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.