[Moose]

Likewise, this is my last post on this, since at last I checked, you can't just demand that you get the final word. Speaking of words, I've put the key ones in caps, since you apparently have trouble picking them out.

"Women have equality now".

No, they don't. Women have SUPERIORITY in this regard; there are "mens and womens" tourneys and "womens only tourneys". That is not equality, that is preferential treatment for women in the form of more opportunity for women. And it isn't just a women's only tournament, it's a women's only CHAMPIONSHIP tournament, that poses the majority of the problem.

<i>You're assuming your conclusion. You're assuming that affirmative action is the point, when it hasn't been shown to be the case.</i>

I'm not ASSUMING that it is the point, I'm stating quite baldly that by definition, it IS affirmative action to have a "women's only championship". It is preferential treatment for women in a culture with a mandate to provide for them equally.

And why is it done? "to get more women into the game".

And what premise must underly that statement to make it valid? "The lack of women in poker, IN AND OF ITSELF, is a problem that must be fixed." In reality, even if only 1% of poker players were women and that 1% of poker players are treated equally and fairly, there is no problem.

Anyways, feel free to PM me if you want to continue this.