Chess “is diverse and inclusive,” the German Chess Federation said in rejecting calls for a ban on trans competitors.

  • originalucifer@moist.catsweat.com
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    27
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    1 month ago

    The German Chess Federation has rejected any ban

    meh.

    if they really cared, there would not be any official ‘gendered’ tournaments. but there are, because they want that for some reason.

    • AlataOrange@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      46
      arrow-down
      4
      ·
      1 month ago

      Gendered chess tournaments make a certain amount of sense. The main issues are that women are less likely to play chess due to societal and cultural factors and without their own division would have even more societal and cultural roadblocks to joining the game. This isn’t touching on how getting certain titles requires winning specific events that would prove even more difficult for those same reasons.

      Basically without gendered tournaments there would be even less women in chess and it would be even more of a “boys club” than it already is.

      • Zagorath@aussie.zone
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        26
        arrow-down
        3
        ·
        1 month ago

        It’s also why the anti-trans argument makes absolutely no sense in chess. Like, in sports there’s some room for nuance because cis men do have a huge advantage in most sports of cis women, and depending on the sport and the stage of transition, that can carry forward to trans women. It’s fucking hard to have that nuanced conversation because 95% of the time it gets drowned out by transphobes, but there’s still something to talk about.

        But in chess? Nobody is arguing there’s any inherent biological advantage. The only reason for gendered tournaments is to create a safer space for non-men to compete in a male-dominated pastime. The only argument for excluding trans women from the Women’s category in chess is transphobia. It’s a real “mask off” moment for all the TERFs claiming it’s about “integrity in sport” (Jesus fuck, writing that out made me realise how similar this all is to gamergate and the birth of the alt right).

        A lot of tournaments in HEMA (historical European martial arts—think fencing, but with bigger, older styles of swords than what they use at the Olympics) around where I lived have started using an “Underrepresented Genders” (URG) category alongside the Open category, instead of Women’s. It’s functionally not much different from having a Women’s category that also accepts trans people (important possible difference: it accepts trans men as well as trans women, and enbies), but the name helps make it clearer. I quite like that as a concept.

        • verdigris@lemmy.ml
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          Nobody was ever arguing there was a biological advantage… As the comment you replied to pointed out, it’s about socialization. Since that mostly happens as children, those who transition as teens have already experienced much of that.

          • erin (she/her)@lemmy.blahaj.zone
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            5
            ·
            1 month ago

            How does a trans-woman’s socialization compromise competitive integrity? That’s an entirely internal problem, and it doesn’t affect any other competitors. This is really just grabbing for any excuse to be transphobic.

            • verdigris@lemmy.ml
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              0
              arrow-down
              1
              ·
              1 month ago

              I hypothetically agree, but note that you’re basically arguing for trans women to compete with men. Just in this scenario bio women also have to. And classically this results in men dominating and women being discouraged from even joining due to factors discussed above.

      • PoopingCough@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        8
        arrow-down
        2
        ·
        1 month ago

        I mean, easy fix there right? Just have a women’s tournament and an everybody tournament. Women can then choose which to enter.

      • Maeve@kbin.earth
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        3
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 month ago

        The system only functions the way it does because the people prop it up. Any system.

        • AlataOrange@lemmy.blahaj.zone
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 month ago

          So instead of having a welcoming space for a historically and actively marginalized group while allowing them to still complete in every other tournament we should just what? Close women’s divisions, revoke all their titles, and tell them to play “real chess” instead?

          Like getting rid of women’s tournaments is only a bad thing that would make the game stagnant even further to being the “boys club” game a lot of people already think it is when chess should be for everybody.

          • Maeve@kbin.earth
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            1
            ·
            1 month ago

            I’m not fond of self-marginalizing. So maybe some of us are uncomfortable. Some men will be, too. Maybe individuals are capable of self-regulating if empowered to do that. I’m sure some chuds will throw a tantrum. Block and parry, so to speak.

    • Stern@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      9
      ·
      edit-2
      1 month ago

      Officially there’s women’s and open tournaments. There isn’t anything stopping the top female player, Hou Yifan from going to a tourney and potentially playing the top (general and specifically male) player Magnus Carlsen.