this has already been addressed and you're just posting in bad faith

you already agreed that that we will have a trans woman at the very top of the female rankings within a decade - so backtracking now with "so what it's one woman" is dishonest as you don't even believe that yourself


the real risk here is that if we get some of the top 100 male chess players coming out as trans and then start pulling a scarlett and after competing in the top open compeitions start just cleaning house in the women's only events treating them like training sessions where they earn money - the female only events will start becoming redundant, the viewers will lose interest watching lopsided results where we already know who the winner will be beforehand and then the cisgender woman start complaining that this is unfair to them - then the sponsors are left with the very difficult position of banning trans people and being called transphobic or running the women's event where they already know who will win and receiving complaints from the women - they'll find themselves in an untenable position and go the esports route of quietly dropping the women's only events and only sponsoring for the open events

we have an esports precedent for this scarlett single-handedly killed women's only starcraft tournaments and closed off that pipeline for good - starcraft women's only tournies used to be a big deal and are now extremely rare and almost always scheduled at the same time as major events to prevent top trans esports players from double dipping but this also kills the audience because few will watch a women's only tourney for $500 when there's a $20k happening at the same time with much better players

No I didn't. I think that is very unlikely, which is why I'd bet it was over 10 years not under (not that I'm wanting to bet anyone ITT). Can you retract the accusation of bad faith?


Seeing as right now a single trans person ever has received the not-at-all-close-to-world-champion status of WIM, I don't think you need to be worrying about anyone single handledly killing women's chess for good.

i mistook your "i'll take the over" as in o.5 #1 ranked trans females

since you don't want to do a financial wager, how about we do this and winner gets to decide what the other person's avatar will be?

There are plenty of things Inso0 and I disagree on, but I think he's provided the rather simple and obvious solution here:

I sure hope I will have finally opted out of posting on this forum in 10 years.

What an asinine idea, everyone knows the real advocates for women’s sports are rightwing bigots.

bobo this happened already in esports they just let trans women compete from the beginning, they then dominated, the women complained and said they didn't want to compete against transwoman who had an unfair advantage

the sponsors then withdraw because it's now a lose lose proposition

if you sponsor it and league allows transfemales to compete then the cisgender women complain it's not fair

if the transfemales are not allowed to compete then the sponsors are called transphobic

so what are the sponsors going to do every single time... they are going to stop being sponsors, why stick your head into the hornets nest when you don't have to do it?

lia thomas' own teammates were against her competing as a woman - that was ignored a few have even been brave enough to go beyond the anonymous letter and publicly acknowledge they were against her competing with the women

what happens to her own teammates who said no? they are dismissed as transphobes




lia was ranked 554 in the 200m, 65th in the 500m and 32nd in the 1650 as a male

she doesn't swim for a year and then swims as a woman, placing 5th, 1st, & 8th in those same events and winning the national championship with a massive lead between her and second place and her times were close to the all time records set by some of the best female swimmers in the history of the sport

from fringe particiapant to the best in the world

imagine if lia were even ranked in the top 100, it would have been an absolute mockery, in her 500 freestyle she was only 6% slower after undergoing the transition whereas women are typically 10-12% slower, which is why she went from mediocore to best in the country by an entire full second

if you look at her shorter times the drop is even smaller, she had 47.15 as a male in the 100m and 47.37 as woman

then it's a freeroll for you

why don't you take the bet?

greg, re-read this again and ask yourself who is the hateful and judgemental bigot again

this is why you're a dipshit, you've drank so much koolaid you're unable to view things objectively and will dismiss out of hand any facts that hurt your predetermined belief


be better than this, i'm sure at one point in your life you were better armed with critical thinking and weren't this much of a clown, it's not too late

Also? Who is "also" made to feel comfortable in these women-only tournaments? Women and...?

Maybe they should work on being comfortable with everyone instead of living based on their anti-male prejudices. Or if the men in chess are actually doing particular things to make women uncomfortable, that should be rooted out and dealt with. We don't fix sexual harassment in government in industry by creating separate companies where only women are allowed to work.

He does seem to recognize that he's a bigot which has to be the first step in changing.

It's a better bet for you because if your conditions are met then you win instantly whereas me/Uke/anyone else betting against you has to wait the 10 years.

I put it in my Google calendar though so I don't forget

If there were separate marathons for each division, that would be less inclusive. But that's not what happens, is it?

It would be fine to have a mixed gender chess tournament and then give an award to the woman who did the best.

No, I said what I was trying to say. You are making up things that I didn't say.

I have no ability to read minds.
You asked me why women participate so I speculated what I thought was the most likely reason.

Why don't you tell us what you think the reason is?

Seems consistent to me that people would want those with a biological advantage to not compete with those who do not, but events with no biological advantage should not be separated.

I think it's pretty ridiculously inconsistent that some people think women need to be 'protected' from competing against biological males in chess, but not in physical sports.

It's actually not all that uncommon to have the elite men and women start at different times. They'll still be on the course at the same time running the same distance, but actual start times can be staggered some.

This seems like circular reasoning. You determine someone is transphobic because their posts remind you of posts by others you consider transphobic?

And from then on you don't even give full attention to their points, so you will never have the chance to change your judgment.

he's so close to becoming aware that he's the actual bigot here

If someone subordinates a trans person’s gender to their biological sex — meaning they identify them as their bio sex — in a neutral environment, that person is a transphobe. But sports can be an exception?

For instance, when Caitlyn Jenner says Lia Thomas shouldn’t swim against biological females, Jenner is subordinating Thomas’ gender to Thomas’ sex. This is usually transphobia as I understand it.

I’d like to know which environments it is acceptable (dating, sports, bathrooms, physical altercations, etc) to subordinate gender to sex and which I will be a transphobe. Thanks.

I don't know if I understand your point. In the sense that they give separate prizes and declare winners of each division, it is what happens.

In a female swimming competition, when Lia Thomas is on the block and the starting horn beeps, I’m allowed to view Thomas through her sex, right?

However, until that starting horn, I have to view Thomas as female, right?

So it’s.. “I’m seeing a female”.. *starting horn*.. “I’m seeing a male”.. *competition ends*.. “I’m seeing a female again”. Like that?

Craig, I thought your first post was well taken and thought out. Why are you quoting and responding to it as if you are a different poster?

It’s still me. I added more questions for clarification.

i think they believe that we need to view jenner here as a woman named caitlyn and the announcers calling her bruce and using male pronouns are bigots even though that caitlyn today would disagree and says at that time she was a male named bruce - it was bruce who won those medals not caitlyn and she was caitlyn at that time it would have been wrong for caitlyn to have competed against other females

I am not up on the current definitions and lingo, but it seems to me that a "transphobe" would be somebody that holds an unfair prejudice against trans people. The subordinating a person to their sex thing seems way too broad to me to qualify as transphobia, for the reasons that you were alluding to.