Why do women get different medals? WGM or simply GM?

Gil-Gandel wrote:
trevbot wrote:

The notion that a woman has less intellectual or logical capacity than a male in completely ridiculous. The idea that a woman needs to be a WGM as opposed to a GM (or any other differentiation based on sex) is ludicrous.

1) True up to a point, but there is suggestive evidence that at the very top end of human achievement in fields such as chess, mathematics, science and so on, men do predominate. (Notwithstanding any number of women who could kick my @ss in any of those fields.)

IDK, I feel that Marie Curie reigns supreme in science. She is the only person in history to receive a Nobel Prize in two separate science categories(Chemistry and Physics).


BISHOP_e3 wrote:





Because they are recognized for winning as women.

llama47 wrote:

Judit was also in the top 10, so yeah, she was a super GM.

The 3 sisters agreed that Sophia was the most talented, but she quit before she even got the GM title. She (Sophia) had something like a 2900 performance rating in one tournament at the age of 14.

Wow, then there’s me, the same age, with 300 ELO :/


It's a relic from a time when women were believed as lesser given the current social climate there are some people who justify it as a way to encourage more women to participate. I've seen people state that this is unfair towards men as they don't have the option to get said title however think of how insulting it is I mean it's easier to obtain which, atleast towards me, seems like an incinuation that women are worse. Furthermore at a certain point title is worthless as a source of denoting achievements in my opinion once you reach the title of IM rating and records seem to be the determining factor in deciding whose the better player. I'd argue I'm an unbiased source here as I'm Agender so I have nothing to gain or lose from these titles.