Both the UK and US Chess governing bodies have rejected FIDE's transphobic bullshit. You know you're out there when even TERF Island and DeSantisland go, "steady on a bit, guys!"
@ajlanes @shinydan chesscom has more money than FIDE by miles and prize funds for things like the Champions Chess Tour are vast compared to anything bar the handful of top tournaments that extract money from sponsors.
@ajlanes @shinydan Just to add some extra explanation: chess can be played at four official speeds: classical (only over the board, about 4-8 hours per game), rapid (over the board or online, about an hour per game), blitz (mostly online, possible over the board, but quite a lot of DQs when pieces go flying, about ten minutes per game) and bullet (only possible online, two minutes per game).
FIDE have total control over classical, but that generates far less revenue than the others.
@ajlanes @shinydan FIDE classical ratings are so important (because they get you titles like GM) that no-one plays non-FIDE classical, but no-one cares about rapid/blitz ratings.
All online chess is faster than classical, so no-one cares about ratings, so no reason to register with FIDE, so online tournaments (which make a *lot* of money from sponsorship and streaming adverts) are entirely beyond FIDE's control.
I can find a quote that the German chess body said they will be ignoring this rule, and are doubting its legality, is there an official statement and policy by the US and UK bodies as well?
I'm not sure if sport is in some way exempt from the Equalities Act in the UK and if so if chess counts. I would imagine it must need to be be for physical sports since otherwise sex categories would trigger legal action, I'd hope chess is not like that.
@Wufflekins there aren't tournaments that are only open to men, afaik. Generally, tournaments are either open to everyone, or have specific qualifications (like rating, title, or winning a qualifying event).
There are, however, tournaments that are only open to women. Ostensibly, these exist to encourage participation, although many have suggested that it is actually to shield women from rampant misogyny in the chess scene that institutions are unwilling to handle properly.
@triplenineteen That's a weird one for me. I absolutely understand the need for a safe space for women, and, as a man, I have no experience of the issues women face but, to me, it feels like that should be a refereeing issue. If men and women (and whoever identifies as whichever) can't participate on an even footing, regardless of gender, that's a fundamental problem with the way the sport is being supervised, isn't it?
Sarah Brown
in reply to Sarah Brown • •DeterioratedStucco reshared this.
Dan Howell
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Sarah Brown
in reply to Dan Howell • •like this
Alexandra Lanes likes this.
Alexandra Lanes
in reply to Dan Howell • •Richard Gadsden
in reply to Alexandra Lanes • • •Richard Gadsden
in reply to Richard Gadsden • • •Alexandra Lanes likes this.
Richard Gadsden
in reply to Richard Gadsden • • •@ajlanes @shinydan Just to add some extra explanation: chess can be played at four official speeds: classical (only over the board, about 4-8 hours per game), rapid (over the board or online, about an hour per game), blitz (mostly online, possible over the board, but quite a lot of DQs when pieces go flying, about ten minutes per game) and bullet (only possible online, two minutes per game).
FIDE have total control over classical, but that generates far less revenue than the others.
Richard Gadsden
in reply to Richard Gadsden • • •@ajlanes @shinydan FIDE classical ratings are so important (because they get you titles like GM) that no-one plays non-FIDE classical, but no-one cares about rapid/blitz ratings.
All online chess is faster than classical, so no-one cares about ratings, so no reason to register with FIDE, so online tournaments (which make a *lot* of money from sponsorship and streaming adverts) are entirely beyond FIDE's control.
Cheryl Morgan
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Christine Burns MBE 🏳️⚧️📚⧖
in reply to Cheryl Morgan • • •Rachel Greenham
in reply to Christine Burns MBE 🏳️⚧️📚⧖ • • •Quixoticgeek
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Yora
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Completely Normaal Hausdorff Aaltonia
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Sophie Schmieg
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Sarah Brown
in reply to Sophie Schmieg • •@Sophie Schmieg US: new.uschess.org/news/us-chess-…
UK: twitter.com/ecfchess/status/16…
Angela Glansbury 🚽 reshared this.
Sophie Schmieg
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Sarah Brown likes this.
Alastair Cooper
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •Constantin A. likes this.
Mark Rigby
in reply to Sarah Brown • • •jonathan
in reply to Mark Rigby • • •@Wufflekins there aren't tournaments that are only open to men, afaik. Generally, tournaments are either open to everyone, or have specific qualifications (like rating, title, or winning a qualifying event).
There are, however, tournaments that are only open to women. Ostensibly, these exist to encourage participation, although many have suggested that it is actually to shield women from rampant misogyny in the chess scene that institutions are unwilling to handle properly.
Mark Rigby
in reply to jonathan • • •That's a weird one for me. I absolutely understand the need for a safe space for women, and, as a man, I have no experience of the issues women face but, to me, it feels like that should be a refereeing issue. If men and women (and whoever identifies as whichever) can't participate on an even footing, regardless of gender, that's a fundamental problem with the way the sport is being supervised, isn't it?
Alastair Cooper likes this.