Looks like Gyula Sax beat <Pavel> Vavra at Varna in 1972:

http://chesstempo.com/gamedb/game/1...

<The Alchemist by H.P. Lovercraft or Ben Jonson>

On that note, have you ever seen the Brainwashing series?

One of my closest friends--former closest friend, who now ignores me, but I still respect him--was a feminist supporter who didn't call himself a feminist but nevertheless found antifeminism to be "morally indefensible" (his words), and when I told him that the result of men and women spreading out unequally in different fields, and thus resulting in unequal pay, was because of men and women's personal choices, he found the idea of women's personal choices having a tendency to lead them to lesser-paying careers "an insult" (his words). He seems to still believe that women are still encouraged to go into less-paying jobs by the society since childhood, like telling them math is a "boys" thing or that science isn't for girls and things of that nature (as it was the custom decades ago, though less so in communist countries I'd imagine, because men had to support a family, so giving away jobs to women who, especially at the time, would insist on a higher-earning man as partner and usually spent most of the money she earned on herself instead of splitting it 50-50, would be an exchange of giving a woman a job at the cost of another man, his wife and his kids--things like this can't just change overnight and expect it to have no negative consequences. And I mean both married women and single women. For example, let's say a married woman gets a job that's typically male dominated and earns extra cash. Sounds great, right? But other women can do the same, both single and married. Soon, another woman has taken a job away from your husband. Then your son is now affected because other single women are entering the field. But the single women taking those jobs aren't willing to support men who made less than them, in general, especially back then, and married women with a now-unemployed husband probably didn't feel comfortable in those times having the roles switched, so divorces would increase... Do you see how you can't just change established customs like that overnight no matter how much you hate or love it, or how sexist you find it to be?). And he also believes that society (US) still treats women and minorities as second-class citizens.

Probably a good idea to avoid talking about feminism and Social Justice issues with your friends who may think differently or else you risk losing them. Unless you don't mind losing them or want to lose them, of course.

Anyway, so career choices between men and women are already affected since birth as demonstrated by the different toys male and female toddlers choose, as you know. Women tend towards the jobs with more socialization or that deals with people issues while men tend to choose jobs that deal more with objects, space, and objective answers. Videos like that supports what antifeminist and Men's Rights Activist Karen Straughn once said: the freer the society, the more men and women diversify in career choices, and this is why in places like China engineers are close to 50/50 men-and-women (I haven't checked the sources for this, but I believe her) while in the Western world it isn't.

http://www.dailymotion.com/playlist...

Anyway, I'm sure you've found plenty of videos yourself (there are plenty of channels who deal at least in part with debunking SJW and feminist videos etc.).

But what is most baffling about the whole thing is the final letter from Wagner. I mean what good will come long-term from feeding the students' victimhood complex or whatever you want to call it. And this one really takes the cake:

At the same time, our commitment to respect, civility, and inclusion calls us to provide a <safe environment> that inspires and supports <courageous inquiry>.

I went through some comments and found this one interesting:

<I am starting to see these kinds of students show up in the workforce and it is frightening. I am a partner at a law firm. A new associate just out of law school gave me a brief. It was poorly done. I wrote the following on it and put it back on his chair (it was 5:00 p.m. and of course no one works past 5:00 anymore): "Needs to be redrafted. Your legal analysis needs work. Start by outlining issues and try again." The next morning he went to all the other associates and told them that I said he was a bad lawyer and that I was creating a hostile work environment. I am the most even keeled person around. I know attorneys who would have yelled and screamed. The fact is that he thought he was perfect. He graduated law school and passed the bar, so he must know it all. Right?>

http://www.slate.com/articles/news_...

Milo didn't come up with the phrase "feminism is cancer"--many others have said it in the past--but he is the one who went public and ran with it, yes.

I feel the same way about the second amendment. Maybe I would prefer a society without the right to bear arms, but since it is there in the constitution (and it's there for understandable reasons, knowing US history and culture), I want that right to be available to everyone, under the same terms.

Ok, perhaps I'm being too general. Regarding abortion, there are other ethical dilemmas, for example genetic defects etc. Sex is just too arbitrary and while I am pro choice I don't really know how you can avoid such instances other than fighting against these backwards ways of thinking that lead to such decisions. Still, an outright ban seems an unnecessary and too drastic a solution and most likely leads to a black market of sorts, which means less safety, probably criminal networks etc.

I thank You for dropping by the other day. It has been quite a while we talked, and it felt good to hear from You.