Does FIDE Want to Ban Transgender Players? | Dojo Talks

[@drronmccoy]

As a ChessDojo member, a doctor who has worked with transgender people, and as an LGBT person, I would like to say that I found this discussion completely respectful from my point of view from all the participants. It’s a complicated area, and the discussion was very informed and respectful. It’s great to be part of an organisation that has this depth of discussion as it sends a signal to everyone that chess is for everyone - which is what we are here for! Well done to everyone involved.

[@honeyinglune8957]

it's not complicated - you are wrong

[@blueguitarist]

No one loves the smell of their own ass more than a doctor

[@GeneralBlorp]

Glad you felt respected but it’s actually quite simple, isn’t it? 🤔

[@hannahbrown2728]

This has eased my concerns about approaching this video to a degree. I know they say kill your heroes, but I quickly balk at even the chance folks I look up to are about to show their ass. I know this channel has to engage with clickbait style stuff to grow and I try not to let the sensationalism disuade me. But this one hits too close to home Sick and tired of being sick and tired of a society that treats us like this all encompassing villain out to ruin everything.

[@Elvis_Rodriguez]

@@hannahbrown2728 this doesnt have anything to do with that. Its strictly chess. Their is a clear advantage that male "transitioning" would have OTB . FIDE was right here.

[@scottmcmanus1453]

This is a good talk and I respect all three participants. I would say that I am a bit unsatisfied with Jesse's comments about how nobody knows anything with certainty. While that is certainly (HA!) true, it feels to me like a bit of a cop out. The very natural follow up question to ask is "Well, if nobody knows anything with absolute certainty, then among the different arguments being made about any particularly topic, which ones rely MORE on verifiable facts and science?" If you aren't asking that question, you aren't getting close to any meaningful understanding about the "left vs. right" dynamic in 2023.

[@giacomo5626]

agreed

[@Fluxion11]

Idk, all mansplaining.. why are straight white male opinions are relevant on this????

[@kfm1242]

Kostya did extremely well. Jesse makes it a bit easy for himself, when stating that there is no dichotomy of true and false. For example there is a study by the uni Leipzig with the result that all the difference between elo values of women and men can be attributed to the larger number of male players. Men and woman share the same normal distribution. Men simply have more extreme cases due to larger sample size.

[@jimmyjs8907]

There is an objective measurement for chess performance, the elo rating. Do away with separate gender distinct tournaments and championships and let everyone play together.

[@Hammerholics]

Everyone can play together - in open sections. Women's tournaments exist mainly to give special accomodations for women, considering that they have been traditionally discriminated against in the past, and to provide a safe space for them to play chess when otherwise they would not feel safe competing in an open section. To deny trans women this accommodation is to deny trans women that they are women. This is transphobic and is the crux of the argument going on. The policy doesn't explicitly deny trans women these rights but it imposes extra barriers in the form of requiring nationally recognized forms as proof of being trans. Many trans people do not go to their national government to be recognized as being trans and they would be negatively affected by this policy.

[@banzaiburger9589]

​@@HammerholicsI'm not familiar with the history of discrimination against women in the realm of chess. I'm familiar of course with contemporary issues of sexual harassment, but historically before men's and women's chess sections existed, in what ways were female chess players systemically discriminated against? The "safe space" argument makes more sense, but allowing biological males to intrude in their spaces seems to defeat that purpose

[@Musicrafter12]

@@banzaiburger9589 You literally just proved the point that to deny them access is to deny trans women are women. You aren't making yourself look so great.

[@cooloutac]

To acknowledge the trans people is to acknowledge hat we have to get rid of woman tourneys. I agree and it's unfortunate. This is what it all boils down to.

[@cooloutac]

​​@@Hammerholicsso women feel safer around trans women? They are biological males and chess is a sport like any other. It's supposed to be fair and sporting. To have separate woman tourneys that allow biological males defeats the purpose of having a genetic or cultural Level Playing Field. We have get rid of woman tourneys in that case otherwise we are defeating the purpose of them.

[@NotQuiteFirst]

Oh -boy- here we go 🍿🍿🍿

[@thechesslobster2768]

Love the discussion from all fronts. Thanks guys, continually appreciate you guys not being afraid to put your thoughts out in the open on tough topics.

[@oldman-badchess]

30:09 why not petition to end women only events, open events only. In 10-20 years you see who rises to the top. No more safe spaces. Just throw everyone together and be done with the bs.

[@cooloutac]

That's basically where this road ends.

[@PhoenixDQ]

Where did this come from? I have a hunch (without any real proof) that it is an attempt to align with the International Olympic Committee.

[@ItIsYouAreNotYour]

And you fools said, "This would never happen!" I remember Aman bringing this up and people laughing and calling him crazy.

[@dmaxpr]

If trans want to play tournaments, they should play in the Open section. Plain and easy.

[@curry3748]

You make something way more trivial too easy. You cant just exempt a group from certain events just because of their identity. Thats really not good lmao. Also theres probably just going to be transgenders that will not be open about it and just play the matches.

[@gavasiarobinssson5108]

Absolutely.

[@Sitbear]

Plain, easy, and also wrong. Solutions are rarely plain, easy, and right.

[@samoppedisano3994]

We are equally lacking trans and lgbtq presence in chess as with women. Your proposal makes the problem worse

[@dmaxpr]

@@samoppedisano3994 how my proposal make it worse? Open section is for all.

[@NoOne-so7jt]

Disappointing that Kostya resorts to labeling anyone who disagrees with his radical ideology as "hateful."

[@ChessDojo]

That never happened..

[@itsameamarioyaplumber3981]

​​@@ChessDojo 5:57, 17:45

[@chrisatkeson4638]

I know I talked some shit about Jesse and David a couple episodes ago with Hans but I give props to them this interview. Jesse raises a great point about people who think they are 100% right about political things. I liked David pushing the discussion in interesting directions (like the question about some group of people potentially having a genetic advantage in chess). One thing I really like about chess is we have all different types of people from different backgrounds reach the top 10 (including women). Even if there are differences it seems like no matter who you are you have a shot at competing at the highest levels, and your unique qualities as an individual will be vastly more important than the qualities of the group you belong to. I'm relatively uninformed on the details of the FIDE trans policy so I'll refrain from commenting, even though some of the things Kostya said like it being a matter of life and death seem a bit extreme.

