Proposal: Add Gender Sorting on the WCA Rankings

Should SORT BY GENDER be added to the WCA database? (will NOT create new WR/CR/NR)


  • Total voters
    198
Probably only girls would be more interested in this and since there are so few of this, we don't have much of a voice. I'm for having the stats made available (age as well), but just the stats. iwca has some stats on gender and things and I have a certain sense of pride of being pretty good among females for a couple events. I would like to know how I rank on the age spectrum too. However, I don't think things like WR/NR should have gender or age divisions.

I just looked at that website and realised:

Yu Da-Hyun has a 48.80 Megaminx average, 3rd in the world, which is amazing considering her age.
Alexandra Daryl Ariawan (regular at Australian comps) has the female square-1 average and single WRs :D
 
7HRAejv.png
 
Way to improve gender equality. In short, nope. I'd even argue that women are stereotypically better at things that require dexterity compared to men (e.g. handiwork).

Cup stacking being separated into gender divisions is just stupid and infact I think that cup stacking regulations should be changed rather than cubing regulations. Sports are divided by gender because the anatomy of a man is different to that of a woman and building up muscle is easier for both performance and resistance. Cubing requires fast reflexes, good lookahead, dexterity and to a certain extent speed, none of which are affected by gender.
 
Last edited:
Chess has separate men and women competitions, although they do allow women to compete in the men's like Judit Polgár who is recognised to be much better than the current women world champion.

Personally I can't see much of a reason or difference to separate, and like windhero says I think there are probably more reason for an average female to be better than an average male.
 
[TABLE="class:grid,align:left"]
[TR][TD] Country [/TD][TD] # [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] China [/TD][TD="align:right"] 599 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] USA [/TD][TD="align:right"] 469 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] India [/TD][TD="align:right"] 146 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Brazil [/TD][TD="align:right"] 121 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] France [/TD][TD="align:right"] 115 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Germany [/TD][TD="align:right"] 110 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Japan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 88 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Poland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 70 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Spain [/TD][TD="align:right"] 70 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Canada [/TD][TD="align:right"] 65 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Indonesia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 65 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Philippines [/TD][TD="align:right"] 60 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Ukraine [/TD][TD="align:right"] 48 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Netherlands [/TD][TD="align:right"] 42 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Taiwan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 41 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Sweden [/TD][TD="align:right"] 38 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Hungary [/TD][TD="align:right"] 35 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Thailand [/TD][TD="align:right"] 33 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] United Kingdom [/TD][TD="align:right"] 32 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Russia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 30 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Iran [/TD][TD="align:right"] 30 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Korea [/TD][TD="align:right"] 28 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Norway [/TD][TD="align:right"] 27 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Italy [/TD][TD="align:right"] 25 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Mexico [/TD][TD="align:right"] 21 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Chile [/TD][TD="align:right"] 21 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Australia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 19 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Denmark [/TD][TD="align:right"] 18 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Peru [/TD][TD="align:right"] 15 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Malaysia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 15 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Belgium [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] New Zealand [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Colombia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Romania [/TD][TD="align:right"] 12 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Hong Kong [/TD][TD="align:right"] 11 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Vietnam [/TD][TD="align:right"] 10 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Singapore [/TD][TD="align:right"] 9 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Israel [/TD][TD="align:right"] 8 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Belarus [/TD][TD="align:right"] 8 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Argentina [/TD][TD="align:right"] 7 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Finland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 6 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Turkey [/TD][TD="align:right"] 6 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Austria [/TD][TD="align:right"] 5 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Croatia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 5 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Slovenia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 4 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Portugal [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Slovakia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Greece [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Macau [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] United Arab Emirates [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Mongolia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Czech Republic [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] El Salvador [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Iceland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Venezuela [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Cyprus [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Serbia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Bulgaria [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Aruba [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Switzerland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] South Africa [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Ireland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Lithuania [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Sri Lanka [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Morocco [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Estonia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Kazakhstan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Luxembourg [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Latvia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[/TABLE]
 
