• It makes sense for physical sports

      Even that I don’t get. Why not just make a bunch of leagues to separate people by skill, and let everyone play in whatever league they fit in skill whise regardless of gender.

      That completely eliminates the problem with trans womens “unfair advantage” when playing in the womens league too.

      • Because then there wouldn’t be women competing in the top leagues of many sports. Men have a huge physical advantage. On marathons, for instance, there’s a >10 minute gap. And people cannot watch each of these separate leagues, they usually want to watch the best in any sports class. It also wouldn’t motivate women to play amateur sports if they get completely destroyed by most men.

        The current sex-based split is imo still the fairest, though it does indeed cause some issues. The naming might not be ideal. The male class is basically the “open” class. Anyone can compete in it whenever they want. The women’s class exists solely to give people who have not recently been under the influence of testosterone and other male hormones a chance to compete with other people with their body type. That’s not only women, but should also allow for AFAB non-binary and trans guys as long as they haven’t started T.

        • I’m a man and I will never be able to comoete in the top mens league either.

          But I like how it works in boxing, where there’s a light-weight class where I could compete fairly. That’s what I was thinking of

      • Why not make leagues separated by performance only? Because when talented women work hard to excel at a sport, they deserve recognition for that beyond merely being allowed to compete with people who have testosterone increasing their physical abilities.

        I compete in Taekwon-Do tournaments, and I train others to compete. I have a really badass young woman who trains really hard, and on top of it all she’s extremely talented. If she keeps it up, after a few years she could be up there with the best in the world… among women. ALSO she literally won the [redacted because I realized someone could find her name lol, it’s a small sport with few seriously competitive people] women’s world championship for the US, just as a side project. That girl cannot compete with men at a high level. I’m still leagues below the guys who go to the world championships, never mind win them. I would blow her and her competition out of the water if you made me seriously compete with them. She deserves an environment where she can compete with people at the same weight class and born with a similar enough body, and when she wins she deserves to be called the best. Not “congratulations, you’re good enough to spar with the lower end of the guys.”

        • She deserves an environment where she can compete with people at the same weight class and born with a similar enough body

          Isn’t that exactly what I proposed? There’s lots of women (and men) that aren’t born extremely talented, that don’t build muscle easily etc.
          Don’t they deserve to compete against people of similar abilities too? 'Cause seperating by gender only doesn’t help them one bit

          • No, it’s not “exactly what you proposed.” Your proposal would see a system where women would never reach the top tier of any physical sport, perhaps with few exceptions. There would always be a tier out of reach, and believe it or not it means a lot to know that winning is achieveable. This idea is so detrimental to a woman who wants to seriously compete in anything.

            In fact, comparing a talented, hard-working woman to a man without the same level of talent or effort is such an insult. “They both have a disadvantage, one was born short and lazy, and the other was born a woman.” It’s not the same.

            Also people who aren’t talented and who don’t put in extraordinary effort have lots of spaces to compete with each other. Co-ed leagues exist and they’re lots of fun. Amateur leagues exist too, at different levels of competitiveness, for those who are competitive but like you said can’t hack it at a professional level. But just because those spaces exist doesn’t mean that should be enough for women who are inspired to be the best.

            I give up, go play a sport.

      • That’s basically it afaik. Chess has been around long enough that it was originally man’s game, then they started letting women compete but only against other women. The reason why I don’t think there’s been a significant challenge to it is that with physical competitions often being segregated, I don’t think anyone really stopped and thought about the fact that the segregation is pointless. I think they were just like, “competitions are usually segregated by gender, makes sense for chess to be segregated” without stopping to think about why competitions are usually segregated.

        However, I’m not a huge chess person. I liked it as a kid but it doesn’t even remotely appeal to me anymore. So my info might be wrong, and if there are any chess historians who want to correct me, go for it!

        • I’ve also heard that some women prefer this system, that the chance of them being harassed is much lower in a segregated environment. I am also not a chess guy, but having been to many Magic tourneys, I can totally understand the thought process.

          • Definitely. I never participated in any MTG tourneys because just the harassment I faced in the shops and from local players was enough. It’s much better today, though. But you still have the problem that when girls and women avoid playing with boys and men (often for good reason) you will always have less growth in that specific group.

            • True, the only women I ever saw at those events were there with their boyfriends, and even then, not enthusiastic about it. Might be why Magic’s dying now, there’s a whole half of the population they forgot about.

        • I think what also reinforces this cycle is external and internal(!) stereotypes.

          Additionally, because you have fewer strong female players, and since they segregate the game, you therefore also have fewer strong female teachers and role models.

          There is also a very strange dynamic between kids and teens starting in elementary school where the boys often drive out the girls from specific activities. It’s only anecdotal but I’ve seen it twice here in my neighborhood. In the school and in the community center a higher ranked chess player offeres free courses to teach the kids chess.

          None of the girls stay when they are offered a more friendly environment like the dance class. Because you will always have a group of boys socialised to be more aggressive (pulling hair, being ultra competitive, etc.) and girls being socialised to rather avoid conflict. I know many boys also don’t like this atmosphere but they will be more like “I need to be more like the other boys since I am a boy” while the girls we be like “I don’t fit in here since I am a girl”.

          Sorry for the rant.

          • You have nothing to apologize for! But I understand that feeling of feeling obligated to apologize for expressing your emotions, especially passionate ones, especially when it’s a topic like this. Too many people have the weirdest, shitty reactions to stuff like this.

            It was a spot-on rant and it helps me feel seen and understood and I appreciate you for it.

        • I’m not 100% sure but I don’t think chess is segregated - women are allowed to play in the top tournaments. There are additional women-only tournaments which are an attempt to make chess more attractive to them.

        • Theres also a thing with it relating to age.

          Preteen girls completely destroy there male same age opponents. For professional female chessplayers that is when there in their prime and it deceases in adulthood.

          This became a self reinforcing cycle as women who used to be high ranked just stopped playing later on, which is one of the reasons the extra titles for women where invented. An attempt to offset this difference.

          Of course by now we are also well aware that male centric spaces can be super toxic to women and this affects motivation and willingness to be involved. We have to remember that before the internet the only way to play was in person.

        • Women allowed to compete with the men, and they do. This thread is nuts.

          There are women’s competitions because the unrestricted competitions are still dominated by men, and the restricted tournaments allow us to acknowledge the best women to generate excitement for chess from other women. To show them that there are women excelling at this game.

  • Learning that about Yu-Gi-Oh tournaments just brought the biggest smile to my face! It should be an obvious no-brainer that if somebody’s going out of their way to be an asshole and antagonize people, they should no longer be allowed to participate!

    If you can’t play nice, other people aren’t going to want to play with you. We learn that as little tiny babies! I don’t know why it’s so hard for people to grasp. But for some people, you bring gender into it, especially non-cis genders, and it’s like logic just goes out the window and is overridden by weird bigotry that helps no one.

  • we’re just trying to address the way that cis women are disadvantaged in chess due to centuries of misogyny in the sport. We’re not anti trans, we just can’t have cis men pretending to be trans in order to further themselves in competition.

    Okay, not a fan of how you’re going about it but I can understand your goals at least

    We’ll be stripping titles from trans men who competed as women and then came out later

    Ah, there it is. You never have to look too far into efforts to “protect women” to see where it’s really just about hurting trans people because you can.