Do We Need More Women in Chess? No.

In recent times, there has been much discussion on social media about the position of women in chess. The prevailing tone, mostly from Western contributors, is feminist and aggressive, criticizing the alleged dominance of white, older men in leadership roles within FIDE.

Why am I writing about this? Because this issue extends beyond chess; it reflects a transformation in public consciousness, particularly in Western societies, where the white, heterosexual male—especially one who identifies as Christian—is portrayed as the source of all global problems. According to this narrative, he oppresses, tyrannizes, tortures, and troubles everything around him until feminism, the LGBT+ community, and migrants come to the rescue.

I disagree.

Humanity should not be divided into men and women as if they were two warring factions. Men and women do not inherently have conflicting interests as groups. Some individuals, regardless of gender, may aspire to the same positions of power and wealth, but that is not a global issue; it's their private matter.

What is globally significant is that everyone, regardless of gender, has equal rights.

In chess, this means that all players, whether male or female, should have equal rights to participate in competitions under the same conditions. This should apply to tournaments organized by FIDE and all national and regional chess federations.

Now, having established this, we need to assess whether the situation in reality aligns with these principles.

As far as the author is aware, FIDE and chess federations in European countries do not discriminate based on gender and even provide women with significant privileges, such as tournaments exclusively for women. While there is literal discrimination against men since there are no exclusively male tournaments, only open and exclusively female ones, both male and female chess players support this arrangement, considering it widely accepted.

However, it is illogical to demand equal financial rewards for exclusively female and open tournaments under the guise of fighting discrimination. It would be scandalous if women earned less than men for the same placement in open tournaments, but it is reasonable for prize amounts to differ for events where the best players, regardless of gender, have the right to participate.

The strength of players, not discrimination against women, should be the only criterion considered when determining rewards in chess competitions or media coverage.

The top-rated female chess player, four-time world champion, Chinese Grandmaster Hou Yifan, is not among the top 100 players in the world according to the FIDE rating in open competition. Apart from her, only eleven other female chess players have a Grandmaster rating exceeding 2500.

Do I wish women were better positioned on the rating list? No. Would it bother me? No. I am indifferent to whether the world chess champion is a woman or a man; what matters is that the best player wins.

Misogyny is not a normal feeling, just as misandry is not. Women and men are not social groups defined by identical attitudes, goals, and interests. They are not opposing armies preparing for a war of extermination. Conflicts between genders only serve those who want to more easily realize their selfish interests disguised as a noble struggle for equality.

Gender feminists fight for their own privileges in all areas of social activity, not for the rights and interests of all women, as they are not homogeneous.

Is it essential for women as a whole that someone reaches high positions of power just because they are female? Wars have been sparked and justified by high-ranking politicians like Madeleine Albright or Hillary Clinton. Albright even made a callous statement justifying the deaths of thousands of Iraqi children for the interests of America. Was her action in the interest of the mothers of those children?

Was it crucial for men in Serbia that the President of the United States or the Secretary-General of NATO was male? Did that ease the suffering caused by the deaths of compatriots, collapsed bridges, destroyed factories, and the environment poisoned by depleted uranium?

Returning to the chess arena, it is understandable that some female chess players fight for their privileges to gain more exposure and win more media space. However, it is crucial to emphasize that they should earn these privileges solely based on results, not chromosomal structure.

For a year and a half as an online chess coach, I have had less than 5% female students. I have not discriminated against them, and we get along well. They are making progress. Why are there so many more men in chess? Simply because more of them are interested. Is that inherently good or bad? No, it just is. Do we, as humanity, need to make additional efforts to get more women interested in chess? No. We need to provide them with equal opportunities to engage in chess if they wish. This has already been achieved, as explained at the beginning of the article.

Whenever I am in the Municipal Court in my city, according to the signs on the courtrooms, I see that over 80% of the judges are female. Does that bother me? No. Am I happy about it? No. It doesn't matter. What is important is that they have reached those positions due to their expertise, not their gender.

What appears to be an issue with a basis and recognizable discrimination in this whole discussion is the section about clothing at tournaments. Equal treatment for men and women must be ensured in this aspect as well. It is absolutely unacceptable for different rules to apply to one gender or another. If a judge reprimands a female chess player for a short skirt or open sandals, the same must be done for any male player. Rules should be the same for everyone and consistently and fully enforced, with sanctions for their violation.

To summarize, gender should be a negligible factor in chess, as in other human activities. We should promote and reward quality and performance, and that's all. So, do we need more women in chess? No, we do not. Do we need less of them? No. Do we need more men in chess? No. It is just a private matter of each individual as long as all of them have the same rights under FIDE.