[@nimzomitch]

Jesse does make a great point about people being 100% right about political things. The problem is trans people aren't a political thing. They're people. I hated how he tried to make trans rights a left/right thing. It isn't.

[@scottmcmanus1453]

@@nimzomitch Fair enough but clearly people are mapping their politics on to their positions on trans people, and politicians are using trans rights as a wedge issue, so it's not like it isn't a political issue as well.

[@nimzomitch]

@@scottmcmanus1453 just because trans issues are being used as a wedge to divide people doesn't mean the framing is accurate, or that falling for it isn't a problem

[@scottmcmanus1453]

@@nimzomitch I agree with that. Thanks.

[@jennystrandqvist1568]

Most countries have 10% or below women participation in serious tournaments. Because of this the terms for being a holder of WIM and WGM are often as generous as IM and/or GM. Where the entry fee is cut in half or free. In some nicer cases you can even apply for the tournament to pay some of your airplane/travel cost and/or hotel room. There is also often a prize for the best woman player of tournaments. It seems to me it a good idea to not open up the space too quickly. A fair but slow process is better than a open gate.

[@vitahast]

its even possible that women are better on chess on average than men but due to greater variance in the distribution for men the players at the top become dominated by men. of course maybe this is cultural as well but men seem to have wider distributions than women for a lot of attributes and outcomes.

[@rizka7945]

4:45 I think it's obvious why it is so. There are no men's events in chess.

[@siddharthb2633]

It's not about genetics or gender. It's about the truth. You don't become a woman if you identify as one. Just like I can't become a GM if I identify as one.

[@duxnihilo]

Oh, shut up.

[@Hammerholics]

Reading the FIDE policy, I agree that FIDE acknowledging trans people and providing an accurate definition for trans people is a positive sign that it considers them equal and equally deserving of care as cis gendered people. This being said, anyone who is unfamiliar with lives, struggles, and problems/perspectives faced by the trans community can inadvertently create policies which are harmful to trans people and the trans community while meaning to do good. The current policy requiring proof from your national legislature is putting additional barriers to trans people who wish to live their lives. There is a significant part of the total trans population who is still in the process of transitioning, who might still be changing their lifestyle, who does not feel comfortable being seen in all environments, and who has not at the point in their lives where they feel safe/comfortable/whatever the reason is their own to have gone to their national government to get proof of their new gender. This does not mean that they are not trans, or that they are less trans. This requirement will absolutely mean that some trans chess players will not be able or feel safe participating in chess events that they would like to, which they would otherwise be allowed to participate in, had they been born as their chosen gender. The fact that no one has been banned yet is not appropriate evidence that no one has been harmed by this policy, as the policy coming into effect will prevent people from even applying - knowing that they will be/might be banned according to FIDE's new rules. Only after acknowledging that trans people are indeed negatively limited in terms of what they are allowed to do compared to a cis person, can we begin to have the discussion about whether or not this policy is appropriate in terms of the positives it has - such as what you mentioned about certain groups being protected from unfair arising situations. The topic of a dominant male player choosing to identify as a woman for the purposes of winning in women's tournaments while otherwise not identifying as trans is reminiscent of arguments about false rape claims. Instead of targeting the issue of rape culture in society, people bring attention to the fact that false rape claims can negatively impact the accused as a reason against laws which would benefit rape victims, fearing the statistically tiny situations in which they could be abused. It would be immediately obvious if a non trans person was trying to cheat the system and the situation could be addressed after it has been shown that the person in question is not trans. If the 'faker' wants to adopt a trans lifestyle to the point that they are indistinguishable from a trans person for the pure motivation of winning in chess, they should be treated as a trans person. The challenges of being trans in society outweigh the benefits from the advantage you would gain doing this. The policy should be put in place to protect and do the most good for trans people in general, and not to avoid specific and unrealistic edge cases at the expense of further difficulty to trans people in chess. On the topic of genetics, culture, and women's and men's chess: This is an issue that, while intensely intersecting with trans life, applies to both cis and trans women and is part of a larger discussion to be had.

[@chesscomdpruess]

Thank you for providing these excellent arguments.

[@cooloutac]

But we are talking about sports bud where genetics can have advantages. Whether men have a general advantage in a mental sport, I doubt. But women just don't have the same support and encouragement by Society and family from a young age that men do which is why the separate tourneys were created. So regardless what you re basically saying is do away with woman tourneys.

[@gmnotyet]

I really want to see a man become the women's world champion.

[@NotQuiteFirst]

It's gonna take somebody with balls to do that

[@ajstyles4861]

​@@NotQuiteFirstdamn nice one 😂😂😂

[@cabalgandocontradicciones8303]

They are not banned. They can participate in the open tournaments like anybody else. This has nothing to do with transfobia or any fobia, please let politics outside chess.

[@LumocolorARTnr1319]

Yes, transfobia is an extremely rare mental healt issue/sickness, I have never heard about anyone who actually have that problem/fobia. As with any fobia, it's a personal issue and other cannot be expected to go out of their way to comfort it.

[@tahmeedchowdhury0007]

Props to all of you for being the only chess KZbinrs to date (that I've seen) that talked about it. I think all of you made fairly cogent points, although my own stance on it leans closest to Kostya's that this policy is just hateful.

[@samoppedisano3994]

Probably, but even if David is right and the policy is well intentioned, it still functions as hateful and discriminatory

[@chesscomdpruess]

@@samoppedisano3994 Thanks. You have provided me the warning that I need to clarify. I don’t know if the policy is well-intentioned or not. I mused on the possibility, as it was not pure hate. Suggested it may have been made a committee in which some people had bad intentions and others good. Might have been some form of a compromise. They might have received concerns that caused them to take this on, or they might have initiated it on their own. Hopefully that reveals some of my uncertainty and some of the things I am considering.

[@samoppedisano3994]

@@chesscomdpruess yeah you’re right, I oversimplified that point. I was just referencing your point in its contrast to the pure-hatred theory.

[@cooloutac]

@@samoppedisano3994 could be pure hatred Against Women. Because what better way to destroy the validity of their events and drive more of them away? This is evil genius. The future is no more woman events period. It's inevitable.

[@diesonne0127]

One of the most superfluous things in modern times.

[@gdoggcasey]

I felt like you guys handled this conversation well. Clearly there was a difference of opinion (or at least, in concern of the impacts of the policy) between friends/co workers but you handled it respectfully.

