@SixtySecondsOfHell said in #797:
> The same logic applies to health clubs, where women can legally segregate from men.
>
Your points are becoming less relevant and even more bizarre every time you reply. We are not talking about health clubs, I and many women I know have no issue working out in a gym full of men or playing chess in a website full of men, as long as those men are behaving properly, which the vast majority do. Why the constant need to segregate everyone rather than just require decent standards of behaviour from everyone? You seem to be obsessed with segregation.
>Why not just require them to work out with each other and punish the men who can't handle it?
Are you suggesting that there are men who would object to being "required" to work out with fit women in skimpy gym gear in a gym? Or did you mean punish the men who can't handle the temptation and act on it?
> The rules also apply in reverse. Let's make sure we enforce them when females are the aggressors,
Are you talking about female-to-female aggression or female-to-male aggression here? And what does this have to do with the alleged male-to-female aggression that this original topic is about? There are two male alleged aggressors and 8 or so female alleged victims?
> ...or are there no same-sex predators?
Female to female aggression? Male to male? What do you mean?
>Chess has a long history of abuse scandals and the perpetrators were not always men.
Deflection and whataboutery, "what about that vague time when the aggressor was a woman?" (which one, incidentally?) What about it?
> The e-sport model offers a level of privacy not possible with OTB chess,
Why do we need privacy exactly?
> which never had to deal with it.
It was never an issue because previously, OTB chess was exclusively a gentlemen's club. But now there are women as well, you think all of a sudden we need "privacy"? Are you a dinosaur? Did you go to an all-boys school? I am getting the impression you somehow have a problem with men and women integrating and having physical proximity with each other, for example in gyms or chess tournaments.
> As this is the *third* time you have made the same point, I don't feel the need to keep responding,
I am making the point again because you have not given me satisfactory answers yet, in fact, you are coming up with increasingly ridiculous scenarios and statements.
> ....even to a Lion of the Sea.
I don't think anyone has ever called me a Sealion before...did something get lost in translation?