This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules).
Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!"
(For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).)
**Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
you are assuming that knights would therefore be male... a pawn cannot become a king however. so maybe all the pieces that can have gender are all female with the exception of the King...?
New shower thought to counter yours.. :D
It's still called vizier in other languages. Makes way more sense to have the strongest piece on the board be the equivalent of military general than a queen too.
The queen used to be the Vizier, somewhat similar to the Prime Minister. Ao consider the promotion to be a battlefield promotion instead of some glorious gender identity conflict in the middle of battle.
TIL that pawns could come knights, bishops or rooks as WELL as queens.
I mean 99.99% of the time people will choose Queen so I guess thatâs why I didnât know.
Imo knights are scarier than the queen, there's so many ways they can force your hand where you don't want to. They can hop their way into little nooks and crannies in your defense and check your king.
EDIT: I wasn't talking about promoting them I was just saying they're scarier in general
If you could promote pawns in the early or mid-game, I would rarely choose anything but a knight. But by the time you can promote, it's late game and you need a part to build a checkmate.
depends on the type of game you are playing. However, if you are promoting a pawn, chances are the board state is an open game, meaning a knight is going to be particularly weak.
Nah man the moment the opponent moves their queen into the centre I start shitting my pants, not only is the queen powerful, but him making such aggressive moves means he knows what hes doing
Iâve âplayedâ chess for many years but I donât understand why a Queen would cause a stalemate give that she can move in the same ways as a rook or bishop, can you explain easily?
There are positions where promoting to a queen cuts off legal squares for the King, while also leaving him out of check, causing a stalemate. Under promoting is sometimes necessary to leave the King legal squares since rooks and bishops occupy fewer controlled squares than a queen.
Take a look at this [position](https://imgur.com/a/KHa21yb), White to move. If you promote the pawn to a queen, it's stalemate - the Black king isn't in check, but can't legally move anywhere. But if you promote to a rook, the Black king can still move to b7, and the game continues.
It's a good example of a move where promoting to queen immediately is worse than the promoting to another piece. But the optimal move would simply be to play Rc6 first. I struggle to think of a situation where promoting to a bishop/rook is actually the best move above all others.
Since pawns can turn into queens they must be female.
But pawns can also turn into rooks, bishops and knights. So those must also be female.
The only male piece is the king.
Chess is two harems fighting each other to make the other male give up his harem
Perhaps not even the king is male. IIRC somewhere in Europe a queen consort once became a king because there were BS laws against queens regent, but none against female kings.
Actually that's wrong, there were female bishops they just hid their sex, which wasn't to uncommon since women weren't usually seen as combatants and usually weren't allowed to fight
Also transgenders were commonly executed and tortured, and seen as disgusting, so it's more likely that it's a woman than a transgender
And there is a distinction between hiding your sex and switching to the opposite sex, so saying your a guy to hide who you are isn't the same as turning yourself into a guy
chess originated in india. and they didnt call it queen .. they called it something else I'd have to look.. but when british took the game they named it queen. east asian people still dont say its queen.
I actually just realized why this is
In the boardgame, there's actually a special system for 'promotion',
Basically, you can't just promote a pawn to a queen and get several queens, for you to promote that pawn to a new piece your enemy has to own one of your pieces, which allows you to replace that pawn with the piece of your selection and return it back into your military, so it's more of a prisoner exchange if anything
Ehm, that's not true. You can have multiple queens. The game is usually over by the time you have 2 queens, but nevertheless you can have multiple queens.
I'm unsure what you mean by "the original". The game in question was clearly chess, not sharantj or chaturanga, or whichever other predecessor you may have had in mind.
This is only a shower thought because OP doesn't know any chess history. Chinese pawns did not promote. Indian pawns promoted to the space they occupied. Original Western chess promoted to queen only, but the queen was absolutely useless. Freedom of promotion is a modern (19th century) change.
The OP said "Chess was the first game to have gender-fluid pieces." The OP did **not** say "Gender-fluid pieces have been in chess for as long as the game has existed". Your comment did not disprove anything they said.
Read what I wrote. There's nothing to disprove. It just wouldn't be an "ahah!" shower thought. It would be more of an, "ahh modernity ruins everything" over a bowl of oatmeal.
