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

this says nothing. this is merely a personal attack. make the point of your argument clear.

I did.  He ignored the rest of my argument that goes against what he argued and replied to one small sentence of my argument, isolated from its context and explanation, by just repeating what he had already said. But this is evidence that apparently this strategy works.

Personal attacks? Lol yea I'm sure he's super offended and won't sleep tonight. No attacks and nothing personal here, I'm simply trying to guess why he keeps on doing that. But in any case I do apologize for those very harsh words to anyone who might feel offended.

And fyi the point is clear:  for instance if I compliment a dude on a cool hairstyle, someone like @nMsALpg for example could interpret as me sending a message that I'm gay, when in fact I just think the dude has cool hair. Bottomline is you can interpret pretty much anything however you like if you're not taking context into consideration.

As someone rightly pointed out, female titles have promoted mediocrity more than anything. I know ALOT of young girls who aspire to be 'WGM'. Well, nothing wrong in it! I'm not disparaging any female title by any means. But when we aspire, don't we aspire for the peak? A girl is sort of conditioned that she'll get prestige and privileges at WGM

Why try for GM (not even IM)...? 

Well, you can look at it with 2 perspectives

I will explain the part which is broader

It was initially done to attract women towards chess and was indeed a success,though small

But in today's time if you look at it considering women have freedom to play any sport and do not have any proven incompetence in the game of chess against the opposite gender

Giving them a separate elo system and title seems like a false encouragement

It very well could also be the reason why most women don't play chess or rather cut the easy way out

As common sense forces anyone to choose the short way out, women just stick to female titles cz of less competition

And well as many people said "They don't have much respect as female title holders in chess" is because of the titles themselves

People know they took the shortcut path so why bother respecting them if they ain't doing that much hardwork

And that is one of the main reasons why women generally don't take interest

So removing those titles now would have better chances of more women joining the community cz of fair competition and no shortcuts

It would rather be better if they are truly given a fair chance of representing themselves cz women's chess now straight up contradicts gender equality

Typical terrible take. You say that the success of it in attracting women to chess is small and yet you think that it's done enough to level the playing field and can now be done away with. Women who actually play the game disagree with you:

https://chessdailynews.com/why-is-there-a-need-for-girls-or-womens-tournaments/

https://lichess.org/blog/X9i1gRUAAJzOKpd0/invisible-pieces-women-in-chess

https://en.chessbase.com/post/why-chess-tournaments-can-be-hostile-for-women-and-girls

https://www.chess.com/article/view/womens-roundtable-discussion

This is a very interesting post. I feel I've learned something. I don't know about this topic at all.

It seems, then, the continued existence of female only titles is primarily to try and counter sexist cultures. Is this a fair assessment?

If so, would it also fair to have an lgbtq+ title for the same reasons?

Also, can you explain to me what the different requirements are for the different titles, and why the female only title is considered less difficult to obtain than the unisex ones?

Only when you can recognise that the culture is not limited to particular countries or religions, but that it's still a problem in the game overall.

That Chess.com Women in Chess Round Table Discussion is from just 9 days ago.

So chess is a sexist culture (though obviously it's only in certain areas that men and women cannot play together).

How does having female only titles help deal with this sexist chess culture?

It encourages more women to play and participate in chess. Female titles alone are insufficient, of course - other positive steps also neeed to be taken. The fact that people want to say "The job is done, let's take away female titles" is in itself evidence that the culture still has a long ways to go.

How does having a female only title encourage more women to play within a sexist sub-culture?

And is it necessary that this title is easier to obtain than unisex titles?

Im kinda hot

Bro the guy above me is hot

How does it encourage more women to play chess?

This forum should just be about me

It means that more of them are recognised and can serve as role models for what can be achieved. It's an achievement that more of them can aspire to, as opposed to only having Judit Polgar. It's a recognition that women need support from the leading organisation of the game.

What are your thoughts on the women's points about the power dynamics in chess? Or about their experience of abuse in chess related contexts? The YouTube video has timestamps where you can jump to the relevant sections, but I highly recommend listening to the whole conversation rather than jumping to stuff possibly out of context.

So because women aren't getting the already existing titles in large enough numbers to encourage more women into the game, they have created a title which is easier to get and which only women can get, so as to create more titled women and this should, in theory, encourage more women into the game. Have I understood that correctly?