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 · Last seen Oct-06-15
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 11775 times to chessgames   [more...]
   Oct-06-15 chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <> To what extent do intentionally bleeped out profane words count against rule #1 of posting guidelines? Does context matter?
   Oct-06-15 Fusilli chessforum
Knight13: <Fusilli> Last month, Vanderbilt's Women's Center held lectures teaching men on how to be men: Any opinions regarding women's centers lecturing men on how to be men? Did go to any of them? Also, do you know when Vanderbilt is going to ...
   Oct-05-15 Winawer vs K Pitschel, 1878
Knight13: I don't think Morphy would've approved of 12. h4, 13. h5, 14. hxg6. But it worked.
   Oct-05-15 optimal play chessforum (replies)
Knight13: <optimal play> A good point. He, and many men, however, were or still is under the belief that "a man shouldn't hit a woman no matter what," which a lot of men take it to include women with a deadly weapon because the detail is usually left it. Centennial crab apple to pomme ...
   Oct-04-15 Knight13 chessforum
Knight13: 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" (for disagreeing women, they label them as having "internalized misogyny", which I'm sure will instantly convert ...
   Sep-05-15 Max Weiss vs Bird, 1889
Knight13: <Honza Cervenka> Thanks for pointing it out.
   Sep-01-15 Caruana vs W So, 2015 (replies)
Knight13: <Engine says Caruana is winning.> Too bad it's not the engine playing, huh.
   Jul-10-15 S Ernst vs A Giri, 2015 (replies)
Knight13: <paavoh: What's with 29.Nc6?> To go after the e5 Bishop as White's threatening 30. Ne7+. It's good for White to exchange his Knight for the dark-squared Bishop in this position, if not for 29... Bxh2+.
   Jul-07-15 Dortmund (2015) (replies)
Knight13: <latvalatvian: Carlsen is probably studying Steinitz. The iron bound rules of Steinitz are the key to maintaining the title.> How so? What kind of rules? Will you give some examples?
   Jul-06-15 hms123 chessforum
Knight13: <hms123> Solid copy. Out. P.S. I just updated my profile. I hope you don't disapprove. :)
(replies) indicates a reply to the comment.

Kibitzer's Corner
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 24 OF 24 ·  Later Kibitzing>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Open Defence> Hi! Yeah, I did, it was very fun, thanks!

<chessmoron> Thank you, Chessmoron! Masters vs. Machines Invitational (2007) was very interesting.

<WannaBe> Yeah, 5 years. And sadly, no, I don't even know how Toys 'R Us begins. Not into toys. :-(

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: For the interested:

Retroviral entry

Retroviral RNA entry into a target cell begins with binding of the viral surface glycoproteins to specific receptor molecules on cell's outer membrane. It mediates fusion of the lipid bilayers of the cell and viral membranes and allows the genetic material of the virus to be introduced into the host-cell cytoplasm.

The envelope glycoprotein complex of retroviruses includes two polypeptides, glycosylated hydrophilic polypeptide (SU) and a membrane-spanning protein (TM). The SU domain binds to a specific receptor molecule on the target cell. This activates the membrane fusion-inducing potential of the TM protein, and the viral and cell membranes fuse.

Viral particles lacking envelope glycoproteins are noninfectious, and cells lacking a receptor are nonpermissive for viral entry.

Premium Chessgames Member
  WannaBe: <Knight13> The lyrics to Toys 'R Us, begins with: "I don't wanna grow up, I'm a Toy 'R Us kid..."

You previous post reminded me of it... That's all. =)

Jul-22-09  Augalv: Happy (belated) birthday <knight13> :)
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <Augalv> Thank you!

<WannaBe> Yeah well I think I promised that I'm gonna be mature on here when I turn 18 but that has been moved to 21.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Activated my chessforum in case anyone wants to say something.

Insults will not be tolerated unless they are directed at me.

Derogatory name-calling will not be tolerated unless they are directed at me.

Follow posting guidelines.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: I was just kidding (in case anyone didn't get it). Say whatever you want, post whatever you want. The only rule goes without saying: follow posting guidelines.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Time to challenge some popular views and opinions, because nothing is free from criticism.

Let's go with this one: the notion that men are more privileged than women in the U.S. today--that women are "second-class citizens," that men have it "easier" than women (whatever that means). I think life expectancy is a great indicator, though, of course, not the only one.

