Transgender Chess Ban

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:"Men consistently outperform women on spatial tasks, including mental rotation, which is the ability to identify how a 3-D object would appear if rotated in space. Now, a University of Iowa study shows a connection between this sex-linked ability and the structure of the parietal lobe, the brain region that controls this type of skill."

An ability that would seem very useful in chess.

https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2008/12/081217124430.htm

They controlled for biological sex but not for gender. So it doesn't really tell us anything about whether trans-women have an unfair advantage over cis-women.

But gender is a social construct so it has no inherent qualities.

[Anonymous]

NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

They aren't giving up their titles. They are still Female Grandmasters, which is from a separate competition.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

wow, if what you are saying is true, then not only trans girls should be allowed to play with girls, but young girls should be allowed to play with young boys. you are stating squarely that the boys' circuits is where the best development and competition is and boys benefit from being exposed to it to the point that a transwoman who trained as a young person in the boys' ciscuit would have an unfair advantage over women who trained in girls' circuits. then eliminate gender divisions in chess. this is not 100 yard sprint or weight lifting, it's a brain game so let's all kids train and compete in the same circuits so they have the same training and if somebody decides to transition to another gender there will be no issues

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

wow, if what you are saying is true, then not only trans girls should be allowed to play with girls, but young girls should be allowed to play with young boys. you are stating squarely that the boys' circuits is where the best development and competition is and boys benefit from being exposed to it to the point that a transwoman who trained as a young person in the boys' ciscuit would have an unfair advantage over women who trained in girls' circuits. then eliminate gender divisions in chess. this is not 100 yard sprint or weight lifting, it's a brain game so let's all kids train and compete in the same circuits so they have the same training and if somebody decides to transition to another gender there will be no issues

Chess is not divided by gender. There's a general competition open up to everybody and a separate female only one to try and encourage young girls to play.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

They aren't giving up their titles. They are still Female Grandmasters, which is from a separate competition.

https://doc.fide.com/docs/DOC/2FC2023/CM2_2023_45.pdf

4.1. Titles. If a player holds any of the women titles, but the gender has been changed
to a man, the women titles are to be abolished.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

They aren't giving up their titles. They are still Female Grandmasters, which is from a separate competition.

https://doc.fide.com/docs/DOC/2FC2023/CM2_2023_45.pdf

4.1. Titles. If a player holds any of the women titles, but the gender has been changed
to a man, the women titles are to be abolished.

This is so weird and still has not been explained. It's actually a denigration of the women's circuit and titles by the chess authorities. Like, they can't hide their disdain of the women's circuit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

They aren't giving up their titles. They are still Female Grandmasters, which is from a separate competition.

https://doc.fide.com/docs/DOC/2FC2023/CM2_2023_45.pdf

4.1. Titles. If a player holds any of the women titles, but the gender has been changed
to a man, the women titles are to be abolished.

DP. That's inaccurate and a misleading selective quote. What it actually says is that the title is changed to reflect the new gender:

"4.1. Titles. If a player holds any of the women titles, but the gender has been changed
to a man, the women titles are to be abolished. Those can be renewed if the person
changes the gender back to a woman and can prove the ownership of the respective
FIDE ID that holds the title. The abolished women title may be transferred into a general
title of the same or lower level (e.g., WGM may be transferred into FM, WIM into CM,
etc.)."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. I’m not going to wade into the absurd and overblown hysterics in this thread but the reason for this is that the real training advantages in chess start when children are young and when transwomen are still boys. Boys do not compete against girls. For whatever reason (prejudice, cultural bias against girls, earlier spatial brain development in boys, something else), the boys circuit is where there is both much more development and better competition. So, by the time the transwoman has this level of competition, she has been given access to a much larger and more advanced playing field than the female-sexed competitors. They are doing this because they want women to play chess, particularly internationally where women can’t remove hijabs etc., and allowing transwomen to play will stop that. It will also bar a lot of Muslim women from competition, and it is an area where Muslim women can shine and compete.

The people who are claiming this is just bias against trans people quite obviously know literally nothing about chess competition and development and sound profoundly hysterical and ignorant. They also clearly don’t care much or know much about international chess, nor about the conditions faced by women playing chess outside the US. It’s a myopic, US-centric, rather spoiled-sounding viewpoint.

