The world’s top chess federation has ruled that transgender women cannot compete in its official events for females until an assessment of gender change is made by its officials.

  • Zapdrive@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    72
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    Lol, literally the only game where physical size, bone density, lung capacity and muscle strength does not matter is keeping men and women separate! Haha… In chess there should be no separate category for women, unless… Unless… Unless we believe that women are less smarter than men.

    • UlrikHD@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      53
      ·
      2 years ago

      Chess got an open class and a female class. The latter is there to provide a safer environment for girls and hopefully encourage more to try out the sport.

    • Hazdaz@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      11
      ·
      2 years ago

      The vast majority of times when men’s and women’s sports are separated it isn’t for the benefit of the men. It is because it would be a blow-out if the two sexes were together.

        • Iteria@sh.itjust.works
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Football? American Football has no restrictions on gender, it’s just that no woman can compete after puberty truly sets in. What that guys says is true about physical sports. Women can’t compete and never could. I can’t think of a single sport where a woman could outcompete a man in a physical sense. Even something like gymnastics, I think men still overcome the natural female advantage that comes from being small.

          Chess from what I recall created a woman’s division because of the systematic biases and pressures girls faced. However, if I’m recalling correctly, it’s not particularly weird for a woman to complete in the open division. It’s just not a welcoming place for woman, so beginners often start in the women’s division. With that in mind I don’t see why transpeople shouldn’t be allowed. They wouldn’t be welcome much either in the open division, but also I’m not sure they’d be welcome in the women’s division either, so it’s kind of a wash.

    • Not_Alec_Baldwin@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      2 years ago

      Sorry to be contrarian here, but at the high competitive level chess is a cardiovascular challenge. If you listen to serious chess players talk about playing it’s not just a simple mental exercise.

      High performing chess players have a higher HRV. Chess grandmasters might be sitting still but their body is undergoing a high degree of stress. https://psycnet.apa.org/record/2019-14359-001

      Men statistically have higher HRV on average, and the outliers are even more extreme. https://www.whoop.com/ca/en/thelocker/normal-hrv-range-age-gender/

      So when you enter into a competitive environment it’s just nicer to know you have a MORE level playing field.

      I know chess specifically is controversial with regards to gender stuff and I’m not saying it’s perfect. I’m just saying that there are real reasons to support separate brackets.

      • Anonymousllama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        Pretty typical for here to see a post with actual sources and instead of people doing their own research they instead want to downvote and dog-pile. You can be upset with the outcome but there are reasons behind it (and it’s not just them jumping on the trans bashing bandwagon, they outlined exactly why it was done and how it works for male-female transitions and vice versa)

        • Ultraviolet@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          2 years ago

          Providing a source doesn’t make a statement unchallengeable, especially if the source is deeply flawed.

      • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        This just in: throughout all of history women were never involved in politics; somehow relates to them being bad at chesd

        • nuxetcrux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Women often ruled capably (Nefertiti, Boudica, Catherine, Elizabeth, etc) were politically involved throughout history ,and were likely some decision-makers in early societies, as temporary habits were likely determined by foragability.

          They are not bad at chess. There are biased circumstances both social and epistemological that have prevented their involvement with the evolution of Chess. I think these chess people are more afraid of someone insulting Chess and in the process insulted a lot of people.

          • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            2
            ·
            2 years ago

            Yeah dude this was sarcasm, ain’t there a whole era named after a female ruler?

            If you want my personal chess opinion they statistically do worse cause chess is nothing but a game of emotions now, and the old masters made sure they had less competition by making women an easy target. Idk why the whole tourney isnt done online if they want an actual representation of chess skill, not just the bachlorette type drama we got going on

            • nuxetcrux@lemmy.world
              link
              fedilink
              English
              arrow-up
              1
              ·
              2 years ago

              I agree. I just think it’s detrimental to just shout that something is wrong as though it’s common sense without analysis or reasoning.

        • nuxetcrux@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          No, I’m saying chess has been biased from the start and the games greatest players have been neurodivergent for a long time. Gender injustice is happening here, but it also has complex layers worth investigating, too. Like, how much of Chess’ DNA and evolution has been balanced based almost exclusively to satisfy traditionally male interests (domination, competition). How did the pieces and board change to fit the boys’ game.

          Is it helpful the WNBA ball is smaller? I’d say yes, but not just in the obvious ways, but also in service of the meta game and to put the best product forward. There are extenuating circumstances. I was trying to say: the exclusion is so deeply entrenched in the historical male worldview that it might just need to have these debates and growing pains to become what it should be: fair and fun.

    • Kara@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      2 years ago

      And the CEO is Emil Sutovsky, who recently made a twitter poll, basically asking, let’s be honest, does anyone actually care to watch this women’s tournament? When he never made a similar poll for any other tournament.
      The chess world really needs to outgrow the sexist and transphobic FIDE

    • Rose@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      No wonder the “gender change” wording of their new rules is so similar to the new Russian law that essentially bans transitioning.

