Florida :)
   Nov-11-15 E R Lundin vs Botvinnik, 1946
Knight13: <21...g5! puts the knight offside and keeps it offside for the rest of the game- Botvinnik is effectively playing with an extra piece on the queenside and breaks through easily.> 21... g5!, brought to you by 21. Qd3?, taking away the best retreating square for the Knight. 21.
   Nov-07-15 Knight13 chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <TheFocus> They are people who fight for (their own subjective versions of) social justice, primarily online through social media. Social justice warrior, or SJW, is a term they picked for themselves. They seek to change, destroy, or censor certain characteristics of Western ...
   Oct-31-15 jessicafischerqueen chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <<Boomie: -> Hello? Anybody home? Should I turn off the lights when I leave?> No. The lights will drive away the thieves. :p
   Oct-26-15 W So vs Ding Liren, 2015 (replies)
Knight13: Ring-a-Ding-Ding!
   Oct-24-15 Zukertort vs Mackenzie, 1883
Knight13: Zukertort made the mistake of moving the same pieces one too many times in the opening, costing him a pawn and an inferior position.
   Oct-19-15 Zukertort vs J Noa, 1883
Knight13: 31. Nd1, 47. Rh4 and 51. Nh6 are stronger alternatives.
   Oct-18-15 G Marco vs Gunsberg, 1895
Knight13: 20. h4!? is a cool move.
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Unsafe Space

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 25 OF 25 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Fusilli> Men have genitals between their legs, so spreading their legs a little more than women is understandable. If spread too wide, and the train is crowded, it's rude. The problem I pointed out is that feminists think "manspreading" is something men do to show domination over women. Feminists made it a feminist issue. I was criticizing feminists more than criticizing "manspreading" itself.

I know of the article, but never read it, since it's pretty long. I know what they mean by "trigger warning"--colleges and/or students are trying to censor "dangerous" ideas that MIGHT offend certain people or certain group(s) of people, i.e. your right to freedom of speech (and expression) end where certain people's feelings begin. I am against it. <Offense is taken, not given.> What one may find offensive, another may not.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: <Knight13> Yes, I approach it as a question of courtesy and etiquette in the use of public space, not some kind of power sexual play. I think that's ridiculous.

On the article from The Atlantic: The overall problem with trigger warnings and "emotional reasoning" (something makes me feel bad, therefore it should be suppressed and it is wrong to expose me to it) is that they lead to self-censorship and the cultivation of minds protected from exposure to dissent or (perhaps unsavory) controversial ideas. That is exactly the opposite of what higher education is about! We should be about developing critical minds, not protecting them from exposure to potential or imaginary unpleasant experiences.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Men will have to lose jobs to make way for gender equality: Transfield's Diane Smith-Gander>

People shouldn't lose their jobs just because they were born wrong, i.e. based on their gender.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <U.N. Says Cyber Violence Is Equivalent to Physical Violence Against Women>

<Cyber violence is just as damaging to women as physical violence, according to a new U.N. report, which warns women are growing even more vulnerable to cyber violence as more and more regions gain internet access.>

<The report also argues that “cyber touch is recognized as equally as harmful as physical touch,” suggesting that online harassment might be just as lethal as domestic violence or sexual abuse.>

<The report notes that cyber violence is an extension of that definition, that includes acts like trolling, hacking, spamming, and harassment.>

"Cyber violence" can apparently distinguish between genders. Cyber violence against men is no big deal, am I right, U.N.? It can't be "U.N. Says Cyber Violence Is Equivalent to Physical Violence" period, or "... Against PEOPLE." No, it has to be "... Against WOMEN." Are men still human beings? Do men have no feelings?

Cyber violence is equivalent to physical violence? So if a random troll online moves his fingers toward his keyboard and press keys in a certain pattern, he will be able to hurt women as much as knocking their teeth out? But if the same troll does the equivalent thing to a man, his penis will emit a cyber shield that protects him from cyber violence, because apparently cyber violence is a women's issue, a gender issue, not a human issue.

