1. SubscriberMisterCat
    T.H.E. Cat
    NJ
    Joined
    24 Apr '07
    Moves
    9965
    21 Aug '23 18:56
    I am taking a chance posting on such a politically and emotionally charged topic, but I AM interested to hear what folks are saying. From the Chessbase website:

    The new gender inclusion policy, which is set to go into effect on June 20, 2022, says that male-to-female transgender athletes will only be eligible to compete in the women’s categories in FINA competitions if they transition before the age of 12 or before they reach stage two on the puberty Tanner Scale.

    Now I risk boring the reader and getting myself in trouble here by adding my two cents, by quoting the email I just sent to my brother. He and I DO AGREE with the rule, but -

    "Well I am glad that you agree, you ignore some 'big pictures', and maybe things you don't know (from 'the world of chess'😉. Keep in mind that we are talking Chess - so item #1:
    is Chess a 'sport'?

    Well, for years the international Chess federation has tried to get Chess included in The Olympics. They have consistently been refused, with the claim 'Chess is NOT a sport'.

    Well, if Chess is NOT a sport, then that lets out the PURE PHYSICAL PROWESS differential between men and women. One could now point out that 'physicality' comes into play with the need to stay focused and thinking clearly for 6 hours - it's why top Chess players always work on their physical fitness (Fischer played tennis and swam; Carlsen plays soccer, etc.)

    But ignoring the mental endurance for the moment, then
    item #2:

    Chess has to do with MENTAL capacity, thinking ahead, planning, etc. Women have consistently and vehemently objected to the position that they are 'not as smart', and this VAGUE pronouncement has been used and abused for centuries.

    I wrote a paper once on whether women are inferior in Math. (for brevity, I won't give details of my paper, but I still have it).

    Women in Math, Science, Music, Art, Literature, Chess, etc. etc. - Here is what is seen - there are always SOME talented women, in all areas, who rise to the top levels. Judit Polgar was #8 in Chess for years. Emmy Noether was a noted Algebraist (too advanced for me to understand; first woman who comes to mind). They just made a play about Marie Curie. Mary Shelley wrote Frankenstein. Etc. Women (and men) use these as examples to 'prove their point'.

    My opinion is that 'the point' is NOT proven. This, despite the fact that according to data, women also score the same median IQ as men. You see, all the median tells you is that women ON THE AVERAGE are just as smart.

    But to compete successfully at anything, you must belong to the category that is HIGHLY ABOVE AVERAGE. This appears to be where women drop off, significantly. They can't reach the top, mentally or physically; MORE physically than mentally, but nonetheless ...

    But this is taken to brand women as 'inferior', and causes constant uproar; always has. Note that it is not MY position to declare women 'inferior' - simply to observe statistical data, and use that to make informed decisions about things, like whether men should be completing with women. In Sports, it seems obvious - but the Olympic Committee says that Chess is not a sport. (btw - typically female Chess players take the position that women have been culturally discriminated against - discouraged from playing Chess - resulting in a much smaller pool of talent and thereby less competition at top levels; I do not agree with this position, though I note it as having an effect).

    Thus, if we ban transgender men from competing in women's Chess tournaments, it is akin to saying that they have an unfair advantage because they are really men, and men are 'smarter'! As I said - totally politicly incorrect.

    And if women claim that they are 'equal' to men in Chess, then this would lead to abolishing women's Chess tournaments - and you would NEVER hear about female Chess players, and women could not possibly make money in this field. Even THERE, it invites a gender discrimination problem."

    Sorry if I am boring, and if you feel that my position is totally out-of-line, well, be nice. As I said, I took the chance to post this and open a can of worms because I am interested in what people have to say, and THIS IS a 'forum', after all.
    (meow)
  2. Joined
    15 Dec '20
    Moves
    53
    21 Aug '23 21:46
    @MisterCat
    Your post makes many interesting points, but I saw no mention of the following critical factor to excelling at chess: the ability and willingness to work at improving, whether it's one's tactical vision, tactical depth, positional understanding, opening knowledge, endgame knowledge, or something else.

    A couple examples come to mind. Decades ago, GM Soltis wrote a column in which he observed that although Bobby Fischer's talent was well-known, few people realized how hard he worked. He gave as an example the game Bilek--Fischer from the 1962 Interzonal, a Najdorf Poison Pawn Sicilian, which Black won. After giving the game, Soltis gave the players' times, and Fischer's was something like 10 minutes! Soltis said that the game entirely followed Fischer's preparation. (I don't know whether Soltis was inferring this or was paraphrasing a comment from Fischer, but either way, Fischer must have prepared very deeply in this instance.)

    I recall Laszlo Polgar saying that of his three daughters, Judit worked the hardest. If so, then this would at least partially account for her having achieved a much higher peak ELO rating than have either of her sisters.

    David
  3. Standard membermchill
    Cryptic
    Behind the scenes
    Joined
    27 Jun '16
    Moves
    3077
    22 Aug '23 05:383 edits
    @fmdavidhlevin said
    @MisterCat
    Your post makes many interesting points, but I saw no mention of the following critical factor to excelling at chess: the ability and willingness to work at improving, whether it's one's tactical vision, tactical depth, positional understanding, opening knowledge, endgame knowledge, or something else.

    A couple examples come to mind. Decades ago, GM Soltis ...[text shortened]... ount for her having achieved a much higher peak ELO rating than have either of her sisters.

    David
    Your post makes many interesting points, but I saw no mention of the following critical factor to excelling at chess: the ability and willingness to work at improving, whether it's one's tactical vision, tactical depth, positional understanding, opening knowledge, endgame knowledge, or something else.

    BAM!! David sends this one into the 3rd deck. In her award-winning book, Grit - The Power of Passion and Perserverance, Psychologist Angela Duckworth made an exhaustive study of top military officers, national spelling bee champions, top producing corporate salespeople, and Olympic athletes, and found that the top performers were rarely the most gifted. The elite in their field were those who displayed some talent, but also an unusually intense work ethic. Angela found that talent counts, but grit counts double!
  4. Joined
    22 Aug '23
    Moves
    13
    23 Aug '23 11:151 edit
    I reckon they should have to play in the men's division if born as a man.
    And please keep it in perspective as they account for less than 1 percent of the population.

    Brent
  5. SubscriberMisterCat
    T.H.E. Cat
    NJ
    Joined
    24 Apr '07
    Moves
    9965
    23 Aug '23 12:14
    Thanks; I wanted some discussion, and you folks obliged; I may post more, but must run off to work. Since the original article, there has been plenty of discussion at Chessbase, which you can see at the bottom of the article. Here is the link:
    https://en.chessbase.com/post/fide-bans-transgenders-from-women-events
Back to Top

Cookies help us deliver our Services. By using our Services or clicking I agree, you agree to our use of cookies. Learn More.I Agree