[@exquisitecorpse4917]

The most irritating aspect of this to me is that a transwoman has NEVER topped a major event. I can't even name a strong trans player FtM, MtF, or NB, and Grandmaster Strawman has never pretended to transition so he can win a women's event. All of the so-called justifications for this are based on hypothetical events and center on the idea that, if a transwoman did become a WGM, she would not deserve the title because those assigned male at birth are inherently better at chess. This is a collection of misogynistic arguments repackaged as transphobic arguments and weaponized to divide women against one another.

[@hypersphere]

Not to take a stance on FIDE's proposals one way or the other, but I don't think 'it hasn't happened yet' is a valid reason not to preemptively do something about it, if they feel that's the right thing to do.

[@Nemtomi]

I don't get this logic.

[@Musicrafter12]

The strongest trans player I know of is FM Iglesias. If that's the best they've got, there is absolutely nothing to fear even if you're a raging transphobe.

[@cooloutac]

​@@Musicrafter12same reason there is so many good Indian players and and not as many high-rated level woman as men. It's just a smaller pool.

[@exquisitecorpse4917]

@@hypersphere So the fear is what? That trans women will begin dominating women's chess? There isn't even a trans woman strong enough to qualify, and - even if there were - she would still have to win against a field stacked with titled players. And even if she did, there's no evidence whatsoever that her [hypothetical] victory would have been based on some genetic advantage. You can make the argument that bomb safety regulations can be put preemptively in place because the consequences of a bomb detonating are so extreme that they warrant caution. But the consequences of a trans woman entering a major women's event and winning some prize money is not catastrophic. There's some implication here that - if a trans woman won - she wouldn't deserve it because all of the work she does is null and void compared to her sex assignment at birth, and that just isn't right.

[@Fluxion11]

"Im not a doctor so how would i know?" Try opening your eyes and observe the world around you. 😂

[@AntonStachSZN]

If I would change my gender I would just be in the womens nationalteam of my country. This isn't right. That's why I am against mixing it up. (Maybe a 3rd category for trans idk)

[@Musicrafter12]

Would you really change your gender -- and accordingly your entire lifestyle -- just to be on the national team?

[@thenotes5589]

@@Musicrafter12 I suspect the we'll never know

[@AntonStachSZN]

I wouldn't but why would I have to change my lifestyle? I can just claim I am a female with short hair@@Musicrafter12

[@Musicrafter12]

@@thenotes5589 As I like to jokingly say, if someone has really given all that much thought to what would happen to their competitive situation by changing their gender, perhaps they're just an egg themselves and won't admit it.

[@robdubent]

@@Musicrafter12perhaps they’re out of their mind?

[@556andressantorio]

It boils down to “what is a woman” question. Also, “what is real?”.

[@lockstock600]

Kostya speaks so well in this discussion, my respect for him is through the roof.

[@Fluxion11]

Kostya "I'm not a doctor" Kuvutskiy can't even answer a simple question about biological men participating in women's weight lifting. You have to live under a rock or be a brainwashed loon to make such statements. Trust me, the vast majority of the world's people laugh at such nonsensical statements. Male gym rats, construction workers, farmers, firemen, ect are stronger than 99.99% of women. Now some chess players may be a little different. I've seen my share of puny, limp-wristed male chess players in my day.

[@tinfang-warble]

Here's how I would think about the genetics issue. First of all, genetics are a matter of ranges and means, not absolutes. Grant for the sake of the argument that women are shorter than men. This obviously can't mean that every woman is shorter than every man. It means that the distribution of women's heights concentrates at a lower value than the distribution of men's heights. Now suppose there's a sport like basketball where height is a hugely determinative variable. We could segregate basketball, as we do, by gender. Or we could segregate it, as we do for weight in boxing, on the physical variable itself: a stratum of "ultra-tall" players, a stratum for players up to 6 feet, etc. Why would we choose to segregate based on the proxy variable (gender) rather than the causal variable (height)? We do so for social reasons: to allow people to achieve success, attention, etc. who are otherwise discriminated against because of the proxy/social variable. Now, grant that there's some genetic "chess ability" that has a sex bias. Even in this hypothetical, it clearly has to be a norms/range question not a categorical one, because people like Judit Polgár exist. We do have something like segregating by height: ELO. So why do we have women's tournaments, WGMs, and so on? It's not because of the range of phenotypic variations that might be influenced by genetic sex. It's because of the social institutions we live in, i.e. discrimination against women for their gender. So if you believe (imo correctly) in a meaningful difference between sex and gender, it's clear that this is a gender problem, not a sex problem. That is, people don't want to keep trans women out of women's sport and women's chess because of their sex: they want to keep them out because of their gender. The impulse is fundamentally and inescapably about wanting to deny that "trans women are women" is a claim that makes sense, not about creating a level genetic playing field. Here's one concrete application of my way of thinking: one benefit of having WGMs is that they are inspirational role models to young girls. Imagine a trans woman wins the WWCC. Who is she more likely to inspire, cis girls or cis boys? Suppose she's excluded from competing. Who does that discourage? Cis boys? Really? ("Shucks, pa, I really thought I had a career in crossdressing chess, but I guess I gotta go back to muh gainz.") Suppose it comforts some cis girls. If so, that's because they didn't really believe the trans woman was a woman. ("But that biological male has a genetic advantage!" Well, so did Hou Yifan, per Jesse's argument around 28:20. Why should women celebrate her genetic gifts and not a trans woman's?)

[@cooloutac]

That's basically the elephant in the room if fide is going to acknowledge transgender people they have to remove woman tourneys. There is just no getting around it and the unfortunate consequences that is less woman playing which was the reason for creating the woman tourneys in the first place.

[@LumocolorARTnr1319]

I really really want to be a woman, but I will never be a woman. It was confusing. Here is the absolute that I had to realise: Where you born with functional ballz or eggs? Easy, no more confusion. It's sad for those who want to be another gender but biology is biology, you just cannot change it. Roleplaying can help but it cannot be forced upon others. Just follow the absolute and remember others will not always play along in private live action roleplaying.

[@tinfang-warble]

@@LumocolorARTnr1319 you, um, you think that testes and eggs are homologous structures? (also, 1999 would like its z's back)

[@LumocolorARTnr1319]

@@tinfang-warble Homologous structures? What are you talking about? And is it not clear enough for you to decide what gender is what?

[@connormonday]

Hi ChessDojo, can you define the word "woman"?

