Sexism was the reason initially, and right now there are still a lot fewer women in chess. Because there are so few women in chess, fewer make it to the top ranks in open tournaments, so they made tournaments for women only, which might actually help get women into the game. Women having their own titles (WGM for woman grand master etc) comes with its own problems though, because people (dickheads) will see those as lesser than the open titles (which women can also earn).
It really sucks either way. Either women are othered and their titles seen as lesser, or they disappear in the rankings in open tournaments (again, not because they are worse at chess, but because there are fewer of them).
“Because sexism” is correct, but for entirely the opposite reason of what you seem to be suggesting.
There’s no men’s league, only a women’s and an open. The women’s doesn’t exist because women can’t compete against the men, but because very many of them don’t want to. The women’s division is about providing a safer space for women to compete comfortably, to encourage more women into playing chess.
I should probably add, this is also exactly why it’s so absurd to ban trans women from competing in this division.
I do HEMA, a combat sport where physical differences actually do matter to some extent, very much unlike chess. But here in Australia, most tournaments don’t have a women’s division. They have an open division and an “under-represented genders” division. They don’t just “allow” trans women to compete, they openly encourage trans women, trans men, and enbies to participate. Anyone other than cis men. And the case for doing that in chess is so much stronger.
Why does CHESS have segregated leagues? I’d understand chess boxing of course, but regular chess?
Sexism was the reason initially, and right now there are still a lot fewer women in chess. Because there are so few women in chess, fewer make it to the top ranks in open tournaments, so they made tournaments for women only, which might actually help get women into the game. Women having their own titles (WGM for woman grand master etc) comes with its own problems though, because people (dickheads) will see those as lesser than the open titles (which women can also earn).
It really sucks either way. Either women are othered and their titles seen as lesser, or they disappear in the rankings in open tournaments (again, not because they are worse at chess, but because there are fewer of them).
Because sexism
Obviously not every gender is as intelligent as the superior one
“Because sexism” is correct, but for entirely the opposite reason of what you seem to be suggesting.
There’s no men’s league, only a women’s and an open. The women’s doesn’t exist because women can’t compete against the men, but because very many of them don’t want to. The women’s division is about providing a safer space for women to compete comfortably, to encourage more women into playing chess.
I should probably add, this is also exactly why it’s so absurd to ban trans women from competing in this division.
I do HEMA, a combat sport where physical differences actually do matter to some extent, very much unlike chess. But here in Australia, most tournaments don’t have a women’s division. They have an open division and an “under-represented genders” division. They don’t just “allow” trans women to compete, they openly encourage trans women, trans men, and enbies to participate. Anyone other than cis men. And the case for doing that in chess is so much stronger.
Shooting is also segregated, but the scores are usually higher on the women’s side, funnily enough. At least that’s the case in air rifle.