[TABLE="class:grid,align:left"]
[TR][TD] Country [/TD][TD] # [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] China [/TD][TD="align:right"] 599 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] USA [/TD][TD="align:right"] 469 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] India [/TD][TD="align:right"] 146 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Brazil [/TD][TD="align:right"] 121 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] France [/TD][TD="align:right"] 115 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Germany [/TD][TD="align:right"] 110 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Japan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 88 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Poland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 70 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Spain [/TD][TD="align:right"] 70 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Canada [/TD][TD="align:right"] 65 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Indonesia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 65 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Philippines [/TD][TD="align:right"] 60 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Ukraine [/TD][TD="align:right"] 48 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Netherlands [/TD][TD="align:right"] 42 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Taiwan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 41 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Sweden [/TD][TD="align:right"] 38 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Hungary [/TD][TD="align:right"] 35 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Thailand [/TD][TD="align:right"] 33 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] United Kingdom [/TD][TD="align:right"] 32 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Russia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 30 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Iran [/TD][TD="align:right"] 30 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Korea [/TD][TD="align:right"] 28 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Norway [/TD][TD="align:right"] 27 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Italy [/TD][TD="align:right"] 25 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Mexico [/TD][TD="align:right"] 21 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Chile [/TD][TD="align:right"] 21 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Australia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 19 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Denmark [/TD][TD="align:right"] 18 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Peru [/TD][TD="align:right"] 15 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Malaysia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 15 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Belgium [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] New Zealand [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Colombia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 14 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Romania [/TD][TD="align:right"] 12 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Hong Kong [/TD][TD="align:right"] 11 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Vietnam [/TD][TD="align:right"] 10 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Singapore [/TD][TD="align:right"] 9 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Israel [/TD][TD="align:right"] 8 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Belarus [/TD][TD="align:right"] 8 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Argentina [/TD][TD="align:right"] 7 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Finland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 6 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Turkey [/TD][TD="align:right"] 6 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Austria [/TD][TD="align:right"] 5 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Croatia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 5 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Slovenia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 4 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Portugal [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Slovakia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Greece [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Macau [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] United Arab Emirates [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Mongolia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 3 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Czech Republic [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] El Salvador [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Iceland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Venezuela [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Cyprus [/TD][TD="align:right"] 2 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Serbia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Bulgaria [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Aruba [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Switzerland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] South Africa [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Ireland [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Lithuania [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Sri Lanka [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Morocco [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Estonia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Kazakhstan [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Luxembourg [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[TR][TD] Latvia [/TD][TD="align:right"] 1 [/TD][/TR]
[/TABLE]
What a list order by the most balanced gender ratio.

Still having the option to filter gender when searching on the wca website is fine but the male and female records [NO
 
I propose that WCA rankings be separated officially by gender. i.e. Female NR, Female WR, etc.

We recently discussed this on the WCA delegate group and I'd say the result was that we don't want that. There was some support and no objection for adding a "100 Female" option here like we already have some "odd" filters like "1000 Results". Would that make you happy enough?

Personally, I initially was against any distinction but changed my mind towards a non-prominent female ranking because of three things:
  • Females are very much underrepresented (half the general population but only 10% in cubing).
  • Major cultural precedent for gender distinction.
  • Some people want it.
why is Cup Stacking separated by gender?

I don't know. Ask the cup stackers. Then tell us. I'd actually be interested in their reasoning.

What I do know is that Emily Fox was stacking's super star for a while and that Jackie Huang currently holds the cycle WR among females with 6.440 seconds, which some time back would've beaten all males. It's not clear that females can't be as good stackers as males... maybe they're just currently trailing behind and will eventually catch up again. And which group is in front is influenced by their sizes - larger groups have larger potential for more extreme cases.

It's actually faster than the official website than me for some reason, so I prefer it. The official website seem reaaaaally slow at times.

How slow and at what times? How about right now? I know we occasionally have a problem with our current host, where all requests get a weird 30 seconds delay.
 
Chess has separate men and women competitions, although they do allow women to compete in the men's like Judit Polgár who is recognised to be much better than the current women world champion.

Personally I can't see much of a reason or difference to separate, and like windhero says I think there are probably more reason for an average female to be better than an average male.

in chess, most tournaments allow both men and women, only special tournaments like women's world championships, etc. will have it separate. Judith Polgar is the only women ranked in the top 100. i think the most major difference is popularity.
 