[@IMKostyaKavutskiy]

This question usually comes from a contemptuous place and isn't very smart but since many people like to ask it as a "gotcha" I'll give a genuine answer: "Woman" is a gender identity typically held by adult human females. The definition of an "adult human female" is a biological one. What I think you're really asking is why transwomen should be considered women since they weren't born as a biological female. Well that's what "trans" means, i.e. be on the other side of/change. When you TRANSform into something, were you that thing originally? No. You become it. Here's a good analogy for you. "What is a father?" You might say a father is a male who has a kid that shares their genetics. That's the biological definition right? But does that mean foster dads aren't fathers? Does that mean stepdads can't be fathers? They don't share any genetic material with their child but we can still recognize them as being a father, even if it doesn't match the biological definition. So just as society can recognize that an adoptive father is a type of father, we can also recognize that a transwoman is a type of woman. I'm sure a trans person could explain it much better but I genuinely hope this helps.

[@ajstyles4861]

​@@IMKostyaKavutskiyGender is fundamentally tied to biological sex.A woman is defined by the presence of XX chromosomes, reproductive anatomy. Gender identity should align with these biological characteristics and I have no problems with transwomen identifying as women, but they should be acknowledged as having a different biological basis.

[@IMKostyaKavutskiy]

@@ajstyles4861 not interested in a debate, just wanted to answer the question. My lane is chess 🙂

[@connormonday]

@@IMKostyaKavutskiy the example of a father is interesting, as it has a biological component and also a vocational component. A nonbiological father can certainly fulfill the job of a father, and we recognize them as such. What is the component of being a woman that men who say they are women have taken up? Is it in how they dress? Do they "act" like women? You say that the definition of a woman is essentially a biological one, but the biological men who claim womanhood can somehow fundamentally change this component of themselves. They aren't changing biology so it must be a spiritual question of aiming toward masculinity toward femininity, but the proponents of this radical new conception of sex should be able to articulate what that change actually means. Not just assert it and demand the world affirm it. That's why I ask that question "What is a woman?" not as a gotcha, but because I genuinely don't understand what someone means when they say that if they also can't say what a woman is nonbiologically. The world affirming such a radical proposition will have practical consequences that organizations like FIDE will have to deal with (in this case), on top of being morally dubious.

[@IMKostyaKavutskiy]

@@connormonday Women/transwomen typically show "feminine traits". These can vary from culture to culture but in the west femininity is often associated with things like being nurturing and emotionally intelligent, for example. We often see pink/purple as "feminine colors" while blue/black are more "masculine". But there are plenty of boys and girls for whom the "opposite" colors appeal more. To follow the father analogy, fathers exhibit "fatherly" traits -- setting a good example, offering protection, showing discipline, etc. that have nothing to do with who they share genetic material with but rather how they treat their children, whether biological or not

[@saadss3784]

Very interesting

[@Brian-ve7ds]

The whole multi tasking argument originated as a sexist trope. As in women multi task whereas men are one target focused in which they excel.

[@engine07]

It's astonishing how much pseudoscience there is in the chess community.

[@NotQuiteFirst]

It's funny that they took the "women are better at multitasking" thing as though it's verified fact when it's basically just a meme, but the mountainous stack of data (game results and ratings) showing the clear and persistent cross-cultural performance gap between men and women at playing chess is completely dismissed as "just _culture_ and we can never even entertain the idea that there could be a biological difference as long as we have the word _culture_ to wave around"

[@engine07]

@@NotQuiteFirstMath is not your strong suit, I guess.

[@battlescard213]

Clickbait. Should’ve refrained from this topic. And no, you did NOT have to cover this subject. It’s been my experience that you only throw yourself into a discussion like this when you really want answers for yourself. Let gay’s discuss their issues. If you feel this way, you don’t have to discuss it. You just deal Equally with everyone. You really DONT have to cover every subject.

[@kwhd559]

One hour and forty plus minutes and in all that time only Kostya was crystal clear on his position, whereas David and Jesse chose to hide behind general arguments without making it clear where they actually stood - i.e Should transgenders, specifically Men into Women, be allowed to compete in Women's events - Yes or No?

[@Nemtomi]

I guess because they don't think men should be allowed to compete in women's events, and that's okay too (if that is indeed the case).

[@rey_pato]

It is not a “yes or no” question, which was part of their argument… But they were unanimous in saying that the FIDE policy discourages trans players.

[@Nemtomi]

Yes, I can get behind the argument that the policty discourages them. @@rey_pato

[@cooloutac]

​@@rey_patoto me it's a yes or no question. The problem is the repercussions from either decision is not clear.

[@chesscomdpruess]

I wasn’t trying to hide; I guess my own opinion on it never came up. We cover a lot of ground in these talks, and I think the focus today was what does fide think, not what do I think. To answer for myself, I (with little confidence) believe that trans females should be able to play in women’s events. I would have more confidence in my opinion (or revise it) if I heard more of the opinions of female chess players, both amateur and professional, cis and trans.

[@theyAreGhost]

I feel having a trans person involved in this disucssion could have helped a lot. Overall a good discussion but as Jesse said you have to spend time with representatives of the group to really understand.

[@NotQuiteFirst]

The reason why we have separate divisions is because of differences in playing strength, not differences in how anyone "identifies". Even if we concede that a male player who in some intangible sense "identifies" as a woman, what on earth has that got to do with the cognitive functions used in playing chess? Men and women are in separate divisions because there is an extremely clear performance gap between men and women at chess, and it's unfair to allow men to enter the women's division.

[@honeyinglune8957]

HALLELUJAH. Also, i like your use of the word intangible

[@nimzomitch]

You're wrong about even Why there is Women's chess. Hint, it isn't because women are worse at chess

[@NotQuiteFirst]

@@nimzomitch Yes it is

[@nimzomitch]

@@NotQuiteFirst FIDE disagrees

[@cooloutac]

@@nimzomitch i would be politically incorrect to say otherwise. But , as this whole topic is proving, its disingenuous.

[@Leavenfish]

All 3 seem to look to Magnus or Aronian or Ivanchuck and say "genetics" are clearly at play. But seriously....IF you are going to take that road you have to have looked at, say, Ivanchucks mom or dad...maybe his grandparents. Do you see 'this' in them? I think they are making a leap.

