Some other stupid rules in chess

Social convention at the time was that only men could be soldiers.

Why would White always start? Why not throw coins for deciding if White or Black starts?

That's a great idea.  With a little luck, I could get to move first every game in a tournament.  Well, I guess with a little bad luck, I could get stuck moving second every game.  And with my luck, the latter would be more likely than the former.  That's a terrible idea.

A game is defined by its rules. So the way the chess pieces move is part of the definition of the chess game. Change the rules and you have created a new game.

That's not true.  Although most masters believe a perfectly played game by both sides will end in a draw, there is no question that in tournament play, white wins more games than black.  Moving first, while not a decisive advantage, is a small advantage.  One has a better chance of winning with white than with black.  Look at your own record.  You'll probably find that you have a higher winning percentage playing white than black.  

Endgame, I saved you the trouble.  In bullet you've won 46.8% with white and 42.7% with black.  In blitz you've won 51.6% with white and 46.7% with black.  I checked mine too.  In bullet I've won 52.3% with white and 48.6% with black.  In blitz I've won 52.9% with white and 48.8% with black.  We're not outliers.  I would bet that the overwhelming majority of players have higher winning percentages with white than black.  Moving first has little to no effect?  Come on, man.  

The casino and gambling industry have made many,many billions with that "barely any advantage".

Another example of where 52 to 48 is barely any advantage is the current United States Senate.

Sure, and this is chess, not the Senate.  I like those analogies because they demonstrate how an advantage of four percentage points can be decisive.  But let's stick to chess.  You're focused on percentage points, not percentage.  For instance, your win percentage in blitz is 4.9 percentage points higher with white.  But if you play an equal number of games with both, you win 10.5 percent more games with white (4.9/46.7).  That's not insignificant.  

Yay !

I FINALLY realized most of these rule objections were made in jest.

HAHA.

try checkers.

Why is my rating based on game results? My rating should be based on my incredibly brilliant moves and than I should be at least 2432.

I like the idea of the rating being based on something other than game results but since I don't make incredibly brilliant moves, I would rather see it based on being an all-around good guy.  Then I'd get a title and the free premium membership that goes along with it!  

Ever win a game with a brilliant combination culminating with a forced mate in four and then play through it afterwards to admire your masterpiece - only to find that you missed a mate in three several moves earlier?  

That's an interesting attitude.  As long as you get the point, the quality of the game doesn't matter.

Here's a stupid rule in chess: in a match where you play a fixed number of games, games played after the match has been decided are automatically unrated! How stupid is that?