Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 10:43am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120993826#Comment_120993826

You're still showing that you don't understand what you're talking about.

Of course a WGM isn't just given a GM title if they decide they're a man. Why would they be? They're completely different things. The WGM title would be converted into an equivalent Open title - in this case, the FM. That seems entirely reasonable.

A female player can be a GM in her own right. And if that female then decides they're male some day, they of course keep the GM title.

FIDE do not place less value on Women's titles. At the risk of overly repeating myself here, how can there be an equivalent (and a lower) Open title if FIDE place less value on Women's titles? That makes no sense. The various titles have different ranks - because of course they do, or else they'd all be the same - but that doesn't mean FIDE inherently don't value Women's titles. So the WGM title of course has lower qualifying requirements than a GM - but then so does the IM title. Do you think FIDE don't value any title below GM? (And let's not forget you tried to defend your point with a quote from a Belarussian GM, who not only isn't FIDE, but was also fined by FIDE for his comments - and then you denied that this is what you had said, even though the quote was quite clear!)

You've a bizarre inability to discuss - to the point of ignoring - any point that you don't like (eg the evidence showing that there may well be an inherent advantage for male players, for whatever reason) and just re-stating your point again. It doesn't reflect well on you.

Anyway, I'd like to think most regular posters can see that you and Overheal not only don't know what you're talking about here, but are also more interested in just shouting out the same point rather than engaging in any sort of discussion. That's a result in itself I guess.

18-08-2023 10:47am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120994372#Comment_120994372

Anyway, I'd like to think most regular posters can see that you and Overheal not only don't know what you're talking about here, but are also more interested in just shouting out the same point rather than engaging in any sort of discussion. That's a result in itself I guess.

Facts are routinely ignored. Whether it be the scientific facts on this question or the illuminating detail you and others have put forward, people who actually know what they're talking about.

Instead they resort to the most bizarre form of obscure pedantry that attempts to masquerade as an intelligent argument, when it is clearly anything but. I can only assume that, deep down, even they know their arguments are simply not true.

One eyed Jack · 18-08-2023 11:07am

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120994372#Comment_120994372

Do you think FIDE don't value any title below GM? (And let's not forget you tried to defend your point with a quote from a Belarussian GM, who not only isn't FIDE, but was also fined by FIDE for his comments - and then you denied that this is what you had said, even though the quote was quite clear!)

These were two completely separate and unrelated things. You claimed it was bad English, and at the risk of tearing the arse out of the joke but here it goes anyway - I provided you with an example of “bad English”, joking that something may have gotten lost in translation. It was a display of a bad attitude towards women’s participation in chess, and demonstrated the kind of behaviour that puts women off participating in competition.

It’s one nutter in that particular case, sure, I got that much, but it’s bloody prevalent in chess. I didn’t care that he is a Belarusian GM, those are the kind of silly details which serve as nothing more than a distraction, they’re not relevant to the point. It’s why I didn’t bother nitpicking with you the first time you said he was fined, because God knows I’ve fallen foul of predictive text more times, but he was fired, not fined:

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-63062092.amp

I didn’t expect you to come back at me the way you did, but the fact you mentioned you’re familiar with my previous posts explains what motivated that attack. It’s pointless at this stage tbh, there’s nothing new being added to the discussion here.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 12:12pm

I didn’t expect you to come back at me the way you did

What, with an understanding of the matter beyond your own googling? Heaven forbid.

but the fact you mentioned you’re familiar with my previous posts explains what motivated that attack.

What attack? Overheal had a very similar way of deflecting attention from his ignorance - accusing me of personal attacks to deflect from the points I'm making.

I was clarifying the original post, which had been completely misunderstood by Overheal in particular, and I'll continue to correct you when you say things like "the implication is that if a Woman Grandmaster declares that they are a man - not only do they lose their title, not only are they not given the title of Grandmaster, they’re given a title which is of lower value than that." Because of course people aren't blithely given a title they haven't earned. And you still haven't explained why they should be.