[@engine07]

They say it's "genetics" and forget to mention things like money. Caruana's parents told the New York Times this year that they spent as much as $50,000 a year to get Caruana coaches and training. Socioeconomic status is considered the biggest predictor of academic achievement for children.

[@cooloutac]

they say this because chess is mostly memory and spatial vision. Especially in classical there is less actual excercised skill. Speed chess is a different story, that is more like a real sport.

[@sephiroth6956]

I am bit surprise about this discussion. Most chess events are open events and anyone can take part in them. Women events are mainly to make more women to play and also play in a safe environment and that should be protected and this policy of FIDE does exactly that. A lot of female players have already given many, many disturbing sexual comments by male participants which made them uncomfortable and female only events shield especially minor womens for experiencing this.

[@nimzomitch]

Trans women, statistically speaking, aren't a danger to women. Men however, are.

[@peterfredriksson1857]

In sports in general it's easy, no biological men in women's classes. There are many examples why transgender men shouldn't compete against women in physical sports. Why not the same in chess if the reason is to keep men out? If one believes that women can be as good as men (ought to be so even if we don't see it today) - open classes only? It was much easier when there were only two sexes. Nowadays the number of sexes increases for every decade it seems. 😙

[@loulasher]

There are only two sexes, only 2 roles in the reproductive process.

[@klausfiedler64]

The only reason this is even an issue is because women, apparently, can't seem to compete successfully against men. Judit Polgar and Hou Yifan are the exceptions that prove the rule. Get rid of "women's' only" events and then there is no problem. The parallel world of women's chess was originally supposed to be temporary till enough women reached competitive levels. Now it's just holding them back since they can earn prizes without testing themselves against the best. If you're a man that wants to be a woman then be a women that plays in open tournaments.

[@Musicrafter12]

Women's chess is no longer as much an aid to compensate for a skill gap as it is: A. A marketing exercise to young women and girls to get them into chess B. A way to promote top female players, both for their own livelihoods and (primarily) to help with point A C. A safe competitive space free from harrassment (theoretically at least, unless you place Alejandro Ramirez in charge) It is not simply compensatory or a way to avoid testing the top women against the world's top men. The world's best women *have* tested themselves against men repeatedly. They want to. Judit has many games on record against Kasparov, Shirov, Kramnik, et al. She played the 2005 world championship and was seeded *by rating* into the 2007 candidates. She played at Linares and Wijk aan Zee. It's just that women like Judit are rare, for a variety of factors ranging from simple imbalance in the gender ratio of players, to the culture of rampant sexism and harrassment that drives women away, to the simple fact that not as many young girls might be as interested in chess as young boys for a variety of mostly unknown and unknowable reasons and therefore aren't making their talents known and aren't being trained into professional players. There is no "apparent inability of women to compete against men". There is simply an apparent inability of the current chess prodigy training system to recruit, retain, and train enough top women.

[@honeyinglune8957]

but i suppose if you want a women's world champion you need a women's candidates and then you need women's tournaments to qualify for the candidates

[@klausfiedler64]

@@Musicrafter12 I maintain that at this point the parallel chess world called women's chess serves as a disincentive to challenging the strangest players. All top twenty players are rare. In fact there are never more than twenty of them. Open or men's tournaments don't require protection from Trans people. Women's chess apparently does. I am not against women's chess but if women truly want equality then they have to compete with the best and no matter how you spin it that doesn't seem to be happening. You can say women can compete with men but this is the kind of thing that requires proof to be taken seriously. If Judit Polgar represents that proof then it's time for women to enter the real arena of chess competition.

[@klausfiedler64]

@@honeyinglune8957 Absolutely not. Judit Polgar fought in the top ten of the world for years. She specifically insisted on not playing women's only events.

[@thenotes5589]

Massive respect to Kostya for his transparent advocacy. This is an issue with real stakes--which concerns people who are seriously affected by FIDE's decisions. Being any more than wishy-washy on topics like this can definitely get one out of some people's good graces, but it's crucial that we have more acceptance in chess. I super appreciate his willingness to advocate for the little guy here.

[@chessisbest]

Kostya, I'm so glad your voice of wisdom comes through clear in this podcast especially in the genetics portion. Very interesting topics! Thanks for the content. I wanted to let you know your work and your voice is appreciated. :)

[@honeyinglune8957]

kostya is not wise, he is weak-minded

[@IMKostyaKavutskiy]

Thanks for the kind words 🙂

[@honeyinglune8957]

27:20 I would say the opposite, it doesn't make sense to even discuss the culture until you figure out and equalise the biology. Is kostya claiming that culture is more fundamental than biology? biology can exist without culture, whereas culture cannot exist without biology

[@TheChron-kl8gf]

If you try to address biology before culture, you get eugenics so the opposite route is much preferred.

[@honeyinglune8957]

im not surprised by this. i could always tell kostya is weak-minded

[@IMKostyaKavutskiy]

Hi, I saw that you left like 15 comments on this video. Insulting me or trans people in every single one. Are you ok? Genuinely asking because this is the behavior of someone who's either completely unhinged or one who vehemently despises trans people. Even if you disagree with everything I said, most normal people would leave a maximum of one (1) comment where they politely and intelligently share what they disagree with, rather than resorting to silly personal attacks. I truly don't care if you have a different perspective, that's how humans work. My concern is the weird hate and intensity you seem to have about this subject. I suspect that there is something going on in your personal life that drives you to take it out on others on the internet, but of course only you would know. Again, normal happy people generally don't post this much nastiness. And this was just one vid, I have no idea how much you post on other vids. Whatever the case may be, I really do hope your life improves one day ❤

[@Fluxion11]

​@@IMKostyaKavutskiydude, on the weight lifting question you went to the "idk, im not a doctor" line. If that isn't weak-minded, then I don't know what is.

[@cooloutac]

This debate is always going to boil down to whether we should even have separate woman tourneys. Because supporting trans people in them is basically just that, removing the separation. Period. Anyone can call themselves trans even if just doing it for the easier competition. And I don't say this in regards to gender I say this due to the difference in average rating.

[@KevinHawkshaw]

there is no difference in average rating

[@cooloutac]

@@KevinHawkshaw only 2 women in the top 100.

[@KevinHawkshaw]

@@cooloutac I think you need to do a quick google search on what an "average" is. But yes, you might be surprised to learn that across the entire Indian chess federation, for example, men and women have about the same average rating. Women actually slightly higher if we're being really accurate.

