why are there different titles per gender

WGM And GM are differentiated due to gender.Why?

Sensitive topic. I'd say for the same reason they have women's prizes at tournaments or a women's world championship (there is no men's world championship).

In my honest opinion its one of the weirdest things in chess. I get it that there is a womens league in sports like football or baseball. I mean men have a gentical advantage so its only fair to let them play in different leagues. But with Chess its all in the mind. With that logic gender should'nt matter in chess.

Personally thats the thing i love most in chess. Anyone can be good at it. No matter race, gender, age or even disabilities.

@eenremco123 true.
Fide should make it equal all are same. Maybe it might be to encourage more women to play chess but it’s not the right way by giving easier titles. I know some WCM and WFM who talk bad about themselves and say they are not a true FM “only” WFM but FIDE should just make it equal.

I don't really have an opinion on such titles. But I don't think that "gender doesn't matter".

A long time ago I was a junior chess player. I used to go every Tuesday night to a chess club. Every week there were no girls or women there. I often wondered why. Eventually I was told that the poorly lit, remote chess club building with a dark, long walk from the car park wasn't an environment at night that any female person wanted to be near. Sometimes gender does matter; I had never thought about my safety there at all. In hindsight maybe I should have.

Nothing stop from female player from getting FM title WFM title is easier to get. reason for their existense is purely marketing less female players means less players good enought to get titel so their created Wxx titles as a motivational tool. And it does not take anything away from anyone to have those extra titles for female players. There are about 35 female grandmasters and about 450 WGM title holders so I would say as marketing tool toward young ladies entering competitve chess they are probably usefull

The chess club I go to is in a very central place,well lit,etc. Still at the weekly tournaments there are very few women and I have the feeling that if it weren't for the prize there would only be one or two. Most of my female friends find chess even more boring than football. Unfortunately.

Tournament organisers, spectators, sponsors like women to compete and some title makes it even more attractive.
You can also see the easier W-titles as a reward for thriving in a male environment.

😂😂😂

I believe the reason for the difference is social, not biological, and the whole reason of titles in the first place is to highlight a player's strength relative to a cohort of players. The cohort of women who play chess are weaker comparatively than the cohort of men who play chess. It's disingenuous to leave it there though. There are many soft barriers to entry for women wanting to play chess, ranging from good old fashioned misogyny (just go and look at a Lichess arena chat after a player has identified as a woman and they'll be people talking to them when they want to be left alone, pointing out the "strangeness" of the woman playing chess, sexual harassment and so on), questions of safety like what vegemite has described, chess being very culturally "masculine", and relative lack of women role models in chess (the most famous woman chess player is Beth Harmon, and Beth Harmon doesn't exist), and many more besides. This leads to less opportunities for woman and girls to play chess, then when they play chess there's less incentive to continue playing chess, then when they continue there's less opportunity to compete, and then when they compete there's less financial incentive (sponsorships, training assistance) to compete at the highest level.

I'm reasonably certain that there is absolutely no biological difference between men and women's ability to play chess, which leads to me believing that the disproportional amount of men chess professionals to women chess professionals is due to something other than biology. I simply have to assume that the social advantages that identifying as a man provides a person (take everything I described that are barriers to entry for women and reverse them for these advantages) is what leads to the men's cohort being stronger than the women's cohort.

So to answer the question, the reason there are different titles per gender is to acknowledge how much more difficult it is for women to gain these titles, and that the "W" in "WGM" highlights that the person awarded this title has excelled in a field despite that field being designed to stop them. Having said that, the distinction is also economically motivated as some have said before, but we should only get rid of the "W" in "WGM" when the chess world stops seeing a woman and not just a chess player. It is not even a case of preferential treatment - ambivalence to their gender would be enough to attract women to chess.