do you also think it´s unfair that women get titled easier?

do you also think it´s unfair that women get titled easier?
why is chess gender seperated as both men and women actually have the same level of intelligence.

It absolutely makes no sense to me.

Society doesn't take women seriously in general, but it cuts both ways. It's easier for them to be mediocre, but harder for them to be great.

For example in chess it's easier for them to get some recognition, but it's harder for them to get respect.

it´s not harder for them to get respect. what do you think who is respected more?

Hou Yifan (2650) or Vladimir Malakov (2652)

Yifan isn't respect for her chess, she's "respected" because of her gender, which isn't respect at all.

i saw many wcm that are lower rated then me on chess.com

There are some super weak CMs too. They give these titles to low rated kids sometimes so it happens.

?

Titles aren't given for online ratings. Online ratings don't mean anything... don't decide it's unfair for that reason lol.

WFM is 200 points lower than FM
All the W titles are 200 points lower.

Maybe worth noting is that there are no male titles. There are universal titles and W titles. Men and women do have the same requirements for all the standard titles.

Respected or recognized?

How about someone who peaked at 2504?

https://www.chess.com/forum/view/chess-players/my-main-man-maurice

it is unfair but again it is what it is unfortunately even if it seems offensive or degrading

For titles like CM, FM, IM and GM, female players have to work as hard as male players. 

Someone has noticed that a certain titled player seemed lower than expected rating wise. It is not only the case with female titles. People with open titles like CM and FM can have lower rating as well because there are some youth tournaments where you gain the title automatically for winning it regardless of your FIDE rating. For instance, senior world champion gets GM title automatically as well, regardless of FIDE rating, if I am not mistaken (though in most cases he will already have that title).

The inclusion of gender titles like WCM, WFM, WIM (equal to CM title point wise) and WGM (equal to FM title point wise) has been done mostly because there are far less female players and those titles are used as incentive to increase the number of women in chess.

The other reason of course is the fact that FIDE likes money, which is why they created CM title as well (because you have to pay a certain amount for your title to be recognized after earning it on the board), but let's not focus on that.

There are people who are all for it and those who are against. Personally, I am ok with it. It is much better than to lower the requirements for open titles based on gender.

There's no evidence that females find achieving elite status in chess more difficult due to biological differences, but you shouldn't conclude that females don't find achieving that status more difficult. There are many non biological factors which vary based upon gender.

No. They don't. They have to work just as hard as you do for every point in your rating

What an original post, never seen anything like it...

They don't get an easier title since it's a different title for a different category. It would be an easier title if in order to become a FM they needed only 2000 elo, for example.

Since the number of female players is much lower then the number of male players they do it this way as means to incentivize more women to play. It affects absolutely nothing regarding the open titles, but it seems to bother a lot of fellas.

And you cannot get a title based on your chess.com rating. It's completely different from FIDE ratings. Shocking, I know... If you think it's easier then get a gender changing surgery and try to get one. I'll be rooting for you.

It's easy for females to get a chess title than it is for males.

The best explanation that I have heard for the existence of women's titles, and it may just be an urban legend, is increased revenue for FIDE.  At one time, very few women played chess and women's titles and tournaments were introduced to encourage more women to play chess, thereby increasing FIDE's revenues.  Is this still necessary today?  Probably not, but it's a tradition and traditions are hard to break.

great job  cutting the rest of my comment where I explain the titles are different therefore the comparison makes no sense

The title of the topic is complaining that it's easier for women to be titled, which is true, since they have access to titles with lower requirements.

So my disagreement with your disagreement stands (and doesn't change based on the rest of your post).

Another way of looking at it is that there are more titles for women than there are for men, e.g. a woman can be a WGM and a GM, a man can only be a GM.  Is that fair?  Who cares?