the framing of this headline is ridiculous. corbyn's characterization as a "radical" is contradicted by this own article, which claims he wants to re-nationalize utilities. is nationalization of water really "left-wing"? is the us left wing for having a national mail service? his characterization as unpopular also seems mystifying to me, the article says that under his leadership membership in labour has increased.
it seems unlikely that second place came from an equally or more disadvantaged background. chess in general is a pretty exclusionary. sure the kid (tani?) might not have been the worst off kid at the tournament but kids from higher income schools or private schools might have an easier time dedicating time to the study of chess. what's significant to me is the difficulty of being homeless and dedicating time to studying anything, especially something extracurricular like chess. it's possible that second place came from the same place but if so you're kinda calling into question the entire premise of champions right? like caruana and carlsen are essentially the same strength so whats the use of calling carlsen the champion and giving him all the prize money?
I agree this is an opinion that i've held for a long time. making the space of conversation more welcoming promotes free speech, however i'm slightly skeptical of the trans example simply because i think there are more people who are transphobic than trans. (although that's just people who i know, it's possible that demographics are different in other places.)
This article is a little bit confusing to me, where did the 80% figure come from? is it just because those studies looked at one year? would the pay gap increase if longer term studies were done?
I don't think it's a conscious choice. I would think its a psychological phenomenon possibly more common in those who are naturally attention seeking but i doubt they intentionally mean to seek attention. i do agree that if they are attention seeking it could detract from the rest of the trans community.
I think this is fascinating, I think that ROGD could be a real thing but nipping science because it's politically inconvenient is not a good thing to do and has disastrous consequences. that being said i'm not sure that ROGD is actually politically inconvenient to the left, it merely expands the definition of trans. I do think this article uses slightly outdated terminology, neglecting to use AMAB (assigned male at birth) and AFAB (assigned female at birth) instead calling males or boys "girls who identified as boys."
I don't see the government paying for my college... In my experience a majority of my friends have or are on track to have student debt from having to pay for college.
It is my suspicion that the attitude of american students towards their professors is perhaps a function of the privatization of schools. since students are paying for their education they feel entitled to a good grade regardless of performance. I would like to know others thoughts on this. I don't know much about post secondary education in Europe but it seems different from the American collegiate system somehow.
I expected it to be the same in America, unfortunately this was not the case. I don't know what it is but nobody in my social circles seemed to even know that this was going on.
Chess is a game that can be played perfectly. There is no perfect Hockey game. If you get two super computers to play chess against one another they will draw a majority of the time, I think it is a testament to the skill of both players that they drew 12 games in a row.
i really enjoyed this article and i think that chess players were a perfect case study for this sort of thing, i wonder though how applicable this is to other games or every day life.