Also, I don't think women are as weak as the U.N. thinks.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: Okay, this is bad:

Consistent with the bad trend discussed in the article from The Atlantic that I told you about. Instead of the university being a place for open debate of ideas, it becomes a place for censorship and exposure to a single view in the name of "protection" of the students.

Notice that this speaker's visit would have caused "actual mental, social, psychological and physical harm to students"... just from her speaking different or unsavory ideas.

Premium Chessgames Member
  WannaBe: <Fusilli> Certain words or things can't be taught/discussed, because they cause stress!!

Premium Chessgames Member
  Fusilli: <WB> Yes, that's the article from The Atlantic that I brought up a week ago or so.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Fusilli> Apologies for the late reply.

This: <“When you bring a misogynistic, white supremacist men’s rights activist to campus in the name of ‘dialogue’ and ‘the other side,’ you are not only causing actual mental, social, psychological and physical harm to students, but you are also—paying—for the continued dispersal of violent ideologies that kill our black and brown (trans) femme sisters … you are dipping your hands in their blood, Zach Wood.”">

The speaker is an anti-feminist WOMAN and they STILL play the misogyny card, as feminists and their allies do on a regular bases against anti-feminists and anyone who disagrees with them. Also, where's the evidence of her being a "white supremacist" and a "men's rights activist"? What "violent ideologies"? But I'm not surprised. It's always the same with feminists and their allies, always throwing those labels at anyone who dare to criticize their ideology.

You'd have to get used being labeled a misogynist in order to criticize feminism these days--it has become a requirement. Which is why a lot of people won't speak up against feminist ideology because they don't want to have their reputation ruined and possibly even lose their jobs after getting attacked as a "misogynistic, white supremacist" (if you're white).

One of the heaviest things you can do to a man is to label him a "misogynist," which is why it's so effective in shutting down discussions and speeches that criticize the ideology of feminism (feminism is not just the dictionary definition--if it was, and feminists acted in character of the definition, nobody would have a problem). It's a tactic used to shame the opposition into silence and automatically get people on your side because nobody likes a misogynist.

Anyway, I think there's a word for that kind of behavior and comments: <bigotry>. And, yes, I agree it is bad. And, yes, feminists are part of the problem.

In other news, <University of Wisconsin--Milwaukee> is trying to ban words: Also bad.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Journalists Banned From Event On Whether Feminism Suppresses Free Speech For Offending Feminists> <>

<A pair of journalists critical of modern feminism have been banned from a university event that, ironically, focuses on whether feminism is stifling modern free speech.>

<The University of Manchester Free Speech & Secular Society is scheduled to hold a public debate Oct. 15 titled “From Liberation to Censorship: Does Modern Feminism Have a Problem with Free Speech?” Initially, two journalists, Milo Yiannopoulos of Breitbart and Julie Bindel of the Guardian, were invited to speak at the debate. Both have since been barred from attending because their opinions are considered too offensive.> But, of course, it is okay for them to voice their in-no-way-offensive-whatsoever opinions about how one is a "famous transphobe" and another is a "professional misogynist" and "rape apologist":

<The student union’s women’s officer, Jess Lishak, made a post on Facebook (since deleted) that justified the bans in further detail, describing Bindel as a “famous transphobe” and Yiannopoulos as a “professional misogynist.”>

<Meanwhile, Yiannopoulos suggested on Twitter that he is considering legal action, saying his description as a “rape apologist” was “highly actionable” (libel actions are substantially easier to bring in the U.K. than in the U.S.>

Milo Yiannopoulos is an antifeminist, so of course he is labeled a "misogynist" and a "rape apologist." It's always the same, isn't it? So predictable. As I wrote in my (sarcastic) October-4 post (the article is published on October-7) in this forum: <It's been four days into a new month and I still haven't done my monthly "misogynist activity", as feminists like to call men who disagree with them, "misogynists"...> and <They also call their opposition "rapists" and "rape apologists" and things like that (might get you fired if they find out who you are and call your employer)...> And guess what? Milo is considering suing for libel.