Pointing out why you're wrong isn't a personal attack.

Annasopra · 18-08-2023 12:39pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120993831#Comment_120993831

Your point about people's gender being in their spare time is drivel and nonsense. End of story.

One eyed Jack · 18-08-2023 12:56pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120994916#Comment_120994916

What, with an understanding of the matter beyond your own googling? Heaven forbid.

Well not that anyway, as you clearly haven’t managed to do that yet.

You’re not correcting me on anything either, you disagree with it, but I wasn’t suggesting anyone be given a title they haven’t earned. The point being of course that the titles for both the open and women’s events should be of the same value and require the same achievements necessary to be granted the title, whether it be the Grandmaster or the Woman Grandmaster. They could still maintain separate titles for both men and women, but of equal value and equal requirements.

It would be nice too if they didn’t make a rule abolishing titles that anyone has earned, or making new rules that put up barriers for players in the game who want to earn those titles, but baby steps. We’ll have to wait and see what happens at the end of the two year period when they review the policy.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 1:19pm

Why should the requirements for WGM and GM be the same? That yet again shows you don't know what you're talking about. Remember female players can get GM (or IM/FM/CM) in their own right in exactly the same way as male players. Why would the WGM title be the same thing? It makes no sense.

Remember there is no male sections in chess; it's Open and Women's, not Men's and Women's. And most tournaments are categorised by strength alone.

If a female player decides they're a male, why should they keep a title for female players only? That also makes no sense. I've asked you that a number of times but you still ignore it.

Nobody's putting up barriers to entry; that's you making stuff up again with no attempt at backup.

And I am correcting you, repeatedly. You're just too obstinate to acknowledge it.

Large bottle small glass · 18-08-2023 1:31pm

This comes to mind

One eyed Jack · 18-08-2023 1:36pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120995257#Comment_120995257

They don’t have to be the same thing, they can be called different things, and actually mean equal, as opposed to being “roughly around the same”. Again you’re not correcting me on anything I don’t know already, and it’s not as though it hasn’t been established already that there is an open category and a women’s category, and that women are eligible to compete with men already should they choose to do so.

Why should anyone keep a title they’ve earned? I’m not sure that’s a serious question, particularly when you were so adamant about the idea of earning titles earlier. The answer to your question should be obvious - they’ve earned the title.

You appear to have taken me out of context again. What I said was barriers in the game for players who want to earn those titles. I’m not sure where you got barriers to entry from.

18-08-2023 1:55pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120995347#Comment_120995347

Why should anyone keep a title they’ve earned? I’m not sure that’s a serious question, particularly when you were so adamant about the idea of earning titles earlier. The answer to your question should be obvious - they’ve earned the title

It's been pointed out multiple times that you don't know anything about competition. This is another example.

A title is temporary. You win a championship, then you hold the title either for a period of time (eg 1 year) or until someone beats you.

Someone who is 19 can win the Junior championship (under 20) this year. He holds the title for that calendar year. Next year he will not hold it, he's not eligible to enter the event.

This is no different. Someone holds the womens title in chess, then they notify FIDE that they will be competing as a man. When that comes into effect they will no longer hold the womens title. It is only logical.

Nothing is being taken away. They are vacating the title by their own choice. The history books will not be rewritten, they will still be recorded as having been womens champion for the relevant period of time.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 1:57pm

If they "require the same achievements necessary to be granted" then of course they're the same thing. A title, after all, is an achievement.

Why would you call them different things if they're the same? Do you maybe think the title of GM should be closed off to female players and that they should only be eligible for WGM? That, again, makes no sense.

Your suggestion - of increasing the requirements for Women's titles - would also deny maybe a thousand or more players (current or future) a title. But yet you talk about not wanting to set up barriers? Again - that makes no sense.

Women's titles are only available to women. If you decide you're a man, then you can't have a Women's title. I've said this any number of times but you ignore it. It's really simple stuff. And the suggestion is your achievement would get converted to the Open equivalent, so what's the issue?