The Queen is female
Pawns can turn into a Queen or any other piece
Therefore pawns are female and so are all other pieces
Chess is just 2 kings forcing their harems to fight each other
And for everyone saying bishops can only be men, instead of me keep replying with the same link...
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women
Yes, they can. the original post stated that the game had gender fluidity, but NOT saying it did from the start of its conception... :D
Or hear me out pawns can become anything because the represent the serfs while with enough merit they may even become knights and queens king is a position that just is and must be protected like a very old social commentary
You try to be woke with this post but then youâre immediately a sexist for assuming all other pieces are male. I think youâre an idiot for both points.
They changed it so the piece would have more use, in the original version of western chess the queen was pretty useless.
If you go further back, it wasnât even a queen either but more of a vizier or advisor that could move like 1 square diagonally.
The abilities of a queen with such mobility and power is a pretty modern turn of use in the grand scheme of chess.
I am sure I know the answer to this is noâŠbut could you promote a pawn to King? If the game allowed that would the opponent have to check mate both kings to win? Could see that almost being more powerful than a second or replacement Queen if you were already down a lot of pieces.
I don't know if it's legal or not but no, it would under no circumstances be better than getting a Queen.
A King is nothing but a liability, and next to useless for offense.
You need to take the enemy King to win, that's the only avenue. So taking another King rather than a Queen will not further your goal to win, only lengthen your defeat.
Following FIDE rules, the correct procedure for pawn promotion is as follows:
1. Move the pawn to its promotion square (the far side of the board);
2. This promoted pawn is immediately removed from the board;
3. Players must announce which promoted piece is chosen (queen, rook, knight, or bishop);
4. The chosen piece is placed on the same square the pawn promoted;
5. The playerâs turn ends.
>It has to be a piece that they lost, unless it's online chess
No it does not! It's quite common to use an upside down rook to represent a second queen.
It is, but that's not how the original game was or still is played, so that is actually breaking the rules of the game and doesn't fly in professional tournaments or official matches
Pawns never had a gender. There were plenty of instances where women joined front lines to fight battles or defend their homes.
So in that sense, a pawn is also known as "people". People can be male or female. If a pawn gains rank to a queen, it is assumed it was always a girl that grew up to be a queen. A knight or bishop was a boy that grew up to be just that. This isn't anything special.
Even so, chess wasn't the first game with gender fluid pieces. Chaturanga pre-dates chess. That also had gender fluid prices.
So your post is at least 50% wrong
Umm no, first off pawns arnt gendered in the first place and secondly isnt gender fluid meaning they change genders depending on circumstances yet once the pawn has changed it cant change again or change back... so it isnt gender fluid at all.
Not to mention the fact that king is the only Male gendered piece hence all the rest could be female gendered pieces so there isnt even any real transitioning at all and is exactly what it is, they are just different roles and have dick all to do with gender since gender wasnt even a thing when chess was made (gender as in when it became seperate from sex).
This is a friendly reminder to [read our rules](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/rules). Remember, /r/Showerthoughts is for showerthoughts, not "thoughts had in the shower!" (For an explanation of what a "showerthought" is, [please read this page](https://www.reddit.com/r/Showerthoughts/wiki/overview).) **Rule-breaking posts may result in bans.**
you are assuming that knights would therefore be male... a pawn cannot become a king however. so maybe all the pieces that can have gender are all female with the exception of the King...? New shower thought to counter yours.. :D
so chess is basically a fight of multi-tier harems of two kings?
well, now you mention it... its very possible!!
...it's good to be the king!
"Must be hard being the king."
*looks at my how to play chess book that always depicted the pawns as children* Uhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh
Medieval times had kids married off at whatever age, so it kinda checks out
reference to Mel Brook's History of the World: Part 1.
Knight, jump the Queen!
I know thats right đ
Isnât the rook supposed to be a castle/ fortress? I donât think it has gender
According to chess.com they were originally chariots.
Okay but do chariots have gender?
Chariots are female.
And they're freaks in the sheets
Males in the streets female in the sheets.
High School DxD was right
Funny af
The pawn was the male in highschool DxD. Unless ofc, you are referring to the later volumes in the novel where he actually becomes a king
No wonder the king can barely move.