There are currently THREE things certain in life: death, taxes, and anti-feminists will be called "misogynists" and "rape apologists." Can't criticize feminism without being branded as such, apparently. Freedom of speech is good... unless you criticize feminism.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: I am a sexist, misogynist, racist, rape apologist, ablest, cultural-appropriating, microaggressive basement dweller. No woman will ever date me for I'm not a real man, I am a man-child. I am also an agent of the patriarchy whose part-time job is to find ways to oppress and exploit women for the benefit of men, such as giving women more legal rights than men. I mean, uhh, giving women the right to vote and federal financial aid with none of the responsibilities that men are subjected to in return. Damn it, sorry, what I meant to say was, umm, giving women preferential rights in the family court as to... #*@&!! Okay, now I know what to say: giving women certain job quotas in high-level jobs and preferential treatment in education such as female-only scholarships despite women making up the majority of college stu--K, I'll stop talking before the secret police of the patriarchy shows up at 3 AM. Don't want to lose my patriarchy membership card. Can't find a job without one.
Oct-30-15  chessmoron: <Knight13> I have a good one for you.

Some female freshman from University of Vermont who has self-esteem issues claims the word "too" is sexist. Of course Huff Post posted it on their website.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <chessmoron> I found the article:

Didn't you know? Everything is sexist! Get with the program. Anyway, apparently a freshman college student said it. People are probably using the word, "too", five times more frequently around her now than ever before just to mess with her.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Why do people hate feminism and feminists?

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #1 - Feminists Hate Men>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #2 - The Patriarchy>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #3 - The Gender Pay Gap (#EqualPayDay)>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #4 - Gender Studies Degrees>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #5 - Hashtag Hate Group>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #6 - Everything is Sexist>

<Why Do People Hate #Feminism? #7 - Male Feminists>

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <chessmoron> Wrong article. Here's the right one: <The 3-Letter Word That Cuts Women Down Every Day>
Premium Chessgames Member
  playground player: <Knight13> It's true: feminists and other radicals just can't be happy. It's not in their DNA.

When they're not complaining about words like "too" and other microaggressions, they're out campaigning against things like the number 4.

Yup, 4 has got to go.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <playground player> I am still waiting for them to declare men who pee standing up to be sexists. :-p
Premium Chessgames Member
  TheAlchemist: You oppressive agent of the patriarchy! Check your privilege :-)

Did you see the SJWs banning insensitive Halloween costumes? Fortunately things aren't this crazy here, but unfortunately it's getting worse and I've been preparing myself for some time now for the inevitable, since they will undoubtedly have the media on their side.

Anyway, keep fighting the good fight.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <TheAlchemist> Yes, I have--they had to ask to see if their costumes MIGHT offend certain demographic(s). To them, freedom of expression is okay--unless it MIGHT hurt someone's feelings.

Unfortunately, they already have the media on their side here. :-( They're organized, so it's hard to fight against.

Thanks for your sentiments.

Premium Chessgames Member
  TheAlchemist: <Knight13>

Yeah. The problem as I see it, is that everything can be deemed offensive by someone. At this rate today's PC language will soon be found offensive and we will have to come up with new terminology. Rinse and repeat. Maybe it's just a way the social justice league can perpetuate its existence. And how would they even go about legislating "offensiveness" I have no idea.

Here's a video for you, everything you need to know in 6 seconds:

I don't know how much you follow it, their main "battleground" here has been the migrant crisis, but I don't remember there being this many SJWs and other PC police before (maybe they just weren't as loud?). The media coverage is quite skewed and generally censors (or better: doesn't provide a platform for) dissenting comments (where they're even still allowed, cynically dressing it as maintaining a high standard of debate) and this is certainly a bad omen, for this could very well become a norm.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <TheAlchemist> I follow the feminists more than I follow the SJWs, although many feminists are also SJWs. I think the feminists and SJWs made a blunder when they went after video games and gamers themselves, declaring games and the gaming industry to be misogynistic and the men who play them misogynists. The gaming demographic is super large so they now have a lot of enemies and people who hate feminism and SJWs just because of people like Anita Sarkeesian, Zoe Quinn, Brianna Wu, and also #GamerGate. #GamerGate is about journalistic integrity and ethics but of course the SJWs and feminists (and the media) have spun it as a movement made of misogynists who harass women online just because they are women.

