Invisible Pieces: Women in Chess

@Fastrade You should probably try to write directly to the official Lichess account : https://lichess.org/@/lichess
Otherwise you can probably write to NoJoke : https://lichess.org/@/NoJoke who (at least) clearly supports this cause.

If none of this works, there is still the official email address of Lichess : contact@lichess.org
That's all I can tell you.

Hello ! Thanks, I "ll try these suggestions. Enjoy chess, who ever you are. Isabelle

@Fastrade De rien

I would like to highlight that this is very admirable on the part of lichess for publishing this piece. It is easy to take a stand when it benefits you, but in this case it runs contrary to lichess's interests of possibly working with FIDE for future events when they are directly calling out three of their executives. Bravo for them on being able to take a stand on the injustices in the chess community at the cost of risking losing the opportunity of growing their site through the support of FIDE.

I'd like to thank the author. Well written piece and I appreciate the links to the references!

I'm sure given half the chance, girls would enjoy chess just as much as boys.
As for any hypothesis to the effect that gender might be an inhibiting factor as far as excellence goes, I think hard-science would have proven this quite a long time ago if it held one iota of truth to it.
Chess has a long and storied history and it has been demonstrated that women played and enjoyed the game just as much as men, for centuries.
At least one author - Marilyn Yalom, in her "Birth of a Chess Queen" - argues that the change in demographics is attributable to a change in the rules turning the game into somewhat of a different creature than it had been for centuries and holding a greater attraction to men, ever since.
Whether this is true or not, I do not know and I certainly don't care to make a value judgment about whether these changes were "good" or "bad" as this is entirely besides the point I am trying to make.
But one thing I am fairly certain of is that little girls probably are turned off of chess by the behaviour of little boys.
These little boys turn into bigger boys and men and I can tell you that as a full-grown man having returned to the game at 56 years of age after a 20-year hiatus, I have rarely encountered a social environment so full of vitriol, bile, venom, snarkyness, haughtiness, and overall ego-wrapped in ratings covered in paranoia about cheating as the one I found when I happened upon online chess.
Most people are fine, of course, but one simply can't go about the business of playing and enjoying oneself without constantly having to contend with juvenile and asinine behaviour which is the mark of many young males when they congregate amongst themselves: most boys outgrow this and turn into well-adjusted and balanced adult individuals, eventually.
Little girls have their own social-growing pains to evolve through before they become well-adjusted and balanced adults individuals but as the game is dominated by boys and men, I won't dwell on these here.
A young girl must be very passionate indeed about chess to somehow overlook the puerile toxicity that seems to linger everywhere the game is played...
Just as a young boy would have to be very passionate about a game that was dominated by women and came with its own form of puerile toxicity.
This is only compounded online by the anonymous nature of the social-environment and the fact that many of the social conventions that make playing a game with someone - courtesy being the most basic - are given very short thrift by the social truants who roam freely within the cybersphere.

Identity politics is a Communist scam that utilizes psychological techniques in order to exploit vulnerabilities in the human psyche and is calculated to manufacture reliable blocks of Socialist voter groups. Don't fall for this garbage, these people are totalitarian freaks who seek to control your every thought. If you intend to take these people seriously and at face value then you owe it to yourself to to find out who these people really are and to understand the ideology that drives them. I recommend reading "Darkness at Noon" by Koestler as a quick primer to help you understand the sort of megalomaniac lunatics you're dealing with.

A bunch of beta males trying to get some validation from superior whamen who've been oppressed by scummy inferior men for 100,000 years into not playing chess because these filthy misogynilisistic men were afraid whamen would utilize their brain power to take over the chess game. Pathetic ball-sack havers!
Keep the political posts coming guys, I wish I had donated more money to you, but it's okey because now you don't need it.
Long live whamen and checkmate to them who refused to kneel.

I'll probably not post after this point, but I'd like to know as to why so many people were offended by my string of posts.
I don't believe anything I said was incorrect, and if it was, let me know.

The general tone of the article presumes that all men had a meeting under a volcano and decided to oppress women...

I want women to know that I personally voted against this motion, but was outvoted.

On a serious note: it's a good piece, a few logical fallacies here and there, but good overall. The one issue I'd mention is an implicit presumption that the discussed problems are unique to chess. They probably aren't. We are no worse than the rest of society.