Life expectancy in the United States:

Male - 77.11 years
Female - 81.94 years

Sex ratios:

at birth: 1.048 male(s)/female
under 15 years: 1.04 male(s)/female
15–64 years: 1 male(s)/female
65 years and over: 0.75 male(s)/female
total population: 0.97 male(s)/female (2010 est.)

How do you go from 1.048 male/female at birth to 0.75 male/female at 65 years and over? Male/female ratio drops by a quarter from 15-64 to 65 and over. If men really are more privileged and have it easier than women in the U.S. today, why are they dying at a significantly higher rate?

And if women are really second-class citizens (I don't think they are)... It just seems very odd to me that second-class citizens would outlive first-class citizens by approximately 5 years.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Before you Western third-wave feminists come on here and give me a lecture on what "real" feminism is, you can rest easy on your moral high-horse because I've already done most of the work for you below, you know, for future reference in case you all ever decide to change the record. Besides, you're not my "feminist babysitter" anyway, right? Also, you don't need to call me a misogynist or accuse me of being against gender equality or how I am "so blind to my privilege I can't even see it", etc., just because I disagree with your feminist ideology. I've heard plenty, its always the same stuff. Not just to me, but to everyone who actively oppose third-wave feminism. Always the same stuff. Do you all get your insults and ad-hominems from the same feminist playbook? And it's not other people's problem that you can't tolerate any opinions and viewpoints different from your own, and ignore or dismiss any and all evidence that contradict your beliefs.

One does not need to be a feminist to fight for gender equality. Feminism does not have a monopoly on gender issues. Or women's rights.

In the name of No True Scotsman Fallacy and egalitarianism, enjoy the list... if you can.


Patriarchy! Smash patriarchy!

Masculinity = bad, feminity = good.

Men bad, women good.

Man = victimizer, woman = victim.


Men are the oppressors, women are the oppressed.

Men are privileged, women are oppressed.

Men objectify women, see women as sub-human.

That's not feminism! Look up the definition of feminism!

All men are potential rapists.

Gender wage gap is solely due to sexism.

There are more men than women in power because of sexism.

There are a lot more men than women in STEM fields because of sexism.

If there is inequality of representation, parity, or outcomes, it's because of sexism, but only when women are underrepresented... except among sewage workers, construction workers, garbage collectors, soldiers, oil rig workers, miners, electricians, police officers, fire fighters, any low-paying job--then it's okay.

Gender is a social construct.

Men are potentially dangerous, women are innocent and potential victims.

Women need men like fish need bicycles.

Only men can rape, women cannot rape.

Rape culture exists and normalizes sexual violence against women.

Society is misogynistic and hates women.

Video games are misogynistic and reinforces misogyny.

There is no female privilege--they are benevolent sexism.

Boys are stupid, throw rocks at them.

Men feel entitled to women's bodies, therefore, rape and sexual assault against women.

Men oppress women solely for the benefit of men at the cost of women.

Rape accusations should automatically be believed.

Don't teach [women] how not to get raped, teach men not to rape!

1 in 5 women are raped or sexually assaulted on college campuses.

Gender inequality against men is men's fault, gender inequality against women is men's fault. And patriarchy.

Men are the problem, feminism is the solution.

It's only sexism when men do it, because sexism = power + prejudice.

Women have been oppressed for thousands of years, therefore, men today owe women for the sins committed by dead men before they were even born.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Third-wave feminism: Because it's only sexist when men do it.

Third-wave feminism: Seeing only the positive in femininity and negative in masculinity.

Third-wave feminism: Because only OUR ideology of gender equality is the right one.

Third-wave feminism: It is okay to make fun of men, mock them, and criticize them--especially white men--but if a man dares to make a joke about women or criticize a woman, it is proof of institutionalized sexism and widespread misogyny.

Third-wave feminism: Female privileges are just the patriarchy backfiring on men, and therefore aren't actually privileges.

Third-wave feminism: We need to teach boys and men not to rape! (Gee, I am so glad there are feminists out there to tell me these things. Otherwise I and millions of other men would've just went and raped a bunch of women for fun. Thanks!)

Third-wave feminism: We need to teach boys and men not to see women as objects and feel entitled to women's bodies [because men are so stupid and deranged, they take objects out on dates, talk to them, pay for everything and try to make them happy, or otherwise talk to them on a regular basis, instead of dating and interacting with female human beings].