I have only followed the immigration crisis a little bit. I know of the censorship going on and how people who speak out against it may lose their jobs and/or be branded "Islamphobes". I also know of the bad behavior of some of the refugees in the streets that really pi$$ed off a lot of people, but of course it's politically incorrect to talk about them. Some also demand cultural change and acceptance of Sharia Law. Then there is the rape crisis, where Muslim refugees who rape non-Muslim women are swept under the rug because the authorities and media don't want to be seen as "Islamphobes".

Most of these SJWs and feminists are middle to upper middle class. I guess for a lot of young people, when life gets too good for them and they can't find a purpose in life they become SJWs to "fight the good fight."

Premium Chessgames Member
  TheAlchemist: <Knight13> GG is actually how I was made aware of all this funnily enough, even though I only discovered it several months after it all started. I guess I never paid much attention before, but what is really horrifying is how universities are plagued by this crap, when they're supposed to encourage diversity of thought. Are you a student now or have recently been? What's your experience?
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <TheAlchemist> I have been a student recently and may be a student again soon. My university wasn't affected by it when I was there, but it might be now for all I know, though I doubt it.

I also hate that the universities have been infested with SJWs. Now California has mandatory consent classes and consent laws and guilty-until-proven-innocent rules if a woman accuses a man of rape on campus. U.K. has it worse than the United States.

Premium Chessgames Member
  TheFocus: Sorry, but what is an SJW?
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <TheFocus> They are people who fight for (their own subjective versions of) social justice, primarily online through social media. Social justice warrior, or SJW, is a term they picked for themselves. They seek to change, destroy, or censor certain characteristics of Western culture that they find problematic or harmful. These include rules regarding freedom of speech, freedom of expression, inter-racial interactions, moral status of people they regard as privileged vs. people they regard as disadvantaged, how men should and shouldn't interact with women, the "harmful" and "problematic" effects of media, etc.
Premium Chessgames Member
  TheFocus: <Knight13> Thank you very much. That clarifies it for me.
Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 25)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 25 OF 25 ·  Later Kibitzing>

A free online guide presented by
NOTE: You need to pick a username and password to post a reply. Getting your account takes less than a minute, totally anonymous, and 100% free--plus, it entitles you to features otherwise unavailable. Pick your username now and join the chessgames community!
If you already have an account, you should login now.
Please observe our posting guidelines:
  1. No obscene, racist, sexist, or profane language.
  2. No spamming, advertising, or duplicating posts.
  3. No personal attacks against other members.
  4. Nothing in violation of United States law.
  5. Don't post personal information of members.
Blow the Whistle See something that violates our rules? Blow the whistle and inform an administrator.

NOTE: Keep all discussion on the topic of this page. This forum is for this specific user and nothing else. If you want to discuss chess in general, or this site, you might try the Kibitzer's Café.
Messages posted by Chessgames members do not necessarily represent the views of, its employees, or sponsors.

You are not logged in to
If you need an account, register now;
it's quick, anonymous, and free!
If you already have an account, click here to sign-in.

View another user profile:

home | about | login | logout | F.A.Q. | your profile | preferences | Premium Membership | Kibitzer's Café | Biographer's Bistro | new kibitzing | chessforums | Tournament Index | Player Directory | World Chess Championships | Opening Explorer | Guess the Move | Game Collections | ChessBookie Game | Chessgames Challenge | Store | privacy notice | advertising | contact us
Copyright 2001-2015, Chessgames Services LLC
Web design & database development by 20/20 Technologies