Gender-based prizes

[William_H_Stokes]

@wilecoyote

The full text of the Laws of Chess is available online in the FIDE handbook.

@Laws of Chess Article 11.3.b

During play, a player is forbidden to have a mobile phone and/or other electronic means of communication in the playing venue. If it is evident that a player brought such a device into the playing venue, he shall lose the game. The opponent shall win. The rules of a competition may specify a different, less severe, penalty. The arbiter may require the player to allow his clothes, bags or other items to be inspected, in private. The arbiter or a person authorised by the arbiter shall inspect the player and shall be of the same gender as the player. If a player refuses to cooperate with these obligations, the arbiter shall take measures in accordance with Article 12.9."

Note that “the rules of a competition may specify a different, lesser penalty.” Presumably, the rules of a competition may also specify no penalty provided the phone or device is completely turned off.

This is a very old post and rather than make up a new topic, such as “Gender Fluidity” for example, I resurrected this because with gender related prizes, how is eligibility able to be determined for these prizes? Are men and women or boys and girls determined by their chromosomes, xx or xy, or is it by their own choice? Also this question is germane for this topic. Couldn’t the director be caught in a “Catch 22” situation if they wanted to inspect a player with fluctuating gender fluidity?

[BobMessenger]

I’ve moved this post from the Reminder for FIDE Rated Events topic in the Chess Life Articles forum, which discusses rules for electronic devices at FIDE rated tournaments.

[William_H_Stokes]

@BobMessenger

I’ve moved this post from the Reminder for FIDE Rated Events topic in the Chess Life Articles forum, which discusses rules for electronic devices at FIDE rated tournaments.

Thank you for the move. With all the money in chess these days and litigious people, I just wanted to know how unusual situations would be handled.

[tmagchesspgh]

Maybe we will have to add a gender selection notation on registration forms. “M/F”: _____ and then go with which designation the player selects. As a TD, I ain’t going to lift up someone’s dress or unzip any pants to determine prizes. If her name is “Lola” and she picks “F”, well okay then.

BTW, most of the women I have talked to do not like gender based prizes. As one young lady told me, “I don’t want to receive a trophy just because I am a girl.” OTOH, a tournament where all of the participants are girls have all of their prizes based on rating or grade. I do not find these tournaments objectionable, because the girls have fun in them and are not under the same pressure and harassment as in other events.

[DENTONCHESS]

@tmagchesspgh

Maybe we will have to add a gender selection notation on registration forms. “M/F”: _____ and then go with which designation the player selects. As a TD, I ain’t going to lift up someone’s dress or unzip any pants to determine prizes. If her name is “Lola” and she picks “F”, well okay then.

BTW, most of the women I have talked to do not like gender based prizes. As one young lady told me, “I don’t want to receive a trophy just because I am a girl.” OTOH, a tournament where all of the participants are girls have all of their prizes based on rating or grade. I do not find these tournaments objectionable, because the girls have fun in them and are not under the same pressure and harassment as in other events.

This mirrors the thoughts of most of the higher rated females I have discussed this with as well. Do college scholarship awards to top finishing females at high school championships encourage greater female participation?? Perhaps, though I have never really seen data to back this up.

In regard to the ‘lola’ comment— just because one was born male or female in today’s world, does not mean that is what they are today. And in the legal statutes of some states, what is ‘down under’ is not at all a determining factor in M or F any
longer.

Rob Jones

[jwiewel]

I thought I’d check and see the definitive way the question was determined in other endeavors.

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gender_ver … _in_sports

In a quick search I did not find any definitive way.

An easy answer is to avoid all gender-based prizes. Considering the popularity of the mixed-doubles prizes in CCA events and others (such as the US Open), I don’t think that easy answer is something that every tournament will opt for. The All Girls National and the NGIT are also tournaments that look like they have staying power (not to mention the US Women’s Championship).

[kevin_bachler]

Another way to solve this is to officially adopt a rule that we’ve been using for years - but that isn’t stated anywhere. (See viewtopic.php?p=288388#p288388 for another mention of this.)

The rule is simple: That a participant in an event (if challenged) must be able to reasonably demonstrate their eligibility for the event, prize, section, etc.

In this case, if someone were challenged, and in response produced an official government document with their identification and gender on it, wouldn’t that be reasonable? A drivers license will do this.

Note that this is a good bright line test because it puts the onus on the participant. The director/organizer need do nothing unless a challenge arises. The TD is not making an accusation in asking the participant for their documentation of eligibility, since it is a requirement - thus we aren’t accusing anyone of cheating - simply of being prepared to provide what is required of them.

In effect, this is what we already do as an organization, except it isn’t formalized, and hence is subject to interpretation, subject to accusations of cheating, unfairness, etc. That’s not it at all. A participant (player) should be responsible for demonstrating that they are eligible for something for which they are competing. Period.

In my opinion, the lack of this official rule has changed the outcome of some USCF scholastic championships. That should be enough for action, and so, it’s high time to have such a rule.