With these new rules, FIDE has managed to

  1. Imply the mental inferiority of women
  2. Validate the existence of transgender men
  3. Destroy the integrity of awards record-keeping
  4. Call transgender women men

Very nice, FIDE, incredible mental gymnastics performance! 👏 Add them to the ever lengthening sports federation shitlist.

  • Urbanfox@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    13
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Woman here, and genuinely, I don’t know what’s right.

    I can recognise that m>f after puberty gives someone a strength advantage but at the same time it’s hard enough having to transition without feeling even more marginalised by being banned from sports.

    Maybe there needs to be just a women’s and open category to recognise the strength handicap that cis women have for certain activities and allow anyone to compete in open, but then there’s the challenge of prize money, viewers etc etc between the two that also needs to be managed appropriately.

    At the end of the day, someone isn’t going to be happy and for that there is no good solution, but we need to be doing our best for cis and trans athletes to make sure everyone has a chance to compete in the sports they live.

    Chess? Banning trans competitors is fucking idiotic and the chess federation can fuck right off with that implied notion of women being less capable.

    • MindlessZ@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      5
      ·
      1 year ago

      Maybe there needs to be just a women’s and open category to recognise the strength handicap that cis women have for certain activities and allow anyone to compete in open, but then there’s the challenge of prize money, viewers etc etc between the two that also needs to be managed appropriately.

      I’m fairly certain that this is already the case, and what’s being done here as well. Specifically that there isn’t a “men’s” category, there’s open, and there’s women’s. In chess specifically it’s a strange situation. My understanding is that the existence of “women’s chess” isn’t due to any inferiority of play (though there’s undoubtedly some sexism in its origin) but rather as a way to entice women to play and grow the sport. There’s no restrictions on a woman being granted the grandmaster title, but a man can’t hold a Women’s Grandmaster title.

      Not keeping your women specific titles as a trans man at least tracks for that. As to not being able to compete as a trans woman I don’t really see the point. I could see an argument for resetting your ELO because there is a lower ELO pool in women’s chess (due to population, nothing enforced) and your ELO could be unduly skewed, but idk. That’s kinda getting beyond my competitive chess knowledge

      Tldr; this is probably dumb and misguided, but maybe not as hostile as the headline first looked to me

    • darq@kbin.social
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      7
      arrow-down
      3
      ·
      1 year ago

      Hang on a sec…

      I can recognise that m>f after puberty gives someone a strength advantage

      This is the sort of thing that is said in these conversations, as if it is simply fact. A common sense truth that we all agree on.

      But it’s not. Transgender women might retain some advantage after transition, but they also might not. That is something that is intensely studied, and hotly debated. Results have been found to support either hypothesis, and may differ from sport to sport. It’s not cut-and-dry in the slightest.

      • figaro@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        I think I read in a study somewhere that after transition, a trans female retains a certain amount of muscle mass and strength for a minimum of 2 years after transitioning. I’ll try to find the study and link it when I’m on the computer.

        That said, there is absolutely nuance to be had here, and the chess organization is being both transphobic and sexist at this point 😮‍💨

        • darq@kbin.social
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          I think I read in a study somewhere that after transition, a trans female retains a certain amount of muscle mass and strength for a minimum of 2 years after transitioning. I’ll try to find the study and link it when I’m on the computer.

          That’s why I said that the evidence is highly mixed. I’ve seen multiple studies that conclude that there is no reason to believe trans women retain advantage, but I also don’t doubt that you have seen the results you say you have either.

          Then it gets even more complicated with, what kind of strength are we talking about? And for what sport? There are even arguments made that increased bone size and density, paired with female-range muscle strength that trans women at least approach if not reach after a few years of transition, may represent a net disadvantage for transgender women.

          I just wanted to call out the one of the incorrect assumptions that even well-meaning folks make when talking about transgender people. Because they’re really quite common unfortunately.

          That said, there is absolutely nuance to be had here, and the chess organization is being both transphobic and sexist at this point 😮‍💨

          100%.

    • Shnog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      In most sports the men’s group is technically open. Most women just don’t succeed because of the sheer difference in physicality.

    • electrogamerman@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      The solution is easy, just open more categories ciswomen, transwomen and anyone who identifies with the female gender. Same for men. Done.

    • Blackmist@feddit.uk
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I just don’t think there’s a blanket answer, that doesn’t involve invasive poking and prodding. There’s always going to be somebody unhappy.

      Any pro-trans decision, like just opening it up and having ability ranked categories is in danger of sidelining women’s sports. But… they are anyway…

      England have just reached the women’s World Cup final in Australia. I look out the window right now, and I don’t see a single England flag. For the men’s tournament last year there was so many flags about you’d think we’d just crowned a new king on St George’s Day. People were playing “Three Lions” for the 13th major tournament in a row. And we did fucking rubbish in that compared to the ladies.

      It’s strange the these people “protecting women’s sports” are completely absent when it comes to supporting them.

      • bitsplease@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        1
        ·
        1 year ago

        It’s strange the these people “protecting women’s sports” are completely absent when it comes to supporting them.

        It’s really not strange at all when you consider the fairly obvious fact that it was never about protecting women’s sports, but instead about finding a way to hurt trans people that plays well in the media.

        Seriously, find me a conservative whose railing against trans women in sports that has actually attended a WNBA game, or is watching every game of the women’s world cup. I’m sure they exist, but I’d be surprised if even 5% of the people who act like the world will end if trans women are allowed to compete in sports have ever actually expressed interest in womens sports. And hell, I’ll bet the number who have actively made fun of womens sports before this became a hot topic is a hell of a lot higher lol