As one of the comments said. Not sure about the sexist angle, but it looks disrespectful. In any case he played less optimally on purpose.
The Baduk TV interview says he did it for the fans. [ํํ ํฌ] ๐ฅ๊ทธ๋ ์ ๊ทธ๋ฌ์ด์?๐ฅ ์ด์ ์์ผ ๋ฐํ์ง๋ '์ต์ ' ์ ์์์ ์ด๋ฒคํธ ๋๊ตญ ๋นํ์ธ๋! - YouTube At least thatโs what I got from auto-translate.
playing less optimally on purpose โ disrespectful? 
I guess nowadays you canโt play any experimental opening without being labelled as disrespectful.
Some people are too focused on the minutiae of communication these days.
What, is the Bermuda triangle opening a โmicroaggressionโ? Please.
One is free to play whatever opening one likes in this game.
Uh, yes. Didnโt Go Seigenโs experimental openings piss a lot of people off?
I mean if you know certain openings is less optimal, and play it anyways, Iโll assume youโre looking down on your opponents. Or at least didnโt think the match is important enough.
Well anyways, the Korean video says he did it for the fans.
I disagree. Rare openings are creative and interesting at any level.
Yamashita Keigo played many novel ideas in his title matches in the 2000s, and Iโve never heard of anyone casting his practice as disrespect.
Not to mention, playing experimentally and losing seems like pretty humiliating to me.
Who knows?
Nowadays Iโm more bored of the new post AI openings as of experimentations
Donโt be humiliated by that. More humiliating is losing with a well known opening. Like you just wasted time when studying.