Overheal · 18-08-2023 2:10pm

They’re not the same though there’s a delta of 200 points. And you go on to admit they’re not the same, alleging 1000s would lose their women’s title if they were in fact the same achievement.

One eyed Jack · 18-08-2023 2:16pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120995480#Comment_120995480

Nothing is being taken away. They are vacating the title by their own choice.

They are not vacating any title by their own choice.

IV. Transfer of rights and liabilities

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.)

CM2_2023_45.pdf (fide.com)

18-08-2023 3:02pm

Actual footage of the Canadian women's powerlifting record being smashed by a biological male.

It was actually 463lbs more, not 210lbs; it was initially incorrected stated as lbs rather than kilos.

https://twitter.com/ReduxxMag/status/1691164884975915011?t=DHko8rrU3rbwNH0PujX9Og&s=19

Enduro · 18-08-2023 3:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120991669#Comment_120991669

I could, but as you suggested this is the real world and while others will likely disagree, I like to think of myself as a sane and rational person who isn’t going to waste my time on something that it wouldn’t take you two seconds to search for on Google provided you were actually interested in finding out that information for yourself.

You are the one asserting something exists. It's up to you to back it up with evidence. In the absence of supporting evidence I'm happy to call it out as rubbish. It's not my job to google your supporting evidence for you. You asserting something as fact here is not going to be trusted by the vast majority of people posting on this thread since you have been caught out so many times with your evidence free waffle. I will happily continue to call out your fact free assertions, but will also be happy to have my POV changed if actual good evidence is provided. (As Cdeb did yesterday, for example).

It would simply be a fools errand to provide you with any more entertainment at this point considering you’ve already gone out of your way to undermine everything I’ve presented thus far, your most egregious example being that when I presented evidence of women being harassed in sports, your rebuttal consisted of your not having witnessed it among your peer group, as though if you don’t acknowledge it, it doesn’t exist, or it’s irrelevant.

Of course I will undermine any fact free waffle you assert that lacks backing evidence. I will continue to point out anything you assert which is lacking in backing evidence. Just because you say something on this thread does not make it true.

And thank you for bringingup a perfect illlustration of your inabilty to back up your assertions with facts. I'm going to very explitly call out your paragraph above as being demostratably wrong. I don't know whether you are deliberately lying here, or just have extremely poor recall, You presented zero evidence of women being harresed in sports in that particular discusion. Nothing whatseover. The discussioon started with post #3836 01-06-2023 9:37am, when you asserted :

The presence of anyone who they perceive as not conforming to their standards, has an immediate impact on their willingness to participate in the activity, because now it’s no longer ‘just for the boys’, there’s a girl there, and some boys will not exhibit the behaviour expected of them, that is to be welcoming and respectful to all participants. That attitude towards them is more the reason girls drop out of sports, or both girls and boys don’t feel comfortable taking part, never mind considering entering competitions.

Note the complete and total absence of evidence of any kind whatsoever. It's just you asserting something, presumably hoping we'll think it must be true just because you say it, despite the complete absence of any evidence whatsoever. I then replied to this specific paragraph in post #3842 01-06-2023 6:21pm . where I did indeed point out that I had never heard of the behavior you asserted exists (without any evidence for that asertion) in my own real world experience. This was my full response:

Except, as I have already pointed out above, there are plenty of sports where males and females compete side by side in the same event without any of the issues you claim would arise. The separation into categories is done post-competition in the results, not in the staging of the event itself. Almost every sporting event I've taken part in during my multi-decade sporting career has been mixed participation. Not once have I ever heard of any males complaining about the presence of females somehow causing them an issue. You're plain wrong again.

You responded in post #3856 02-06-2023 6:36pm , basically pointing out that my experience was anecdotal, and that you had anecodotal experience which backed up your claim. You did provide a link in your follow up point, but it was to do with the treatment of transgender people by the Iranian regime, but nothing remotely reelated to your orginal assertion, which remained completely and utterly evdence free, apart from now claiming to have your personal anecdotal back-up.

