#301 Agree! There's a documetary about her I've been meaning to watch, so thanks for mentioning her and reminding me :D Anyway, on the OP, the nominal current reason is to encourage more participation. Whether that works or should happen is up to interpretation.
Why do women get different medals? WGM or simply GM?
Sort:
How about a new title thats for both men and wowen. We can call it the IBM award. Its the I beat magnus carlsen award. Lets see how many could actually get it. I bet there wont be many
a question that got my mind revving three years ago , lol
AT THE TIME i BEGAN MY JOURNEY FOR GM,, NOT WGM i WONT BE SATISFIED .. I READ AN ARTICLE THAT SAID OUR BRAINS AND MENS ARE DIFFERENT ??? WOMEEN CANNOT GO THROUGH IT .. aT THE TIME i BEGAN MY BLOG ON CHESS,COM TO BEGIN MY jOURNEY ..AND WRITE ABOUT IT .. i'VE COME A LONG WAYS .. BUT OH i'VE GOT A WAYS TO GO .. BUT IMMA DO IT ..nOT TAKING ANYTHING AWAY FROM ANY GM WOMAN .. .. OR MAN HMM ..LOL
GOOD QUESTION THOUGH
I think the reason why we award women in fields where they are equal to men is because society and humans in general are "very" nice towards women so even their small achievements are celebrated to the extreme. It's just in our genes to value female achievements way more than male achievements. Think about this, if judit polgar was a guy she would not even get close to 10% of the fame which she gets
Dec 5, 2021
0
#307
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
I think the reason why we award women in fields where they are equal to men is because society and humans in general are "very" nice towards women so even their small achievements are celebrated to the extreme. It's just in our genes to value female achievements way more than male achievements. Think about this, if judit polgar was a guy she would not even get close to 10% of the fame which she gets
This is one of the worst cases of stupidity I have seen in a while.
Are you referring to me? what i said is just a fact based off of verifiable evidence. In fields where women are in majority u will never see any initiative to increase male participation however for the opposite it's always true. As i said, it's simply in our genes since women are much more valuable than men for the survival of the species(this is a fact) and that's why they are always promoted more
Dec 5, 2021
0
#309
WGM titles are given for outstanding performance in women's tournaments, just as GM titles are given in open tournaments. This started long ago, when women were considered to be inferior players, so they needed tournaments and titles of their own. Some people still complain that Nona Gaprindashvili (women's world champion for 17 years, first woman to get the GM title) got unfair special treatment because she earned her norms in tournaments that totaled only 23 games rather than the prescribed 24. FIDE took into consideration the unfortunate fact that at that time there weren't enough norm-worthy tournaments that let women in for her to get 24 games. Even after having the GM title and a 2495 Elo rating, she still couldn't get invitation to top tournaments and so she continued to play mostly in women's events.
Today there are many more tournaments in the world strong enough for players to earn GM norms so top female players prefer to play in open events. Unfortunately, there are still many places in the world (Saudi Arabia for example) where the genders are strictly forbidden to mingle in leisure activities such as chess tournaments so women-only tournaments and titles are still necessary.
mpaetz wrote:
WGM titles are given for outstanding performance in women's tournaments, just as GM titles are given in open tournaments. This started long ago, when women were considered to be inferior players, so they needed tournaments and titles of their own. Some people still complain that Nona Gaprindashvili (women's world champion for 17 years, first woman to get the GM title) got unfair special treatment because she earned her norms in tournaments that totaled only 23 games rather than the prescribed 24. FIDE took into consideration the unfortunate fact that at that time there weren't enough norm-worthy tournaments that let women in for her to get 24 games. Even after having the GM title and a 2495 Elo rating, she still couldn't get invitation to top tournaments and so she continued to play mostly in women's events.
