Why Woman Grandmaster?

delusions...

Are men so easily confused?  I tend to give them more credit.

My position here isn't to argue whether such titles still have a value or whether or not there are gender inequalities or if these suggested inequalities are nature or nurture, but rather quite simply to question why men are continually complaining about something that has absolutely no bearing upon themselves - women's titles.

I do find it, in fact, to be the most trollish of all possible trollish material and the one that generates the most responses. 

White people have suffered racism just as, if not more, any other race.

The anti-white propaganda that they do in schools is just a part of that.

White is the new black!

I think the interest is more philosophical than practical. We all have our little world views and ideas on things like genders and society in general. It's true that the existence of women's titles is completely neutral in its effect on men, but with its link to social issues it's great fodder for discussion.

Or maybe I should say, pseudo discussion -- trolling in particular.

+1

What does it matter if there is a WMG title? We all know most WMGs are not as strong as GM, and titles are not nearly as good an indicator of how strong a player is as their ratings anyway . If it helps to bring more Women into the game, so be it.

Make a more welcoming environtment for EVERYBODY, encourage everyone to compete in the same tournaments and it won't be long before women's titles go away.

 You do not see women play in men(open) tennis tournaments do you? You can say what you want about being sexist or what ever, but currently women cannot be competitive in men's tournaments. If you only have open tournaments, many women players will just stop playing, that's just the way it is.

Chest-thumping is now a philosophy?

Well, we're only human :p
 

Besides, in #8 the OP says:

Which seems to be the prevailing sentiment.

If the discussion is strictly about who has superior mental skills.....  That's not a question which can be easily answered.   Gender Studies 101 say's that in general, male's do naturally have better spatial skills.  Women have better dexterity and work better in groups.  These are just a few examples, but the fact is men and women are different.   With those differences come different natural aptitudes.   But remember, all of this is very generalized. The differences, while technically there, arn't really all that big.  I see no reason why women shouldn't be able to compete directly with men in pretty much all areas.  

This isn't about equality/inequality but about trying to force one's opinion for no reason other than ... what?

I've said this before, but as I see it, a small advantage in spacial skill isn't at all a convincing argument for a superiority in chess.

Differences in chess ability are practically never characterized as being due to visualization skills by anyone above a beginner level. Grandmasters are famous for commenting that they do not do deep calculations most of the time, and can find the best moves and plans by feel. Practically everyone will speak on pattern recognition as being the source of skill.

One gender may be better equipped mentally for chess, but until more women participate, it's not clear which gender that is.

Yes, exactly! :)

I'm glad someone else sees it this way.

Expressing strong opinions (for reasons other than trolling) almost always serve 1 of 2 purposes IMO.

1) To convince others they're right

2) As a way of changing their mind about something.

Why #1? Because these sorts of core world views are closely associated with a person's self identity and their perceived role and value in society. So when others disagree, cognitive dissonance and all that stuff i.e. "I'm not a bad person! You're just stupid!" ... The only comfortable scenario is if everyone agrees with them (and the opinions of those who don't agree are proven to be unworthy of consideration).

#2 can be more of a "free thinking" or intellectual approach. They want to gain more information. Especially children will state strong opinions they don't necessarily believe simply to judge and learn from the reactions of others.

---

An example that randomly came to mind (I had forgotten all about this until now) A freshman in college once, completely randomly, blurted out in a large group "you can tell whether a person is gay just by looking at them." It was evident by his behavior afterwards that this was very uncomfortable for him to bring up, and he didn't even necessarily believe what he had just said. Nevertheless he repeated this idea a few times while listening to various points of view. I found it interesting.

Gads.  Everytime I scroll thru these posts at first it looks like I'm seeing double T's rather than TL.  Bigger fonts would be helpful.

I had to ctrl+f and search for "tl" to even understand this.

Less women than men are playing chess and excersising hard and much for decades, therefore there are fewer titled players. A title is important, and an attraction if you wants to teach chess and get pupils. WGM sounds better than FM, actually WIM sounds better to.   These titles are a kind of sertification, and can give chessteacher job-opportunities. The chessworld has less women than we want, and these WIM and WGM titles can help.

most women will never be good enough to get those titles either so who cares

Most men will never be good enough to get those titles, and chesslovers that wants to teach chess and play tournaments can enjoy the race towards those titles and the credit that they gets.