[@cooloutac]

@@KevinHawkshaw Let me add to this only two women in the top 100, now how would you feel as a woman if the 98 guys decided they feel like they are women and started dominating the women tournaments? Hell, how would you feel as a fan and sponsor? You don't wait for unfairness and uncompetitive matches to happen before you do something, its a sport you try to ensure them from the outset.

[@KevinHawkshaw]

@@cooloutac do you actually think top male chess players are going to fraudulently change their gender to win women's tournaments? Hikaru Nakamura is going to get hormone therapy and surgery to physically transition to a woman so he can win the Women's World Chess Championship? And all Hikaru's friends and family and his doctors are going to cover for him and say "Yes, Hikaru's secretly been transgender his entire life." And all chess authorities are just going to believe him and go along with it like there's nothing wrong? Is that really what you're afraid of?

[@jenmoves]

FIDE, lets not focus on our internal misconducts, let’s just discriminate the astronomically small number of trans chess players

[@vartananq]

Sounds like Kostya did not survive college without becoming a liberal

[@samoppedisano3994]

Empathy, am I right??😅

[@vartananq]

@@samoppedisano3994 yes, feelings > logic

[@vartananq]

Interestingly how he kept himself out of the A.R conversation just because he works with US chess, typical liberal only yelling about stuff that don’t affect them

[@samoppedisano3994]

@@vartananqyou seem like a victim of the right wing pipeline. You will eventually need to seek help for this, but in the meantime, stay away from chess and keep the 1100 rapid pool free from hate

[@vartananq]

@@samoppedisano3994 what makes you think I’m 1100, that’s above average.

[@oldman-badchess]

Best point of this entire discussion was at the beginning from Jesse. FIDE is not a US organization. The US is not morally superior. To think so is the height of arrogance.

[@edl5731]

The FIDE policy seems pretty reasonable. In summary, FIDE will recognize the gender of a player that the player is legally recognized by the country that they are a citizen of. Lets compare the alternative that seems to be being proposed. FIDE recognizing as women a transgender woman whom their own country legally views as male. That would create a lot of problems. The national woman's champion being someone who is not viewed by that nation as a woman???? I don't see any reason to challenge that aspect of FiDEs policy. What I would like to see is FIDE having a policy of not holding international events in any country where being gay is illegal.

[@ChessWithMouselip]

Regarding Jesse's genetic comment. Is talent truly genetic? My granddaughter is a talented dancer. She is the only gifted dancer I know of in my family, my wife's family or the family of my granddaughter's mother. I am not sure that talent is completely a genetic thing.

[@cooloutac]

With chess its even more of a genetic thing because it's more dependent on memory and spatial Vision rather than creativity or exercised skills. The question though is whether men have inherit advantage's over woman regarding these things. I don't believe that is the case ,but regardless , the tournaments were created to encourage more women to play. If all the top hundred players in chess considered themselves women and were playing at woman tourneys woild as many women e en want to play? Maybe that's an unfortunate consequence if we want a world where everyone is treated equally in sports.

[@bluefin.64]

Recessive genes mean a blue eyed child can be born into a family where everyone else is brown eyed. The expression of genes is also affected by environmental factors that turn them on and off. Genetics is a highly complex business.

[@cooloutac]

@@bluefin.64 But there is no greater distinction or wide a difference as biological male vs female. It only becomes complex when we interject false equivalencies with other minor differences that are so slight and incomparable they are meaningless and off topic. And regardless if it appliess to chess or not the fact is most men are ranked higher and we have tournament separating them to give more women a chances for success to encourage more woment o play. If you are saying that is not right, its selfish and insincere, well than you have an argument especially if you want to open the door for anyone to make the switch. Thats probably why FIDE now ramped up the vetting process.

[@bluefin.64]

@@cooloutacI was pointing out to mouselips that someone in a family being different, whether that's advantageous or not, can be for genetic reasons, and that how things look naturally can be misleading. My opinion on talent is that it requires nurturing, but it's genetic. The alternative is that we are all conceived with identical capacities, which makes no sense at all.

[@cooloutac]

@@bluefin.64 The question the trans topic brings up though, is should we get rid of women tournaments or make everything gender equal? Anything else imo would be just a facade.

[@everydaffodil5344]

Kostya, it should not be taboo to acknowledge that men’s chess is stronger than women’s chess. It is important actually that the women’s game has an opportunity to flourish on its own and build up players so there is more incentive for women to play, which one day will hopefully result in equal play strength. That is the root of the issue in this video, and it makes no sense to dismiss it.

[@curry3748]

Its not taboo lol. Its just wrong. Women have entered top 10 players in the world and the top youth of the world have a lot of women. Theres no advantage for men, its simply that men play chess more often because the culture around it. Women in chess at a lot of clubs for elders is still weird. Theres still sexism at a lot of clubs

[@siraf1234]

​@@curry3748Therefore, men's chess is stronger. You can avoid saying the words concretely, but it means the same thing

[@Sitbear]

None of this is relevant. We've already taken for granted that women's chess is necessary for the sake of conversation. The question is how trans people fit into the dichotomy.

[@ChessDojo]

The point made was about the reason for the disparity, not that the disparity doesn't exist. Biological factors insulting to consider until culture is normalized. Thank you for watching!

[@samoppedisano3994]

Forget this entire line of conversation. Forget social vs genetic reasons (they’re social), we need women’s chess. We also need to not be terrible to trans people, and it’s not hard to do both

[@sachinpaul2111]

That’s a random title : they’re not banned from all FIDE tournaments: just from a specific subsection In which countries is it banned to be biologically trans ? I’m genuinely curious : if you’re born transgender , are you killed in any country? Genuinely curious. Women’s only section should have only women competing. Simple. Also if men’s and women’s events aren’t different according to Kostya, then why the fuss? Let everyone play in the open section then

[@curry3748]

You can be killed in the middle east for it. By sharia law. Those 'specific' tournaments are pretty big. Also transwomen are women and transmen are men. So yeah women should compete in womens tourneys and men in mens tourneys. And as a last point. You cant just segregate people for their identity. Thats what a lot of people tried in history. Look how those ended

[@Sitbear]

"In which countries is it banned to be biologically trans?" Officially? Most of those countries don't recognize trans people as a real thing, so they'd just take a trans person to an asylum or behead him in the public square. So Saudi Arabia, for one. "Women’s only section should have only women competing. Simple." Everybody already agrees with this statement. What's not simple is whether trans women are women and thus eligible. A lot of people like you don't understand how gender works. "Let everyone play in the open section then" Again, everybody already agrees with this. But what about women's events?

