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.

    • Squids@sopuli.xyz
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      14
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      Because different genders taste cheese differently obviously duh. Don’t want to give them NBs an unfair advantage in the Roquefort round

      (Serious answer - I think it’s to try and combat entrenched sexism in the sport? There aren’t many women in chess and by making a space explicitly for them you hopefully create a safe space that can encourage more women to take up the pursuit. As it’s a social perspective thing, AGAB therefore really shouldn’t matter because the point is to go “look women!” Not “women are inherently better/worse and so we should segregate on gender”)

      • elscallr@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        7
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        Because different genders taste cheese differently obviously duh.

        I’ve heard it is possible to fascinate a woman by giving her a piece of cheese.

        • CoderKat@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          3
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          It’s true. Cheese is extremely fascinating. Please give me cheese.

    • Sarsoar
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      17
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 year ago

      To add to squids answer: There isn’t a segregated mens and womens category. There is an open category and a women’s only category.

      What happened in the open category is that because the societal pressures and social constructs that disincentivized young girls to play, women weren’t placing high in the open category. (Because top players end up being top players because they started when thwy were 5) This leads to a feedback loop where young girls see less women in the sport and get reinforced that it is not for them so don’t pick it up at a young age, so less persue it and get good, so less women are seen at high levels, etc.

      So then comes the women’s category to combat women not feeling like they belong in that space. Women can compete in both the open and women’s categories.

      But because it is an intellectual thing mostly, barring transgender women is ridiculous. In athletic sports you could almost try to argue that a woman that went through male puberty could be stronger(ignoring how estrogen weakens them and they cannot compete in the men’s category anymore). You could try to make that argument in athletic sports (and it is a different discussion to this) and almost seem logically consistently on the surface level if you don’t think about it any further than your fox news talking points, but what is the argument here? If a woman went through a male puberty they were possibly socialized as male and weren’t told as a kid that chess wasn’t for them and so they have an intellectual advantage over cis women?

      I don’t get it. It seems like, just with athletic sports, it is not about the sanctity of the sport or about fairness, it is about banning trans people from public spaces and policing what women can be.