      • fubo@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        2 years ago

        One can imagine that every oligarch who wants to suck the milk of Mr. Putin is required to demonstrate loyalty periodically by pissing in the eyes of one of Mr. Putin’s designated targets. LGBTQ+ is just one of those.

  • Silverseren@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    52
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    2 years ago

    And they also made it so trans men have to give up any women’s titles they’ve earned. So, they simultaneously think trans men are men, but trans women are not women.

    If anything, based on the past comments of the head of the organization, they have a position that’s generally “women are dumber than men and we want to make decisions that align with that ethos always”.

  • aluminiumsandworm@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    42
    ·
    2 years ago

    this makes sense because cis women have such small bones they can’t reach past the centre board, giving most trans women and tall cis women an inherent advantage. /s

    what the fuck chess this is just blatant transphobia

  • SuddenDownpour@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    42
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    None of y’all are getting it. Trans women have an unfair advantage in chess because they can turn the king into another queen.

    • Hello Hotel@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      5
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      2 years ago

      That would put the chess judges into a paradox and their mind would lock up, requiring a visit to the ICU. Because trans pepople can only do that, thay are “a danger to the whole chess community” /s

  • chk232@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    30
    ·
    2 years ago

    I don’t think it’s a issue in chess. Unless they have to run 100m while holding the chess board.

    • starlinguk@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      27
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      2 years ago

      They consider trans women men, and men are smarter than women. That’s what it implies anyway.

      • static_motion@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        Being good at chess isn’t about being “smart”, a lot of top chess players will tell you as much. It is however about things like spatial awareness and pattern recognition, and some studies have demonstrated those traits to be, on average, stronger in male subjects. I’m sure evidence to the contrary exists though.

  • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    34
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    2 years ago

    This is such a stupid argument, while you might be able to make the argument about sexual dimorphism in physical sports there’s literally no good reason why a woman shouldn’t be allowed to play chess against a man, or play chess against another woman if they are trans.

    Chess is a game based on intelligence and strategy, it’s not based on strength. It seems that this decision was made primarily on the basis of sexism, either because they think that chess is ““manly”” or because they think that men are smarter than women or that women are stupid. Either way not logical, purely sexist.

    • Shanedino@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      12
      arrow-down
      8
      ·
      2 years ago

      Women have been allowed in the open division and Trans females will also continued to be allowed in that division just not in the women’s division.

      • Pogbom@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        16
        ·
        2 years ago

        They said that while you might be able to make it for sports, you certainly can’t make it for chess. That doesn’t mean they personally think there’s a case for sports too.

        • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          9
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          Exactly, I’m saying that in chess there is no advantage or disadvantage between sex (or gender for that matter) because it is not a physical game.

      • Draconic NEO@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 years ago

        No I was saying that for chess you can’t since there’s no unfairness or difference in advantage to playing chess as a man or as a woman.

  • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    23
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Clarifications and comments (some pre emptive)

    Chess has a women’s category to boost participation and spotlight female players.

    Women can and do compete in the open category, which allows men and women. However, currently the highest rated women perform under the super closed “Super GM” level, so they participate in the tournaments that are less prestigious but fitting their rating. Male players like IM Eric Rosen also participate in such tournaments.

    The best female player in history , Judit Polgar was 8th best in the world when taking both genders into account. There’s nothing stopping women from reaching the elite level in open chess. She even participated in the candidates tournament which decides who gets to play against the world champion for the world champion title. Unfortunately she didn’t perform too well, but it’s not because of her gender, she was basically beaten 2-1 (plus draws) by a male competitor, just like the other contestants in the round she was eliminated.

    At her peak she had 2735 Elo points, making her 55th highest rated person in the history of organized chess. This is higher than one of the actual challengers to the crown, Nigel short.

    Regarding the rulings:

    1. No one is going to pretend to be a woman, in order to convert the person’s identity with fide, they are required to have government issued paperwork saying they have transitioned. It’s not worth it.

    2. it’s funny that male to female transgender people are not regarded as women by this ruling, hence cannot participate in women’s events, but female to male transgender people also forfeit their women’s titles as they are not seen as women either. (To be fair, they can convert them to open titles, and get them back if they detransition officially)

    So according to FIDE, transitioning from a man to a woman doesn’t make you a woman, you are considered a man, but also, transitioning from a woman to a man makes you a man, so you are also not considered a woman.

    Seems paradoxical. You’d think they’d pick one and stick to it.

    Also: chess does have physical advantages, but they seem to be reletive and not competitive. Most high level players have some sports regimen as it helps increase cardiovascular efficiency, but size of competitor doesn’t seem to matter as seen by David Bronstein and Mikhail Tal. Ian Nepomniatchschi intentionally lost weight for the world championship, and his ratings grew as a result.

    Remember that whales are not necessarily more clever than humans even though their brains are huge in comparison.

