I gotta laugh at all the "downvotes" anyone defending the queen swap is getting. My guess is this is mostly (not entirely) from lower rated players to begin with, and a few higher who just despise it when they play someone who mirrors long enough to play trade for trade as much as possible. I know a person who told me that this is what he does and it's worked against some decent players. I wouldn't say they're all cowards--some are probably playing "not to lose" which by some definition is "cowardly" but to others it's a strategy. A strong enough player won't let them get away with it. The fact that an articulate post by a player rated right at 2000 garnered 17 downvotes amazes me. If it's a legal move, man up or woman up, or whatever up, and counter it! If you're good enough it won't work, and anyone thinking a queen swap renders the game into checkers better look at the probable moves still possible in chess vs. those in checkers. Okay, said my piece, and I'm ready for all the players who can't handle or don't want to handle a queen swap to downvote this post too! It'll be a badge of honor, and BTW... I am NOT a strong player, nor do I play the swap for swap game. Just FYI.
Are people who exchange queens scared players?

17 downvotes? Did some post get deleted? I only see a handful of up or down votes on any given post on this thread.
I never answered this post in 2017...but my default translation when reading the title is something like:
"I played somebody that keeps beating me by trading down to pawn up endgames, and I am in a road rage situation here...why can't they just engage me on their own terms like they are supposed to? This strategery is unfair. They just keep beating me over and over! I'm so frustrated I could punch a pillow. Give me some consensus that they are a chicken**** player so I can feel better...".
That default proves out more often than not, which is why it's still the default .

Considering queen trades alone is not a sufficient way to think about the game. The reason is because whenever one opponent has a favorable game trading off one or more pieces can drastically change the game; often to winning middle and endgames. Think about one or two moves ahead and the position after trades are made, ask yourself is it advantageous for either player? if not find a better route. Lastly, maybe its the openings you are playing that are not advantageous and have common queen trades. At the 1600 level I struggled a lot with middle game plans. If you know your middle game plans for the opening you are playing then you can evaluate the positions that arise quicker and more accurately, endgames that are common too.

The real question ought to be: why do people want to hold on so desperatly to the queen? I for one am all in favour of trading queens (and the earlier the better).
An example of the last game I just played:
I hope I don't have to explain why that queen trade is the best move?
Even in slightly different scenarios there's still an advantage for black:
According to the analysis tool this is a 1.4 advantage for black.
Still a 0.5 advantage for black.
According to Stockfish the queen trade simply is the best move in this position. So if you don't want to give your opponent an advantage by trading queens: don't offer it.
Another one you should know by heart if you play London:
It's more of a queen trade offer than an actual queen trade by white (white does not take the queen here!), but if black decides to accept than white gains an advantage.
Then of course there's just trading material (including queens) to open up or simplify things, if you're really good at king and pawn endgames than trade everything as quickly as possible I'd say, you can always make a new queen anyway. And last but not least the psycholigical aspect of losing the most powerful piece on the board.
So people who trade queens aren't scared, they trade or offer trades in order to get an advantage over you.

I always trade queens ASAP because they scare me this one player used the wayward queen opening and took almost all my pieces he was 100 points below me.

I always trade queens ASAP because they scare me this one player used the wayward queen opening and took almost all my pieces he was 100 points below me.
Booo!
If you want to attack your opponent, you'll want to keep the Qs on. If you are under pressure, trading queens is often a good way to pull the plug out of your opponent's attack. Trading or not trading is to be based on judgment of the position. Your reason for trading is just an admission that you really don't know how to play chess. The note by Optimissed above is pretty good advice.

Queens make me nervous and I don't like being nervous.
If you get better, you won't be so nervous (I mean, what can happen to you in a bad chess game?) and you'll make better decisions in games. Sometimes you'll want the Qs off, sometimes on.

Here's a good example, played today, of being scared and getting the queens off. When you have a clearcut win, why not?
I'm just curious, why did you play h4 instead of f4 on the last move?
I find that a quick queen exchange is a weasley move. I find if players are getting cornered and outmatched, they quickly start mirroring your queen to force an exchange because obviosuly, at that point, the game is more checkers than chess and a bit more luck factor comes into play. I believe a game of skilled players will involve CAPTURING a queen, not facing them off to gain a quick advantage.
Endgame involves a bit more luck? I think the opposite.
I was thinking the same thing. I don't understand how endgames could involve more luck. If there is luck in chess, I think it would have to stand to reason that the more pieces, the more chances of luck involved.
It seems to me the stronger the player, the better they are likely to do in a queenless endgame. The queen being the most powerful piece is going to appeal to the beginner the most.