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Since I love third-wave feminists so much, I will even write the reply for you wonderful people and save you trouble, since your replies, just like your narratives, are always the same things over and over worded differently. Have you considered copy-and-pasting? It's much easier.

"<Knight13> No one cares about your feelings, no one cares about your 'suffering', because you have a penis instead of a vagina. Stop being a whiny, privileged, misogynistic @#$%lord. Stop mansplaining, stop misrepresenting feminism, feminism is about equality. Oh, and don't rape, because unlike normal human beings, i.e. feminists, you need to be taught not to rape. I know you want to, since you're a woman-hater just because you disagree with our ideology, but don't.

Signed, a third-wave feminist"

Uhh, I wasn't talking about my feelings or claiming that I was suffering, nor do I hate women, but it's okay, I know you guys only own one record and can only play the same song over and over and over not just to me but to all who disagree with your ideology. I understand.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: "To know who rules over you, simply look to those you are not allowed to criticize." -- Voltaire
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: I never thought I'd get used to being called a "misogynist", but after getting called a misogynist and labeled as anti-women so many times by feminists (and zero times by non-feminist women--go figure) it has become meaningless to me. In fact, I think most anti-feminists are very desensitized to it.

It is not hard to see that (third-wave) feminism is not synonymous with women's rights or gender equality. The only thing feminism is synonymous with is feminism. Fighting for feminism is not synonymous with fighting for women's rights. Most feminists don't fight for gender equality--they fight for the ideology of feminism. Their actions contradict what they preach. That much is clear.

Not a surprise there is currently a movement called Women Against Feminism: "Women's voices against modern feminism and its toxic culture. We're judging feminism by its actions, not by dictionary definitions".

Premium Chessgames Member
  optimal play: Hello <Knight13>

Please enjoy the following YouTube video...


Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Hi <optimal play>

Please enjoy the following Youtube video:


Premium Chessgames Member
  optimal play: Thanks for the video

Is that Donald Trump's theme song for his presidential campaign?


Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <optimal play> It'd be hilarious if he used it against Hillary Clinton.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Here are several examples of the horrible injustices third-wave feminists are fighting against:

<Air conditioning in your office is sexist. True story>

I'm not even gonna comment on this.


But, of course, women spreading their legs on the subway and taking up empty seats with shopping bags and purses is just fine. Why? I don't know, something about sexism against women and being born wrong.

<War on Men: First Arrests for ‘Manspreading’ on New York Subway>

Ahh, well, at least women aren't getting arrested, only men. Why? I don't know, something about sexism against women and being born wr--oh, wait, I already said that. Apologies.

Sorry, men on New York subways: You were born wrong. Shouldn't have tortured all those puppies in your previous lives, 'cause now you're solely getting punished for things both men and women do on subways.

<Sheryl Sandberg Launches 'Ban Bossy' Campaign to Empower Girls to Lead>

No, don't teach girls how to handle being called "bossy," just ban the damn thing, because that will definitely prepare them for the real world when the grow up.

So in other words, the campaigners are implying that girls are so much more fragile than boys that they need extra outside help while boys who get called bossy and other degrading stuff (because we all know boys and girls are always friendly to boys and never say anything degrading to them) don't need extra help because they were born different. Why? I don't know, something about sexism against... managed to stop myself there, haha! Also, they're implying that although girls mature faster than boys, somehow they have a bigger problem dealing with the word "bossy" than boys. Feminist logic, what can I say?

But it's good news, young girls: You were born right. You didn't torture all those puppies in your previous lives, so now you're getting extra help for something both boys and girls experience in schools.

Anyway, so how do feminists propose to deal with such horrible sexism against women? One of the many ways is apparently by joking (and not joking) about killing all men. <#KillAllMen>, tweeted 216 times per day on Twitter. Which, if the sexes were reversed, would get all men who joke about killing all women fired from their jobs and probably publicly condemned. See, men, if we were born right, we could joke about killing half of the population and talk about it in public without getting into trouble. Just like Valerie Solanas's <SCUM Manifesto>: "It argues that men have ruined the world, and that it is up to women to fix it. To achieve this goal, it suggests the formation of SCUM, an organization dedicated to overthrowing society and eliminating the male sex."* "... but Solanas denied that the work was "a put on" and insisted that her intent was "dead serious."**

But since killing all men is too extreme and impractical, some feminists have proposed the alternative of putting all men in concentration camps: <Top Feminist: Put All Men in Concentration Camp> Now, if a man had said that, he would've lost his job, be publicly shamed, and have his life ruined, but, hey, if he didn't torture all those puppies in his previous life, he could've been born a woman and can casually propose putting half of the population in concentration camps, too, without serious consequences.