. This just sounds like a slightly easier way for females to get one.
Using that logic shouldn't there be ONLY WRs because NRs and CRs are slightly easier to achieve, are they not? Of course it depends on where you live but just the same they are easier to achieve.
Do you as a female feel like you would want to be treated differently because of your gender?
No, I know this is hard to believe but I did not make this proposal in hopes of only benefiting myself. Lets look at it this way. If it werern't the fact you had an NR to works torwards would you be anywhere near as movtivated to get good at blind? Now i as a female see that pretty much only men are world class and have acheive records with a few exceptions i.e emily wang, yu day or whatever her name is. And with that being said it is seemingly impossible for females to get records or at least have the motivation to. But it the ranking were indeed split then female would have more records to work toward or what seem more possible for them to achieve.

Sports are separated by sex because of physical inequality between males and females. Cubing, as far as we can tell, is not affected by this.

Concerning cup stacking, we really shouldn't let ourselves be affected by the bad rules of an unrelated hobby.

I am simply using cup stacking as an argument since it is a sport not affected by your gender but the rankings are separated.


We recently discussed this on the WCA delegate group and I'd say the result was that we don't want that. There was some support and no objection for adding a "100 Female" option here like we already have some "odd" filters like "1000 Results". Would that make you happy enough?

.

No, that actually would not make me happy enough because I can already see the female rankings using iwca.jp and if you did add that option it still would not change the fact the records are not seen as "real".
 
Last edited:
No, I know this is hard to believe but I did not make this proposal in hopes of only benefiting myself. Lets look at it this way. If it werern't the fact you had an NR to works torwards would you be anywhere near as movtivated to get good at blind? Now i as a female see that pretty much only men are world class and have acheive records with a few exceptions i.e emily wang, yu day or whatever her name is. And with that being said it is seemingly impossible for females to get records or at least have the motivation to. But it the ranking were indeed split then female would have more records to work toward or what seem more possible for them to achieve.

You talk about my NR as if you don't have the same thing. You totally do. Why can't you go for NRs like everyone else?

You still haven't presented any reason to make a distinction for females other than the fact that there aren't very many of them.
 
Last edited:
What I'm getting from this is:

Women need a handy cap to get a WR. Like many have said, women are fully capable of getting it (Emily Wang, little Megaminx girl) so why do we need it to be divided? There is no physical limitation.

Also, your point towards Noah doesn't really work. You do have an NR to strive for but you're saying it's too hard to get.

Edit: Also, it seems like you're the only girl who actually wants this. Don't see Emily complaining about it. She had to work hard to get where she is. It shouldn't be easier for others who don't wanna work.
 
Last edited:
We recently discussed this on the WCA delegate group and I'd say the result was that we don't want that. There was some support and no objection for adding a "100 Female" option here like we already have some "odd" filters like "1000 Results". Would that make you happy enough?
No, that actually would not make me happy enough because I can already see the female rankings using iwca.jp and if you did add that option it still would not change the fact the records are not seen as "real".
Does it really matter whether it's seen as "real" or not? I think it'd be neat to have "100 Female" added as a filter for the sake of making female statistics easily accessible for those who are interested in seeing them, but it seems like it's against the spirit of the WCA to actually divide the rankings to make female rankings "official".
 
As a female cuber, I believe that having gender specific "records" is just a way to get ahead, rather using one's gender to make it easier to get a record. To be honest, I wouldn't like that that, because there would be no point. To me, it seems demeaning. It's almost saying that females are not capable of reaching what males can do, and like stefan said, I would like the reasoning for cupstacking's decision for separating ranking in the first place. Females are more than capable of reaching NR, CR, WR status, there aren't a lot competing. As more and more females compete over time, the idea of gender specific records will seem silly.


EDIT - I have been informed that I am not female
 
Last edited:
1. There will always be a fastest girl cuber. There is a huge chance Yu Da Hyun will be first female WR holder.

2. The interest of solving the rubiks cube is everywhere. I started a club at SMBA and about 25 people showed up to hear about plans and such. 12 girls showed up. Some knew how to solve one. The problem is getting them interested in speedsolving and competing.

3. Someone claimed Cup Stacking is the practice of learning how to put dishes away, which gets me in trouble because I keep dropping cups on the floor when I do community service in the cafeteria. Cup Stacking is fun!

EDIT - Waffo! SIRWAFFO
 
EDIT - I have been informed that I am not female
I would doublecheck your sources if I were you :P
women are fully capable of getting it (Emily Wang, little Megaminx girl)
I would like to take a moment to also mention Laura Ohrndorf.
She is the competitor (male or female) with most wins in the Rubik's Clock event.
She is also 12th in the world for single and 10th for average.
 
Back
Top