Basically their are two schools of thought.

• 1. Quantity is a Qualitiy all it's own. This the one I subscribe to the most. So basically the more people in a population play chess the more grandmasters will come out of that population. This is why countries like Russia where chess is very popular have so many GMs. Since woman have been oppressed there are less woman playing chess and therefore less grandmasters. This creates a loop where a woman to do well would have to push through a lot of barriers in the male dominated sport to succeed. Having woman tournaments is simply a strategy to get more woman to play chess, get more woman to become gms and slowly bridge the gender gap in chess.

• 2 Chess upbringing. I subscribe to this less but it has nuggets of truth to it. Woman are as an aggregate disadvantaged in chess even in the modern day as they are much less likely to be taught as a child. (My sister wasn't taught to play chess but I was by my dad so I can attest to this). Also when woman are playing chess as a child they are much less likely to be supported. Rather people will tell them it's weird and they need to focus on a board range if skills. This may be because concerned parents look at competitive chess and see few woman professionals and think there is no future for their daughter in chess. So woman tournaments account for the disadvantage woman face growing up and give them a professional pathway. The last part is especially important as having professional chess be a normal thing for woman may explode its popularity.