    • morphballganon@mtgzone.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      2 years ago

      So according to FIDE, transitioning from a man to a woman doesn’t make you a woman, you are considered a man, but also, transitioning from a woman to a man makes you a man, so you are also not considered a woman.

      This is only confusing if you assume the two categories are equal, one for each gender. The anyone category has more relaxed rules. They could make a men-only category that is just as strict as the women-only category, but what for?

      • Skullgrid@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        ·
        2 years ago

        There is no men only category, there are only open (any gender can participate) and women’s (only women can participate).

        The thing I find funny is how they treat transmen and transwomen differently. Like, if they want to say transwomen aren’t men , and they can’t participate in women’s events, they should also say that transmen aren’t men and can keep their women’s titles.

        • morphballganon@mtgzone.com
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          2 years ago

          Gender is a spectrum, not one or the other. The women’s category excludes people in the middle. If you understand that, there is no inconsistency.

      • Anonymousllama@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        5
        ·
        2 years ago

        No, you can’t have men’s only categories. The only viable options are open (men+women) or women (just women). It would be horribly sexist to just have a men’s only division apparently 🙄

  • FourPacketsOfPeanuts@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    22
    ·
    edit-2
    2 years ago

    Plenty of enlightened gents hitting the thread here to rubbish the need for a women’s category whilst simultaneously demonstrating the need for a women’s category

  • Hairyblue@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    21
    ·
    2 years ago

    What? Is this real? Are the men and women not competing together? It is not a physical competition. Why the separation?

    • PunnyName@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      29
      ·
      2 years ago

      The reason there’s a women’s league in the first place is so they don’t get harassed by the men (ostensibly).

      So while on the surface, a gendered League is stupid, there are real world reasons for the separation.

      This decision might / maybe / could be an extension of that reasoning. But very likely it’s not, and it’s just more bullshit anti trans policy.

      • donuts@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        9
        ·
        2 years ago

        The best way to prevent harassment is not bigoted segregation by gender, but in fact punishing or banning people who harass others.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        edit-2
        2 years ago

        The solution to men harassing women (and generally making them unwelcome, as they do) should not be to segregate women though, it should be to discipline men.
        Which leads me to the real reason why women are segregated (because clearly isn’t about their safety or their inclusion) - because the men involved would have an absolute breakdown if they were beaten by a woman (not a problem exclusive to chess, either).

      • ShakeThatYam@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        2 years ago

        If that’s the reason, I’d imagine trans women would be the most likely to be harassed by the cis men who are harassing cis women.

      • Sethayy@sh.itjust.works
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        2 years ago

        or they could just like… Not allow harassment.

        Really the game is chess, you shouldnt even need to see your oponent, so it could be all done online.

        Chess was pretty much perfected decades ago - now all the tournaments thrive on is psyching out your opponent, which they’ve made women an easy target by isolating them. No wonder they statistically do worse

    • wwaxen@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      23
      ·
      2 years ago

      Currently, the top women don’t come close to the top men. Considering how few female chess players are in comparison, it’s not a surprise.

      Having a women’s league means you can have chess news about women’s tournaments and champs and give them some visibility.

      • DessertStorms@kbin.social
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        10
        ·
        2 years ago

        Currently, the top women don’t come close to the top men

        because they’re excluded at all levels, lets not pretend it’s because women aren’t as good and need “protecting” from the “superior” men.

        • spiritusmaximus@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          edit-2
          2 years ago

          That doesn’t make any sense.

          Yes, they don’t compete with men, but they still have women’s league and women from that league don’t come close to men (not all, ofcourse).

          Could making united league deter women even more? Very possible.

          I am not against, but still I think a strong bump in women’s chess league with marketing, money, better condition would be great, before possible merging.

          Currently, women would just suffer with results for long time.

          Unfortunately Chess doesn’t seem as healthy and open for that, and that is just sad.

          • DessertStorms@kbin.social
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            2 years ago

            I feel like if you really wanted to know you could easily look up the barriers that women face in chess (and in all sports), and I honestly don’t feel like spoon feeding you such basics, so I’m going to just paste my other reply here and leave it up to you to start educating yourself if you really want to:

            The solution to men harassing women (and generally making them unwelcome, as they do) should not be to segregate women though, it should be to discipline men.
            Which leads me to the real reason why women are segregated (because clearly isn’t about their safety or their inclusion) - because the men involved would have an absolute breakdown if they were beaten by a woman (not a problem exclusive to chess, either).

  • katy ✨@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    19
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    2 years ago

    Today we learned that bigots think trans women have a biological advantage at being smarter and more logical than cis women.

    Last month we learned that bigots think trans women are hotter than cis women.

    Starting to think bigots don’t think clearly.

    • Zapdrive@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      2 years ago

      If trans men (and by extension all men) are equally smart and logical as women, why even have separate men and women categories? Let women compete with men and we’ll soon find which gender is more smart and logical.