[@MattyNiceZM]

It’s well known that men and women bell curves for iq look different. At the upper and lower ends of the scale you find more male individuals than females. Why wouldn’t chess have a similar distribution? You have to ask yourselves what the purpose of having a women’s division in competitive chess is and is that purpose consistent with letting biological men have access into that division and prize pool $. If the purpose is to promote more female professional chess players by making a women only prize pool, is it consistent with that aim to allow male to female transgender into that prize pool? Are you willing to give a place to a biological male that would otherwise put food on the table of a female chess player? And if so how is that consistent with the purpose of a women’s division? Transgender rights aren’t the only rights to consider, especially when they clash with women’s rights. You have to consider everything and everyone. Kostya wouldn’t even acknowledge that there is a women’s rights issue here. Strange.

[@engine07]

"It’s well known that men and women bell curves for iq look different." This is pseudoscience from the 90's. The IQ of women was significantly lower in the 1930s due to a lack of education. Are you planning to use this information to make arguments in 2023?

[@Sitbear]

Some thoughts: 1. Some cis women may feel unsafe around trans women, but then some white women back in the 60's felt unsafe around black women. We don't need to cater to bigotry 2. Kostya's assertion that you can't consider genetics until culture has been equalized is nonsensical. Genetics informs culture, and culture informs genetics (natural/sexual selection). If you insist on equalizing a culture which arose from genetic differences, then you've thrown the baby out with the bathwater. For example, if you accept that women are on average less competitive or otherwise predisposed to chess than men then you might never expect the number of women to equal the number of men. The culture will always then lean "male". 3. On the question of physical sports, evidence suggests a very small lasting advantage for trans women who transition _after_ puberty, and negligible for those who transition during puberty. Other factors include the fact the women's leagues simply have a smaller competitive pool, and post-puberty height/weight differences. The most important factor to me, however, is that sports has not just meritocratic value, but entertainment and social value (active lifestyle role models) which may outweigh the physical considerations for trans people in sports. 4. We need to mention access to Women's Titles which grant special privileges. But women's titles are themselves a controversial topic.

[@blueguitarist]

You will never be a real woman

[@banzaiburger9589]

If trans women feel unsafe among cis men, by your logic this is bigotry in the form of misandry. To let them play with biological women based on this discomfort is catering to bigotry

[@Sitbear]

@@banzaiburger9589 Well yes, that would be misandry, but that's not why trans women want to play in women's events. After all, a cis man could be afraid of cis men, but it does not follow that he'd want to play in women's events, because he doesn't identify as female.

[@banzaiburger9589]

My question is what would be the motivation of a chess player who was previously presenting as a cis male playing chess as a male needing to no longer play in the sections they had been playing all along simply because they now present as female? What would be the chess-specific need?

[@Sitbear]

@@banzaiburger9589 Suppose a cis woman had been playing in open events all her life, but then decided to switch to women's events. Would you demand of her a "chess-specific need"?

[@lordchampion2724]

The way intelligence works with chess is this: the smarter you are the better you are with little to no training compared to your peers. Training can raise a less intelligent person's level to close this gap to the point that both trained players perform at the same level. Assuming the intelligence doesn't limit them, it's mostly an issue of time. More intelligent people learn faster. They may make master in 2 years while a less intelligent person has to grind for over 5 years.

[@nadavfranckovich2811]

Fide is so rotten

[@robdubent]

You spelled BASED WRONG. Cope harder

[@curry3748]

​@@robdubentgrow up kid. We know you like to be edgy but its really not a good face.

[@ChessJourneyman]

Gotta concur with Kostya, it's insulting to women to assume that they are mentally impaired compared to men since chess isn't a physical sport. If there was a biological advantage, a club player could destroy Polgar the same way a 16-year-old male amateur athlete can completely destroy an Olympic-level female athlete. Also, to the best of my knowledge, there is almost no activity where women are better than men, multitasking included. Actually, the only evolutionary advantage I can identify is perception - men adapted to be hunters and women to doing tasks at home in a cave, so women can scan a room and spot nearby items better than men whereas men are better at focusing on distant objects. The best theory I've heard why men dominate everything is the competitive drive. Even in areas like art, music, or cooking, women rarely enter the discussion for the top 10 ranks. Women can almost exclusively do an activity for thousands of years and if men set their mind to doing it, they will quickly catch up and overtake the lead. If you look at a group of 40 young female athletes, you will find maybe two that are as driven as boys. Maybe there are cultural reasons for this, maybe women are focused on reproduction and securing family life more than men, etc. It's much more common for women to lose focus in a sport and allocate more time to attracting a partner than it is for men - men lose focus in a sport only when they identify a new competitive goal, such as education or work. Everything is competition for men, not survival. So if women could have the same competitive mindset for sports and not just beating their biological clock, we wouldn't even be having these discussions in chess since being transgender only matters in physical sports.

[@honeyinglune8957]

it pretty much comes down to the fact that given the opportunity men will have sex with almost any woman whereas women won't have sex with men who are losers. Therefore in order to reproduce, men need to be competent at something. Women don't become obsessed with things like men do. for example, it's clear no woman has the same kind of interest in chess as people like fischer or kasparov - if the story is true that fischer memorised every one of spassky's games before their match, i could never imagine a woman doing that. or in music, someone like beethoven or glenn gould- i feel these men had an objective interest in the art, which is somehow not possible for a woman. So it's maybe not strictly a biological advantage men have but rather an extreme difference in interest and motives, which explains how Judit was an exception to the rule. if it was strictly biological the case of judit would have been impossible. but still, the better a woman is at chess, the more her attitude towards chess will be typical of a male's

[@alsatusmd1A13]

A friendship across sectarian lines is not a common phenomenon, in his experience. In the past, it has struck him that, apart from homosexuals, only chess players have found a reliable way to bridge, intensely but without fatal violence, the gulf that separates any given pair of men. ~ Michael Chabon Interestingly enough, in the past at least, it was just accepted in the wider culture that men dominated homosexuality even if homosexuals themselves were not (Ironically, the homophobia started in the Renaissance in the “decadent West”, which then exported it everywhere via either direct colonies or spheres of influence). The sports angle is important to the discussion in that when women lose focus in a physical sport and allocate more time to attracting a partner, they lose access to the spaces where they get to see bare breasts (and feel other women’s breasts and clitorises against their bodies) very frequently. Even there though, “very frequently” is rare compared to the situation in men’s sports because women are more squeamish about casually being naked around or having sex (in all but name) with other people. Besides this, women have a significant supernormal releaser linked to height which overwhelmingly leads them to men. This is why “trans-inclusivity” is an issue within lesbianism but gay men functionally don’t care.