Today there are many more tournaments in the world strong enough for players to earn GM norms so top female players prefer to play in open events. Unfortunately, there are still many places in the world (Saudi Arabia for example) where the genders are strictly forbidden to mingle in leisure activities such as chess tournaments so women-only tournaments and titles are still necessary.
eh what? u can't just give example os South Arabia and apply it to the entire western world. Female titles are like saying "women are inferior to men" and should absolutely be done away with at any cost since it expects less from women just for being women.
Any person who supports female titles thinks of women as weaker players, there is absolutely no question about it. That's as if they have a title "african master, african GM" etc etc... it would be condescending
Dec 5, 2021
0
#311
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
Are you referring to me? what i said is just a fact based off of verifiable evidence. In fields where women are in majority u will never see any initiative to increase male participation however for the opposite it's always true. As i said, it's simply in our genes since women are much more valuable than men for the survival of the species(this is a fact) and that's why they are always promoted more
Always promoted more?
I refer you to the Nobel Prize in Physics for 1957.
Of the fundamental forces in the universe, Electromagnatism and the Strong Nuclear Force had already been shown to conserve Parity (or left-right symmetry). Two theoretical physicists called Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee did a review of the relevant literature and pointed out that nobody had managed to prove (or disprove) that the Weak Nuclear Force followed the same rules. Partly this was because the required experiments, to confirm or refute the prevailing assumption that Parity is conserved in Weak interactions, were so delicate and difficult that nobody had yet attempted to perform them.
Enter Chien-Shiung Wu, the world's expert on beta-decay spectroscopy. Wu decided that the theory WAS testable, using Cobalt-60 held in a strong magnetic field and cooled to near absolute zero.
Wu performed the experiment in 1956, and the results rocked the Physics community. Parity was NOT conserved in the Weak interactions. They could distinguish left from right, clockwise from counterclockwise spin.
Otto Frisch (the discoverer of Nuclear Fission) told a lecture-hall audience at Princeton that Wu's experiment was the most significant since the Michaelson-Morely experiment in 1887 that had inspired Einstein's Theory of Relativity. The AAUW called it the solution to the biggest outstanding riddle in science.
When the Nobel Prizes were awarded in 1957, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to... Yang and Lee.
Wu got nothing. She was a woman.
blueemu wrote:
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
Are you referring to me? what i said is just a fact based off of verifiable evidence. In fields where women are in majority u will never see any initiative to increase male participation however for the opposite it's always true. As i said, it's simply in our genes since women are much more valuable than men for the survival of the species(this is a fact) and that's why they are always promoted more
Always promoted more?
I refer you to the Nobel Prize in Physics for 1957.
Of the fundamental forces in the universe, Electromagnatism and the Strong Nuclear Force had already been shown to conserve Parity (or left-right symmetry). Two theoretical physicists called Chen-Ning Yang and Tsung-Dao Lee did a review of the relevant literature and pointed out that nobody had managed to prove (or disprove) that the Weak Nuclear Force followed the same rules. Partly this was because the required experiments, to confirm or refute the prevailing assumption that Parity is conserved in Weak interactions, were so delicate and difficult that nobody had yet attempted to perform them.
Enter Chien-Shiung Wu, the world's expert on beta-decay spectroscopy. Wu decided that the theory WAS testable, using Cobalt-60 held in a strong magnetic field and cooled to near absolute zero.
Wu performed the experiment in 1956, and the results rocked the Physics community. Parity was NOT conserved in the Weak interactions. They could distinguish left from right, clockwise from counterclockwise spin.
Otto Frisch (the discoverer of Nuclear Fission) told a lecture-hall audience at Princeton that Wu's experiment was the most significant since the Michaelson-Morely experiment in 1887 that had inspired Einstein's Theory of Relativity. The AAUW called it the solution to the biggest outstanding riddle in science.
When the Nobel Prizes were awarded in 1957, the Nobel Prize in Physics was awarded to... Yang and Lee.
Wu got nothing. She was a woman.
One of the scientists who nominated Wu said that she and her colleagues who made the experimental measurements did not get the prize since only 3 people could have been awarded according to rules.