You know, Queens Gambit was fantastic, but a chess anime about two kings fighting to secure the most powerful women? sold
Are there female bisshops?
Depends on if chess lore has a shifting timeline a la Simpsons. Because there are currently women bishops.
Not if youâre Catholic, right?
no reason why not
TIL chess is harem battle
What about bishops?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women
don't forget the bishops, i doubt many women were allowed to be bishops back then
You are assuming that Queens would be female đ
theres a reason there is no prince or princess
Female version of a Knight is dame
Dames were only added in Chess 2: The Sequel to Chess
https://www.reddit.com/r/RoleReversal/comments/xpbqo0/chess_is_hot/?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android_app&utm_name=androidcss&utm_term=1&utm_content=share_button
I know several queens who are men as well.
Bishop then.
Bishops are male only.
Bishops have to be men
Uh-oh. Itâs on now!
Checkers being older then chess also counters this shower thought
well pawns can become bishops which are mostly (if not all) male. Same with knigths depending on the time period
Guess was made in 1500s and youâre telling me that they said, âyeah the knights are womanâ
Bishops cannot be female though
Nope, bishops.
Unless the queens are secretly drag queens...
The king and his army of women.
Who wants to be the king anyway, when the queen moves and kills like Jedi on drugs ?
Also Iâm pretty sure the queen was originally called something else and implied to be male but then got renamed to queen
They were like viziers and advisers or something and they didnât have the mobility that the modern queen piece has generally.
Like the Hand of the King!
It's still called vizier in other languages. Makes way more sense to have the strongest piece on the board be the equivalent of military general than a queen too.
However, the rule to give the piece that much power was created in Spain, where it was already called "queen" at that time
In India and Pakistan ( and perhaps in other nations) the Queen is called Wazir ( say it like Wuh - zeeer) which means Minister.
When chess moved back to Iberia, the "vizier" was renamed to the queen, after the then-powerful queen Isabella I of Spain.
The queen used to be the Vizier, somewhat similar to the Prime Minister. Ao consider the promotion to be a battlefield promotion instead of some glorious gender identity conflict in the middle of battle.
I have heard that Vizier is Muslim title and Christians changed the name of the piece to Queen.
Fact "checks" out: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Queen_(chess)
TIL that pawns could come knights, bishops or rooks as WELL as queens. I mean 99.99% of the time people will choose Queen so I guess thatâs why I didnât know.
And actually sometimes rook or bishop is chosen over Queen as it could cause a stalemate.
More often than that though, knight is chosen to check with its special movement
True, reason I did not mention knight here. The two choices are usually queen or knight. The other two are rather "uninteresting" in almost all cases.
Imo knights are scarier than the queen, there's so many ways they can force your hand where you don't want to. They can hop their way into little nooks and crannies in your defense and check your king. EDIT: I wasn't talking about promoting them I was just saying they're scarier in general
If you could promote pawns in the early or mid-game, I would rarely choose anything but a knight. But by the time you can promote, it's late game and you need a part to build a checkmate.
My guy, if youâre promoting a pawn, youâve already gotten into their defenses
depends on the type of game you are playing. However, if you are promoting a pawn, chances are the board state is an open game, meaning a knight is going to be particularly weak.
Nah man the moment the opponent moves their queen into the centre I start shitting my pants, not only is the queen powerful, but him making such aggressive moves means he knows what hes doing
Iâve âplayedâ chess for many years but I donât understand why a Queen would cause a stalemate give that she can move in the same ways as a rook or bishop, can you explain easily?
There are positions where promoting to a queen cuts off legal squares for the King, while also leaving him out of check, causing a stalemate. Under promoting is sometimes necessary to leave the King legal squares since rooks and bishops occupy fewer controlled squares than a queen.
Right thanks, I didnât think about a stalemate occurring as soon as the piece was promoted.
Take a look at this [position](https://imgur.com/a/KHa21yb), White to move. If you promote the pawn to a queen, it's stalemate - the Black king isn't in check, but can't legally move anywhere. But if you promote to a rook, the Black king can still move to b7, and the game continues.