If you're thinking that these are cases of sexism against men, you're wrong, at least according to feminists: <Men Do Not Experience Sexism>


Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: Let's take a look at what the public have to say about third-wave feminist activism:

<Is feminism sexist? 80% say yes, 20% say no>

<Is feminism good for women AND men? 29% say yes, 71% say no>

<Do you believe in anti-feminism? 63% Say Yes, 38% Say No>

Great job, feminists! Standing ovation! Keep up the good work.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: You know feminists are doing a great job fighting (perceived) misogyny when the people they claim to fight for tell them to go shove their toxic, dogmatic ideology up their asses: <Women Against Feminism>
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <IF men acted like FEMINISTS (OMG SEXUAL OBJECTS!!!!)> [Parody]

"Feminism: the realm where real evidence and research are just obstacles to inhibit you from reaffirming your initial prejudices about how you're the victim. You're ALWAYS the victim. But what would it look like if MEN acted like feminists?" -- Thunderf00t, introduction

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: An expansion on an earlier post: different perspectives and opinions (including feminist ones) on said feminist causes.


Manspreading on trains.

<Why ‘Manspreading’ Is Definitely a Serious Issue, as Explained by the Feminist Internet>

<Movement against 'manspreading' on transit leads to MRA sads>

<Manspreading has feminists’ panties in a wad>


Air conditioning is sexist.

<#SJW Feminists Now Claim Air Conditioning is Sexist. Yes Really…>

<Feminist Writers: Office Air Conditioning Is 'Sexist,' Part of 'Overbearing Patriarchy'>>

<New York Times Puts Feminist Air Conditioning Conspiracy Theory on Page One>>

<VIDEO: This ‘Sexist Air Conditioning’ Interview Has Killed Feminism Forever>


Ban the word "bossy".

<'Bossy' Ban: The Main Problem With Feminism Today>

<Feminists Want to Ban ‘Bossy’ But Don’t Mind the Other B-Word>


So apparently American women and Western women in general have it so bad compared to the "over-privileged", "oppressive" white men that these are the kind of problems feminists spend time, money and effort campaigning on. Do they ever look at how women are doing in Africa, Middle East, and South America?

Premium Chessgames Member

I've been riding buses and subways my whole life and I never once saw any "man spreading."

This is frivolousness of the first order and it should never have been taken seriously by anyone in the first place.

I'm glad to see that at least some of the women in the links you provide share my opinion on this.

Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: <jessicafischerqueen> Neither have I. I'm glad you agree.
Premium Chessgames Member
  Knight13: 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" (for disagreeing women, they label them as having "internalized misogyny", which I'm sure will instantly convert anti-feminist women to their beliefs). I do this mainly to make feminists happy at least once per month by attempting to see things from their point of view. 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) but I'm not doing "monthly rapist activities" for obvious reasons.

Here we go.


<"Men ‘frightened’ to help women at work in case of harassment claims">

"Women are failing to advance at work because the senior male executives who could help them most are terrified that an offer of assistance will be misconstrued as sexual harassment, a new book claims.

<Sex and the Office> suggests that the furore over sexual harassment has backfired on women, making it too risky for men to forge professional friendships with them.

Kim Elesser, the author, argues that a <sex partition> has sprung up, which impedes women from building a vital network of contacts in the company where they work, as well as outside it...."

See, men are just acting that way because they are misogynists. It can't be any other reason whatsoever--it must be because they look down on women and hate them. Can't be anything other than that. It would be preposterous to even consider such an idea. That article is a total propaganda by the patriarchy, a giant smoke screen to hide the truth. In fact, men now hate women so much they are okay with avoiding conversations with women in the workplace to the detriment of the company. That could get men in trouble for anti-teamwork behavior that leads to lower productivity. Men are so sexist now that they are willing to risk their career by staying away from women! Oh, the misogyny!


Well, that's it for my Misogynist Activity of the Month. Have a nice day.

Jump to page #    (enter # from 1 to 24)
< Earlier Kibitzing  · PAGE 24 OF 24 ·  Later Kibitzing>

100% Cotton Chess Puzzle Shirt
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