{{
`${userDetail.user.displayName}${userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode ? `#${standardizeBungieGlobalCode(userDetail.user.cachedBungieGlobalDisplayNameCode)}` : ""}`}}
{{getUserClans()}}
Edited by mdcaimbeul:
3/14/2022 1:36:56 PM
17
Using “Pawn” as a Derogatory Word
“Pawn of the government”
“Being used as a pawn”
Specifically when using it as a comparison in chess, pawns are incredibly powerful in chess so the comparison doesn’t hold.
That’s all of my bs. Bye.
English
#Offtopic
-
4 RepliesEdited by SYKEVANDAL: 3/16/2022 3:52:28 PMThe term ‘Pawn’ is absolutely a Chess reference. The Pawn, while equally powerful enough to take out any piece on the board, is by far the most limited in its innate ability to do so. Additionally, their positional state on the board is such as to act as a body shield to the “more important” pieces behind it. More specifically, to protect ‘The King’. As such, the term Pawn has come to have a derogatory meaning representative of an individual who is expendable and under the control of someone superior, as opposed to controlling their own destiny,…even foregoing self-preservation. Edit: An alternative, but not quite as meaningful,… how do you feel about the term “cannon fodder”?
-
[quote]pawns are incredibly powerful in chess[/quote] Not until they get to the other end of the board they’re not. Queens and knights, that’s power. Nobody pulls off a solid L like knights do.
-
Yes, this a whole lotta bullshart
-
Well, in chess, they generally have more limited ability to move, and are the most readily sacrificed. So yes, they can be used for a lot of good in a chess game, but being described as someone who is the most easily sacrificed is sort of insinuating that they are the least important to the person who is deciding the moves.
-
1 ReplyPawn isn't just a thing in chess. It means someone who is being used by someone higher up for some purpose above themselves. It says they're unimportant and lack the intelligence to exercise free will.
-
My first thought reading this was of a Density character
-
The relationship in that analogy is that the pawn (consumer/follower) is controlled directly by the player (corporation/cause/etc.) and has no will of its own.
-
Pawns are expendable. Great in numbers, useless if they are by themselves. Plus, they only go forward, and can be attacked from anyside. They can only attack diagonally. So when they are face to face with another pawn, they practically just stare at each other, stuck until someone gets them killed. Rendering them useless.
-
I view a pawn as one who conforms to say a system, lets take a military as an example. Say you have the new guys coming in who know only the mindless devotion imbedded in their manipulated mind being your classic E1-E2, easily influenced by anyone of higher rank, a pawn. then you have those who have been in awhile and have ascended the brokenness of said system, this being the E3-E4 mafia of whomst have ascended said pawnship and don't conform, the true heros, hardest workers, and terminal lances. not pawns, heroes... then you have the yesmans, those E5-E6 that just want that bonus and reenlist even when the military screws them over twice but they are into that kinda thing. pawns. [spoiler]Be the hero, or stick around long enough to become the villain...[/spoiler]
-
Sure, a pawn can be super powerful, but they’re also expendable. If I can sacrifice a pawn to save literally any other piece on the board, I will. Not to mention how they just mindlessly drone forwards without enough thought to even turn around. That’s what it means to be called a pawn. A small, expendable, mindless drone, to be used and sacrificed for the grand strategy.
-
what you dont like pawn stars?
-
4 RepliesPawns are only powerful in tandem, or if they’ve been queened. Isolated pawns are very weak, and are often sacrificed to either improve the players position or protect more valuable pieces. Pawns are often the focus of forks, pins, and skewers.
-
1 ReplyEdited by Cobravert: 3/14/2022 7:25:57 PMBecause Magneto says so.
-
2 RepliesThe analogy is usually used to refer to someone’s lack of autonomy and subservience to authority, not lack of power in an abstract sense.
-
2 Replies"Being manipulated and used to fulfill a more powerful persons agenda is super cool guys stop laughing"
-
They’re incredibly useful - yes - but there is complete disregard for their lives/wellbeing.
-
Even in numbers, a weakling is a weakling still!