I then replied in post #3879 02-06-2023 10:59pm agrreeing that my evidence was anecodtal, but pointed out that you had no evidence of any kind to back up your asertion. I also pointed out that anecodtal evidence (In my case quite a considerable volume of it, frankly) trumps a total absence of evidence. I specifically asked you to provide the evidence to back up your point :

So could you please provide some evidence to back up your assertion, since that seems to be the standard you require.

And you failed to reply to that post in any way whatsoever. You ran away and left it at that, whilst continuing to reply to other people's posts. You provided no evidence to back up your original point whatsoever at any point from your orignal assertion to this current reply. But you feel the need to post a total untruth "your most egregious example being that when I presented evidence of women being harassed in sports, your rebuttal consisted of your not having witnessed it among your peer group, as though if you don’t acknowledge it, it doesn’t exist, or it’s irrelevant.".

So once again, Provide the evidence. Your original assertion remains no more than you saying something without anything to back it up whatsoever. That assertion is in complete contradiction to my lived experience, so I continue to call it out to be utterly wrong. As ever, I'm open to having my mind changed if evidence is provided.

I also notice that you continue to run away from answering the question that I have asked you multiple times on this thread. It's a simple question that only requires a straighforward yes/no answer (im willing to bet that you will either ignore this question again, or not give a straight yes/no answer... feel free to provide paragraphs if reasoning, but please provide the yes/no first) :

Do you agree that post pubescent male sex athletes have a significant performance advantage over females sex athletes? Yes or no?

thegame983 · 18-08-2023 3:25pm

If it says 'Women's' in front of something.

Be it tennis or toilet.

Then it's not for men.

It's not complicated.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 3:26pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120995480#Comment_120995480

Just to be clear here - while you're right that OEJ doesn't know anything about chess competition, you've taken a very incorrect meaning of the word title.

This is not the same thing as winning, say, an underage or national title. There's no suggestion at all that competitions a player won would be rescinded or history books would be rewritten. (This is in fact a fairly fundamental error and OEJ has further betrayed his ignorance of all this by not picking you up on it actually)

A chess title is an achievement based on various performances and is not temporary. It is in fact permanent, as I outlined at the start of all this. There's players in their 80s who are still GMs despite being nowhere near the rating threshold any more. They mightn't

However, the issue here is that a Women's title can only be held by women. If you now decide you're a man, how can you hold a Women's title? It doesn't make sense.

Enduro · 18-08-2023 3:41pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996223#Comment_120996223

Yeah, thanks to your explanations yesterday that's what I picked up. Nothing wrong with your explanations at all. They are titles in the same way that one can be conferred with the title "Doctor", or "Sir", or "Senior Council", to use a few wildely different examples with different thresholds for achieving them.

18-08-2023 3:50pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996214#Comment_120996214

That's pretty much it in a nutshell.

Overheal · 18-08-2023 4:07pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996308#Comment_120996308

You don't get your doctorate abolished for transitioning. I have no idea what equivocation you are going for there.

Overheal · 18-08-2023 4:08pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996223#Comment_120996223

A chess title is an achievement based on various performances and is not temporary. It is in fact permanent

No, not when it can be abolished for merely changing gender.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 4:14pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996308#Comment_120996308

It might be even simpler than that - take Mr and Mrs. Can you really still be Mrs x if you decide you're a man? Surely, by definition, you're Mr x now?

It's a similar idea here.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 4:19pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996484#Comment_120996484

The reporting said that "women’s titles are considered less valuable by the FIDE", which I don't agree with and think is bad English. I've explained why a number of times on thread.

Your comment "That apparently includes stripping former winners of titles if they later transition. I wonder how the Caitlyn Jenner fans feel about that." indicates you don't understand the subject at all (for reasons again discussed at nauseum since). When you repeated the comment a number of times more, I felt as an experienced player I should clarify your error.

I don't think you've actually taken it on board though, sadly.