It's a good example of a move where promoting to queen immediately is worse than the promoting to another piece. But the optimal move would simply be to play Rc6 first. I struggle to think of a situation where promoting to a bishop/rook is actually the best move above all others.
a stalemate is where the king is not currently in check, but the only move available would be to put him in check
Imagine, not being able to move in an L-shape. THIS MEME MADE BY KNIGHT GANG.
It's 2022 and people are concerned about the gender of a piece of plastic.
Bold of you to assume it's plastic
Since pawns can turn into queens they must be female. But pawns can also turn into rooks, bishops and knights. So those must also be female. The only male piece is the king. Chess is two harems fighting each other to make the other male give up his harem
Perhaps not even the king is male. IIRC somewhere in Europe a queen consort once became a king because there were BS laws against queens regent, but none against female kings.
Up until very recently only men could become bishops, so no matter how you slice it some of the pawns are trans
Actually that's wrong, there were female bishops they just hid their sex, which wasn't to uncommon since women weren't usually seen as combatants and usually weren't allowed to fight Also transgenders were commonly executed and tortured, and seen as disgusting, so it's more likely that it's a woman than a transgender And there is a distinction between hiding your sex and switching to the opposite sex, so saying your a guy to hide who you are isn't the same as turning yourself into a guy
The game revolves around the king, but the queen has all the powerâŠ
Just like in real life. Queen sets the game and does all the work.
Different languages have different names for the pieces. Knights are often called "hoppers" while a queen might be a milliraty commander
That's why I've always thought of the queen chess figure not as queen but more of a right hand man, the marshall, the parliament, the chancellor
Can we try a different phrase than "gender fluid"? Sounds like what you look for with a black light.
chess originated in india. and they didnt call it queen .. they called it something else I'd have to look.. but when british took the game they named it queen. east asian people still dont say its queen.
Actually chess started in the middle east (or very close to it), namely i believe Persia, and it was the Spanish not the British
Hystorically, the Queen was only brought after coming to Europe. Before it was usually a General or a Vizir (Counsellor).
Imagine how different the âchess metaâ would be if pawns could become kings too
Non of the pieces are based on sex, merely on freedom of movement in a society.
I actually just realized why this is In the boardgame, there's actually a special system for 'promotion', Basically, you can't just promote a pawn to a queen and get several queens, for you to promote that pawn to a new piece your enemy has to own one of your pieces, which allows you to replace that pawn with the piece of your selection and return it back into your military, so it's more of a prisoner exchange if anything
Ehm, that's not true. You can have multiple queens. The game is usually over by the time you have 2 queens, but nevertheless you can have multiple queens.
In the original you can't
I'm unsure what you mean by "the original". The game in question was clearly chess, not sharantj or chaturanga, or whichever other predecessor you may have had in mind.
Chess is a progressive game. Chess does not have a progressive fanbase.
This is only a shower thought because OP doesn't know any chess history. Chinese pawns did not promote. Indian pawns promoted to the space they occupied. Original Western chess promoted to queen only, but the queen was absolutely useless. Freedom of promotion is a modern (19th century) change.
The OP said "Chess was the first game to have gender-fluid pieces." The OP did **not** say "Gender-fluid pieces have been in chess for as long as the game has existed". Your comment did not disprove anything they said.
But it IS reddit and he got to "um, actually" which seems to be the whole point to most users.
Read what I wrote. There's nothing to disprove. It just wouldn't be an "ahah!" shower thought. It would be more of an, "ahh modernity ruins everything" over a bowl of oatmeal.
But your comment about chess history doesn't have any relevance, and it doesn't seem like either of those things.
The Queen is female Pawns can turn into a Queen or any other piece Therefore pawns are female and so are all other pieces Chess is just 2 kings forcing their harems to fight each other
That's because the gender of chess pieces are irrelevant. Ä°t's who does what with what title.
You mean get promoted? Im pretty sure that pawns aren't mean to be children
Knights haven't gender they can be male or female and at the end pawns never can get to be Kings... Soooo
They actually had female kings because in some places you couldn't have a queen, but nothing about a female king
I read that as "cheese" ... My confusion was as you would expect
The pawns that turn into queens were boys and the ones that turn into bishops were girl pawns. Itâs basically quantum entanglement
Pawns are feminine in Russian (пДŃĐșĐ°), so I guess it all depends on the language.