Plus, if this is your example then i can name atleast 100 scientists in history(all male) who were denied any recognition. When men are denied recognition people don't shout "Sexism". Like how many of tesla's inventions were stolen and there are countless other examples (which include the very highly praised einstein too).
Point is, unless u can prove without any semblance of doubt that she got denied only as she was a woman, u have absolutely no case since as i said, there are hundreds of scientists which u probably have never heard of who never got credit.
Noble prizes are a prestigious thing and many things go towards attaining it. You need contacts and some influence, regardless of whether you are a man or a woman. Your "case" proves nothing since there are worse cases of poor male scientists being denied any credit
Dec 5, 2021
0
#313
I think your frantic scrabbling around for explanations proves something, though.
"Methinks thou dost protest too much" - Shakespeare.
blueemu wrote:
I think your frantic scrabbling around for explanations proves something, though.
"Methinks thou dost protest too much" - Shakespeare.
Nah it's just the rampant ignorance in this community which is sometimes infuriating. I am sure u are not aware of the two female scientists who received a noble recently for "crispr" (jennifer and charpentier). The whole research from the ground up and all the base work was done by feng jhang and george church and neither of them received any credit for it. Where was the outrage then? why wasn't it "sexism against men"?
As i said, many things go into winning any prizes. Since u are on the mercy of a few people u need to have some influence. It's not like chess where "if u win, u win"
?
so if you lose you lose really thats sooooo cool
Dec 5, 2021
0
#317
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
mpaetz wrote:
WGM titles are given for outstanding performance in women's tournaments, just as GM titles are given in open tournaments. This started long ago, when women were considered to be inferior players, so they needed tournaments and titles of their own. Some people still complain that Nona Gaprindashvili (women's world champion for 17 years, first woman to get the GM title) got unfair special treatment because she earned her norms in tournaments that totaled only 23 games rather than the prescribed 24. FIDE took into consideration the unfortunate fact that at that time there weren't enough norm-worthy tournaments that let women in for her to get 24 games. Even after having the GM title and a 2495 Elo rating, she still couldn't get invitation to top tournaments and so she continued to play mostly in women's events.
Today there are many more tournaments in the world strong enough for players to earn GM norms so top female players prefer to play in open events. Unfortunately, there are still many places in the world (Saudi Arabia for example) where the genders are strictly forbidden to mingle in leisure activities such as chess tournaments so women-only tournaments and titles are still necessary.
eh what? u can't just give example os South Arabia and apply it to the entire western world. Female titles are like saying "women are inferior to men" and should absolutely be done away with at any cost since it expects less from women just for being women.
Any person who supports female titles thinks of women as weaker players, there is absolutely no question about it. That's as if they have a title "african master, african GM" etc etc... it would be condescending
Where did you come up with the idea that FIDE only operates in the western world? They have to consider REALITY in the entire world. Where do you suggest female Saudi, or Iranian, or Afghan, or citizens of dozens of other nations where women are kept under male control go to play chess? Women-only tournaments are their only choice. And are women treated as fully equal to men in all parts of India and among all social classes there? Or in tribal societies in Africa? Or many other places? So is it your opinion that strong female chess players in these places should have NO opportunity for titles and recognition? Yes, it would be better were there no need for separate women's chess tournaments and titles. Try convincing the Supreme Leader of Iran to change centuries of tradition and prejudice and see how far you get. Some things are beyond the power of FIDE and the international chess community has to make concessions.
mpaetz wrote:
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
mpaetz wrote:
WGM titles are given for outstanding performance in women's tournaments, just as GM titles are given in open tournaments. This started long ago, when women were considered to be inferior players, so they needed tournaments and titles of their own. Some people still complain that Nona Gaprindashvili (women's world champion for 17 years, first woman to get the GM title) got unfair special treatment because she earned her norms in tournaments that totaled only 23 games rather than the prescribed 24. FIDE took into consideration the unfortunate fact that at that time there weren't enough norm-worthy tournaments that let women in for her to get 24 games. Even after having the GM title and a 2495 Elo rating, she still couldn't get invitation to top tournaments and so she continued to play mostly in women's events.