Enduro · 18-08-2023 4:25pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996452#Comment_120996452

OMFG, you entirely missed the point of my reply there. It has nothing to do with transitioning or abolition of Titles. I#m simply trying to help people like you to wrap your head around the nature of the word "Title" being used here. It is a (normally) lifetime honorific conferred as a result of achieving some standard, as opposed to most other sports-related "titles" such as "World Champion" which refers to being the most recent winner of a given world championship. When someone else wins the subsequent world championships the current holder is no longer the "World Champion". That's the point here.

Now most of these titles can be rescinded under certain circumstances. Priests can be "defrocked" and lose the title "Father", for example. (It'd be interesting how a transgender member of the catholic church hierarchy would be referred to!!").

It's amazing your advocacy for effectively "dead-titling" as an equivalent of "deadnaming" here. It's like TRAs have a default setting to find faults everywhere.

Overheal · 18-08-2023 4:32pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996518#Comment_120996518

I don't know if you play chess or not. I'm looking at FIDE's own documentation.

https://handbook.fide.com/chapter/TransgenderRegulations

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.).

They make it abundantly clear a WGM is not the same level as a GM.

"The issue is that women’s titles are considered less valuable by the FIDE, so a Woman Grandmaster wouldn’t be tranferred a general Grandmaster." - MediaITE

The reporting is therefore accurate and proper english. You could be the grand pope of chess but these facts are supported and your claims of chess papacy are not.

https://www.mediaite.com/sports/international-chess-federation-will-abolish-womens-titles-from-any-player-who-transitions-into-a-man-per-new-guidelines/

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996556#Comment_120996556

I don't know why you're getting so worked up, but the example you gave was a terrible one. Doctor isn't some temporary title you earn in a competition like Miss USA for a 12 month period.

cdeb · 18-08-2023 4:43pm

They make it abundantly clear a WGM is not the same level as a GM.

I mean, I've been saying that all along.

The issue is that women’s titles are considered less valuable by the FIDE, so a Woman Grandmaster wouldn’t be tranferred a general Grandmaster.

I've said about a dozen times now I consider the phrasing "women's titles are considered less valuable by FIDE" to be bad English, because it implies that it's the "women's" part that's causing them to be less valuable. That's not the case. There are various titles awarded by FIDE and of course they have an order. But there are Women's titles which are higher than or roughly equivalent to Open titles, and there are Open titles which are lower than other Open titles and indeed than some Women's titles. To suggest the issue is "women's titles are considered less valuable" is therefore bad English in my view.

Tell me, have you realised how silly your Jenner comparison was at this stage? Just I haven't seen you acknowledge that point.

Enduro · 18-08-2023 4:44pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996592#Comment_120996592

I don't know if you play chess or not.

For the second time this week you prove again that you don't read this tread at all. He has clearly stated exactly what leve he plays chess at. You're embarrsing youself again. You're doing the chess equivalent of "Mansplaining" female issues to females (which you also do in abundance, in fairness).

Overheal · 18-08-2023 4:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996636#Comment_120996636

I've said about a dozen times now I consider the phrasing "women's titles are considered less valuable by FIDE" to be bad English

I don't, if a WGM != GM. They are considered less valuable by FIDE, it's unquestionable.

Enduro · 18-08-2023 4:47pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996592#Comment_120996592

I don't know why you're getting so worked up, but the example you gave was a terrible one. Doctor isn't some temporary title you earn in a competition like Miss USA for a 12 month period.

I think you're having comprehension issues here. That is exactly the point I'm making.

F

Overheal · 18-08-2023 4:48pm

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120996642#Comment_120996642

For the second time this week you prove again that you don't read this tread at all. He has clearly stated exactly what leve he plays chess at.

Oh, an anonymous user on the internet claimed to be an expert in something. That settles it. /s

I repeat that no supporting evidence has been presented to prove this user has any authority on the subject. And appealing to that sense of self authority is a fallacy. We have primary sourcing from FIDE itself.

Transgender man wins women's 100 yd and 400 yd freestyle races.

Comments