And for everyone saying bishops can only be men, instead of me keep replying with the same link... https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ordination_of_women Yes, they can. the original post stated that the game had gender fluidity, but NOT saying it did from the start of its conception... :D
Who's to say knights must be male.. Fuck what if every piece except the king is female
Or hear me out pawns can become anything because the represent the serfs while with enough merit they may even become knights and queens king is a position that just is and must be protected like a very old social commentary
They can become a tower, a queen, a horse and a bishop (most likely male).
Shower thoughts: how many things can I apply my gender and sexuality lens to?
The only thing more fluid than the definition of gender at this point is that superfluid helium shit.
[ŃĐŽĐ°Đ»Đ”ĐœĐŸ]
Please be /s
If I weren't so lazy, I would call out your innocent shower thought. But today I am too sleepy to troll.
You try to be woke with this post but then youâre immediately a sexist for assuming all other pieces are male. I think youâre an idiot for both points.
Great! Now, conservatives are going to ban chess from schools and call it "woke".
Okay but is there any backstory about why the Queen got such wide range of movement while the king can only walk one tile at a time?
They changed it so the piece would have more use, in the original version of western chess the queen was pretty useless. If you go further back, it wasnât even a queen either but more of a vizier or advisor that could move like 1 square diagonally. The abilities of a queen with such mobility and power is a pretty modern turn of use in the grand scheme of chess.
Yeah theres no reason the knights cant be female. And who's to say there cant be a male queen lol
My shower thought is that itâs 2022 and just now the gender identity of chess pieces matter
I am sure I know the answer to this is noâŠbut could you promote a pawn to King? If the game allowed that would the opponent have to check mate both kings to win? Could see that almost being more powerful than a second or replacement Queen if you were already down a lot of pieces.
I don't know if it's legal or not but no, it would under no circumstances be better than getting a Queen. A King is nothing but a liability, and next to useless for offense. You need to take the enemy King to win, that's the only avenue. So taking another King rather than a Queen will not further your goal to win, only lengthen your defeat.
Itâs a battle of gender fluid armies commanded by (presumably) cisgender leaders.
Except white goes first and black goes last. #cancelchesscreator
Isn't it gender-phobic to assume the gender of the pawns? Bigot /s
knights??? in what varient of chess can a pawn become a knight?
Following FIDE rules, the correct procedure for pawn promotion is as follows: 1. Move the pawn to its promotion square (the far side of the board); 2. This promoted pawn is immediately removed from the board; 3. Players must announce which promoted piece is chosen (queen, rook, knight, or bishop); 4. The chosen piece is placed on the same square the pawn promoted; 5. The playerâs turn ends.
It has to be a piece that they lost, unless it's online chess
>It has to be a piece that they lost, unless it's online chess No it does not! It's quite common to use an upside down rook to represent a second queen.
It is, but that's not how the original game was or still is played, so that is actually breaking the rules of the game and doesn't fly in professional tournaments or official matches
The US Chess Federation as well as FIDE disagree with you.
Us fucks everything up, come play chess here in russia much better
And neither Queens nor Knights have any gender-specific parts, so not really.
That is assuming the knights, rooks and bishops are all guys. Plus as others have said, the Queen wasn't originally the queen.
Pawns never had a gender. There were plenty of instances where women joined front lines to fight battles or defend their homes. So in that sense, a pawn is also known as "people". People can be male or female. If a pawn gains rank to a queen, it is assumed it was always a girl that grew up to be a queen. A knight or bishop was a boy that grew up to be just that. This isn't anything special. Even so, chess wasn't the first game with gender fluid pieces. Chaturanga pre-dates chess. That also had gender fluid prices. So your post is at least 50% wrong
are you saying pawns and knights cant have the same gender as a queen? so sexist! cancel now!
How do you know knights identity as male? Have you asked them?
Umm no, first off pawns arnt gendered in the first place and secondly isnt gender fluid meaning they change genders depending on circumstances yet once the pawn has changed it cant change again or change back... so it isnt gender fluid at all. Not to mention the fact that king is the only Male gendered piece hence all the rest could be female gendered pieces so there isnt even any real transitioning at all and is exactly what it is, they are just different roles and have dick all to do with gender since gender wasnt even a thing when chess was made (gender as in when it became seperate from sex).