What's your explanation for trans men giving up their titles from before they transitioned? It sure sounds like they're bigoted against trans people and this isn't about trans women specifically.

They aren't giving up their titles. They are still Female Grandmasters, which is from a separate competition.

https://doc.fide.com/docs/DOC/2FC2023/CM2_2023_45.pdf

4.1. Titles. If a player holds any of the women titles, but the gender has been changed
to a man, the women titles are to be abolished.

This is so weird and still has not been explained. It's actually a denigration of the women's circuit and titles by the chess authorities. Like, they can't hide their disdain of the women's circuit.

It seems like a confluence of transphobia and misogyny.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I commend this group from taking this approach.

Instead of reflexively bowing to the current trend, they are taking a "time out" to research the issue further.

Good for them.

Bowing to the current trend? The current trend is to freak out over trans-people.

I don't know anyone "freaking out" over trans-persons. I do, however, know many who are growing sick and tired of having this nonsense front and center all the time. YOu want to change your name, wear a dress, wear pants, etc., go right ahead. But demanding that everyone accommodate you in all aspects of your journey is immature and obnoxious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I commend this group from taking this approach.

Instead of reflexively bowing to the current trend, they are taking a "time out" to research the issue further.

Good for them.

Bowing to the current trend? The current trend is to freak out over trans-people.

I don't know anyone "freaking out" over trans-persons. I do, however, know many who are growing sick and tired of having this nonsense front and center all the time. YOu want to change your name, wear a dress, wear pants, etc., go right ahead. But demanding that everyone accommodate you in all aspects of your journey is immature and obnoxious.

This reads like, "I know you changed your legal name to Jill but I'm going to call you Jack anyway because I don't believe in transgenders."

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I wish the whole trans issue would just go away. Why is there more talk of trans stuff in the last three years than there was in the last 50?

I'm sure your dad said the same thing about gay people.

Probably his grandfather said the same thing about Black people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That’s some kind of tortured reasoning. They are just being bullies. It’s acceptable to harass transgender people and so now everyone is jumping on the bandwagon.

I simply don’t understand how anyone can be so cruel. There’s not a lot of acceptance of being transgender as it is and it’s gratuitous to keep piling on.

Replace "transgender" with "black" and step back 70 years and nothing would have changed.

There are so many people on this forum who would be dumping milkshakes on sit-in protestors and cheering the dogs and fire hoses if they had been born in the 1930s.

They'll try to tell you "oh no, I'd be all for civil rights if I was around back then, but this trans thing is different!"

It's not, and they wouldn't, but it's what they have to tell themselves to believe they're good people despite their bigoted beliefs.

No it’s not. Stop comparing your imaginary oppression to to the heinous discrimination faced by black people. Trans people have full civil rights under the law, and this absurd analogy is highly offensive.

Good lord, nobody is saying trans people literally have the same or worse oppression as black people did under Jim Crow. Talk about "imaginary oppression!"

The analogy is simply that like civil rights, this is an issue where people currently believe their bigotry is normal but in time will be looked at as decidedly the wrong side of history.

Funny. I think history will look back on this period and think.... "What the hell? A man can claim to be woman and compete with them in sports and use the locker rooms designated for women?"

"Claim to be a woman." You make the experience of a trans-person sound so frivolous. Like they're just making shit up so they can get kicked around extra hard by the world.

Doesn't "identify" as a woman pretty much mean the same thing as "claim to be" a woman?

Not really. "Claim to be" has connotations of dishonesty.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I commend this group from taking this approach.

Instead of reflexively bowing to the current trend, they are taking a "time out" to research the issue further.

Good for them.

Bowing to the current trend? The current trend is to freak out over trans-people.

I don't know anyone "freaking out" over trans-persons. I do, however, know many who are growing sick and tired of having this nonsense front and center all the time. YOu want to change your name, wear a dress, wear pants, etc., go right ahead. But demanding that everyone accommodate you in all aspects of your journey is immature and obnoxious.

"Nonsense?" Your lack of empathy is sociopathic.