Today there are many more tournaments in the world strong enough for players to earn GM norms so top female players prefer to play in open events. Unfortunately, there are still many places in the world (Saudi Arabia for example) where the genders are strictly forbidden to mingle in leisure activities such as chess tournaments so women-only tournaments and titles are still necessary.
eh what? u can't just give example os South Arabia and apply it to the entire western world. Female titles are like saying "women are inferior to men" and should absolutely be done away with at any cost since it expects less from women just for being women.
Any person who supports female titles thinks of women as weaker players, there is absolutely no question about it. That's as if they have a title "african master, african GM" etc etc... it would be condescending
Where did you come up with the idea that FIDE only operates in the western world? They have to consider REALITY in the entire world. Where do you suggest female Saudi, or Iranian, or Afghan, or citizens of dozens of other nations where women are kept under male control go to play chess? Women-only tournaments are their only choice. And are women treated as fully equal to men in all parts of India and among all social classes there? Or in tribal societies in Africa? Or many other places? So is it your opinion that strong female chess players in these places should have NO opportunity for titles and recognition? Yes, it would be better were there no need for separate women's chess tournaments and titles. Try convincing the Supreme Leader of Iran to change centuries of tradition and prejudice and see how far you get. Some things are beyond the power of FIDE and the international chess community has to make concessions.
I highly doubt that the supreme leader of iran would go "oh so there's a WGM title too? oh my bad ladies, please go play chess!"... u see the point? having titles does not mean anything. If a country stops women from participating in sports then it doesn't matter if there are female titles or not
Dec 5, 2021
0
#319
kartikeya_tiwari wrote:
I highly doubt that the supreme leader of iran would go "oh so there's a WGM title too? oh my bad ladies, please go play chess!"... u see the point? having titles does not mean anything. If a country stops women from participating in sports then it doesn't matter if there are female titles or not
They don't prevent women from participating in chess. They prevent women from playing in tournaments with men. Are you now suggesting that these women should not be allowed to play chess at all? And as separate men's and women's tournaments are all that is allowed, why should the best women not be able to get recognition and earn titles?
Or as "having titles does not mean anything" I guess you must mean that GM, IM, NM, FIDE M, and perhaps even "World Champion" should be abolished.
SukerPuncher333 wrote:
Vance917 wrote:
SukerPuncher333 wrote:
flamencowizard, the GM title is available to both men and women. If you meet the requirements, you get the title, regardless of your gender. There's no bias here.
However, for women who don't meet the requirements, they may be eligible for the weaker WGM title, as an encouragement.
In fact, women are eligible for every single title that men are eligible for (GM, IM, FM, CM) but they just have the extra option of obtaining the WGM, WIM, WFM, WCM titles (all of which are weaker than their corresponding non-W versions).
So what's the difference between a female GM and a WGM? A female GM (like any GM) is simply much stronger than a WGM. That's all.
Unless there is also a title for MGM, is this not the very definition of a bias?
But bias towards which side? Women have the option of GM and WGM. Men can only earn the GM title. I think it's an advantage to have more titles available to earn.
Think of it like this: what if we make it so that only men can earn the GM title? Let's say women are eligible for the lesser FM and IM titles, but not the GM title (no matter how good they are), while men can earn all 3 titles. Now THAT would be biased against women and very unfair. But right now it's not like that: women are eligible for every title available to men (FM/IM/GM) plus some that aren't available to men (WFM/WIM/WGM). How could that be bad?
It incinuates that women are lesser by putting them before GM now you could argue that it's not saying men are better however there arent any male exclusive titles men are held to the normal standard and holding women to a lesser standard implies the idea that they aren't as capable
IDK, I feel that Marie Curie reigns supreme in science. She is the only person in history to receive a Nobel Prize in two separate science categories(Chemistry and Physics)."
Marie Curie got all her Nobel prizes from the work she did in collaboration with her husband. So it is incredibly misleading to credit her alone for it.