[@cooloutac]

So if the top players considered themselves women and started playing at woman tourneys you would be cool with that? What if the next Magnus comes along one day but he's transgender. How would you feel as a woman entering woman tournaments? I don't think kostya realizes he's calling for removing separate woman tourneys because they will never be seen as valid. Chess is no different than any other sport.

[@Musicrafter12]

@@cooloutacYou know what, if Magnus suddenly considers himself a woman, congratulations to her. Funny thing is, he's so strong he doesn't exactly stand to benefit from entering a women's event, either. Unlike some people I actually have no conceptual problem with the idea that a trans women can beat cis women at things and win competitions. Trans women aren't just allowed to compete as a token gesture and never be allowed to win.

[@engine07]

There is only 1 male in the top 10 rankings of memory grandmasters. The memory world champion is a woman. Men compete but are unable to catch up.

[@nimzomitch]

You guys should invite a trans person on and talk to them about some of this stuff - it could be great content. I would suggest Katy Montgomerie. She could help iron out some wrinkles in your perspectives

[@Musicrafter12]

Why not Yosha Iglesias? Would probably be even more directly relevant since she's an FM.

[@nimzomitch]

@@Musicrafter12 I didn't say not anyone; Mentioned Katy bc I'm 99% sure she would come on Dojo Talks, and is an activist who is used to being an ambassador

[@nimzomitch]

@@bushidobam 😆🤡 Yes, when people's rights are being trampled on, sometimes "activists" step up to advocate. Please refer to the history of civil rights in America, women's sufferage, etcetera Also, I think Pruess (sp? sorry) on this channel is also a comrade, so if you have a problem with comrades, Dojo might not be the channel for you

[@nimzomitch]

@@bushidobam you don't know me, comrade

[@nimzomitch]

@@bushidobam you never argued or demonstrated a point besides the one on your head, like you're still doing. Do you have one? Another point?

[@nimzomitch]

Jessie explaining how trans women don't count as women, bc they'll somehow take spots away from...women. ?! 🙃🤡

[@lesliemarshall3764]

Three men telling us what are the issues in women's chess...🙄 Women chess players: the problem is the toxic culture of sexism, discrimination and harrassment against women players. FIDE: we take your concerns seriously and will discriminate against another vulnerable group on your behalf.

[@ChessDojo]

Isn't this what we said?

[@chesscomdpruess]

Here’s a previous Dojo Talk on women’s chess: kzbin.info/www/bejne/pmqqgaampqlrY7s In your opinion would it be preferable if we avoided this and other topics?

[@cooloutac]

more likely its the fact only 2 are in the top 100, and if all they could play was open tournaments most wouldn't bother, which would mean less jobs for people. But its politically incorrect to admit publicly.

[@cathleenrocco4804]

This is really terrible - no reason other than persecution. I would not have expected the chess community to be bigoted.

[@Sitbear]

The chess community is international. International tends to mean bigoted at this point in human development.

[@samoppedisano3994]

At least in the US, I think Club and tournament players tend to be better about this, but most “chess players” online are just gamers and bring their gamer bigotry

[@cooloutac]

@@samoppedisano3994 Do chess clubs actually have seperate women tournaments? Of course not. Not even in India in Russia, they all play together in their club tourneys man. Which is how it should be.

[@klausfiedler64]

If Magnus Carlsen goes trans will he drop 200 elo points? If he doesn't does that mean he's not a real women despite the surgery? Are these really stupid questions or is it that the idea of biological men competing in women's events is really what is stupid here. I don't see why women's chess, despite some real questions I have about why it exists. needs to be put under a microscope because some super-minority of freaks (not that there anything wrong with that) decides they want to play chess only against women. If you're Trans, then make like Judit Polgar and play only in open events. And since Judit Polgar came up, has anyone actually seen her...., I mean...., you know...., like,... , well, she plays too good to be a women. I feel like Nikki Haley the other night.. Every time I think about this topic I feel a little stupider. But I don't think it's me, it's the topic.

[@honeyinglune8957]

it's definitely the topic. the main reason i see for womans chess is if you want a woman world champion you need a womans candidates and then you also need womans tournaments in order to qualify for the candidates

[@klausfiedler64]

@@honeyinglune8957 Perhaps the same can be said for a Trans Champion. Trans only events????

[@AntonStachSZN]

1 min in: seems like a smart thing because otherwise some 2500 GMs would play as women and destory the competition

[@hannahbrown2728]

Yeah GMs are just gonna drop hat and socially and medically transition to play in a different league. Cause folks doing that isnt a total god damn myth or anything

[@AntonStachSZN]

@@hannahbrown2728 can you use proper English please?

[@Sitbear]

You are implying here that women can't normally be 2500.

[@AntonStachSZN]

@@Sitbear no I am not. But there a very few 2500 women (edit: currently 13)

[@Sitbear]

@@AntonStachSZN Ok, so walk me through this logic here. If a 2500 trans woman destroys other women, it's bad. But if a 2500 cis woman does the same, it's ok? I don't get it.

[@Maxfr8]

Let's hope that they are banned.

[@hannahbrown2728]

Pathetic.

[@chessisbest]

Well, there's the hate they were referring too. 😂

[@honeyinglune8957]

hahahahahahaha best comment on this video. Well done sir. straight to the point

[@cooloutac]

@@chessisbest is it hate though? Or does it destroy the whole idea of having women only tournaments. I can see alot of guys claiming to be women and taking estrogen just to have a chess career since they can't compete at the mens level as successfully. Some people murder people for money when desperate man. Its naive to not take measures against this. And even still, regardless, once a trans woman starts dominating womens events will lose tons of fans and sponsors. the olympics are almost dead now.

[@chessisbest]

If that actually becomes a prevalent issue let's deal with it then, but I'm not convinced, at all, that women can't compete with men in chess... so that would be a very silly and unlikely choice anyway.