Why do women get different medals? WGM or simply GM?

 Its nuts, yes but also true, though they dont call them affirmative action titles thats exactly what they are. Check out the top Puerto Rican players for example or from countries like Angola. They have IMs that have never been 2400 and even some that have never been over 2300 ! If you win a national championship you are awarded the title of IM and it doesnt matter the strength of the opposition nor your rating it seems. There are Puerto Rican IMs that have never been 2400 or better and some never been 2300. There are other countries like this.

It's also not true! There ARE NO male titles.

There are only female titles, and generic titles. Everybody can compete for the generic ones, CM, FM, IM and GM. There is no difference between males and females for them.

Then there also exist seperate female titles, that are just extras. If you don't like them, ignore their existence. Many female players do.

Seems to be some confusion , let me clarify. A female can earn the GM title but also must meet the 2500 min rating requirement just as males must. A female that gets the WGM title only needs a 2300 min rating. My point is that the WGM title only means they are maybe as strong as a FM. I just last year played a male FM who was over 2500 fide !  He is now a GM already and he is 16 or 17. There is also WIM  ( 2200 min )  and WFM  ( 2100  min )

Seems to me, that is a contradiction of the title. International master, implying the same standard of play internationally to receive the title.

2700? Isn't that super GM level?

 Rich, as usual, doesnt know what he's talking about.

hmm you may think this way, but some other women don't.. even if they are taught chess, they might not be interested in chess.. not only women, i've in fact seen many men who're taught chess who aren't interested in chess..

and about Judith Polgar.. IF she does win World Championship, that's something big.. i'm sure it'll get enough publication.. maybe even headline news in most media.. so i guess that will attract more women to try to achieve the same thing and suddenly become interested in chess..

btw, scarblac, is that an official FIDE rating?? that is pretty good.. wish u all the best in getting higher ratings.. :) just another point, a lot of members on this site say CC ratings are not really accurate, but scarblac's rating proves otherwise.. his CC rating is almost equal to his FIDE rating.. so that takes any doubt (there was only a little) that CC ratings are not accurate totally out of my head..

CC ratings are not accurate. One example takes any doubt out of your head?

Why are they not accurate (within the pool they represent)? Certainly you can make an argument that due to the time a CC game takes, they will experience much more volatility for improving players than is desirable, but RD accounts for this.

On what do you base this?

Not accurate compared to OTB ratings.

Which claim? Men not liking war, or chess being nothing like war?

Both

I think ratings here are inflated compared to otb ratings. My best here is over 2500 yet my best otb is 2270 ( uscf ) and 2240 ( fide ) . There is at least one player rated over 2600 who has an otb rating under 1700 ?! Seems fishy to me but if he can be 900 points higher here than his otb I am expecting GM Becerra to soon be about 3500 if he can also get 900 points higher than his fide rating of over 2600......

Well first claim, men in general do not like war, I base this off of everyone I have ever known, nobody seems to like war, men or women.

Second claim, chess is nothing like a real war...well this should be self evident, chess is a board game with a set of rules, a time limit, a winner and a loser; war is a bunch of people killing each other, often for no reason.

Oh, you know the opinion of every single man in the world? 

Did you ask each and every one of them if they like war or not?

(You didn't use 'in general' in your original statement)

Actually chess has been likened to war on many many fronts.  The tactics, the strategy, the sacrifice.  War has all the things you mention, there is a set of rules, there is a time limit, and there is a winner and a loser.

The other thing I would like you to explain is what you base this statement on:  "often for no reason"

From what I can tell, no country has ever gone to war for no reason.

It would seem that your assertions are no better than those that you wish to dispute as being baseless.  Why is it ok for you to make such "unsupported" (according to your own critera) statements, yet it is not ok for others?

Is that inflation, or just a matter of different pools of players? No chess rating system, to my knowledge anyways, can be compared to another -- even if using the same underlying algorithm.

well, the current women's world chess champ is Alexandra Kosteniuk, after checking out her site, www.kosteniuk.com , i think she certainly deserves the title....

The strategy and tactics in war are totally different to those in chess, there is no time limit to war, and there are no rules.

Obviously I do not know the opinion of every man in the world.

I never said that no country has ever gone to war without a given reason, I said the people killing each other are doing so without reason, big difference.

They are stupid! - Sorry, trolling.

Would you like a link to the old threads with the very same question?