Legal requirements? I thought the law made specific exceptions for things like sports, chess, poker, etc to allow single-sex events. Does this mean a guy could enter the Women’s Chess Championship or even the Ladies Tournament at the US Tennis Open?
The “legal requirements” may be something specific to casino regulation in Atlantic City, NJ, and not apply even to casinos anywhere else in the US or to sporting competitions outside casinos in Atlantic City.
A few years ago, the NJ Supreme Court decided that “ladies nights” were illegal in bars because they discriminated against men by offering different drink prices between genders.
I would suspect that this had something to do with it. If you can’t have a men’s only tourney or a straight only or gay only tourney, you can’t have a women’s only tournament.
legality issues aside, this chick is an idiot. when they got heads-up, chopping the pot was discussed - provided he retained the trophy (he donated all his winnings to charity) - and she refused.
Ya sure about all 4 of these? Sexual preference is not a protected class so straight/gay only tournies may be legal.
Not yet but the courts seem ready to go there. IIRC Romer v. Evans was a step in that direction.
Generally the courts frown on discrimination when there is no real purpose served by the discrimination (some discrimination is ok when there is an acceptable purpose to it).
I cannot recall where I read it but I think even Justice Scalia opined that something between “intermediate scrutiny” (cannot discriminate based on gender) and “rational basis” (absurdly low bar almost anything can pass) is likely to happen for discrimination based on sexual preference.
As a matter for a casino (or other business) I am guessing they do not want to be the test case. Why spend the money on lawyers? Better to just not discriminate and skip “straight only” poker night.
As far as they are concerned money from gay people is as good as from straight people. No need to alienate someone who wants to drop money at your establishment.
I believe this is correct. My uncle said he saw the same thing when he was in Vegas last. Some female pro started raising money and put a bounty on the guy’s head.
The casino I work at had to stop doing “Jack and Jill” tournaments for a similar reason I believe.
I believe that it depends on whether the sponsor of the tournament or championship is public or private. Women still can’t play at the Masters Golf Tournament in Augusta, but that is a private club that sponsors that.
The casinos that sponsor the big poker tournaments are open to the public. Some of the tournaments say “Invitational,” but I’m not certain how officially legal they are if they actually discriminate. But if it is for all former World Poker Championship Bracelet Winners to compete only…and there have never been any women World Poker Championship Bracelet winners…then they’re not really discriminating now, are they?
I don’t see why men can’t enter women’s chess tournaments. I know there has been at least one female winner of the Men’s Grand Masters World Chess Championship.
I am particularly opposed to having poker, chess and other table games separated by gender.
Anyone know why women are not allowed to compete in the Masters Golf Tournament? Would we cramp their style that badly if we’re good enough to qualify?
Dr. Renee Richards was successful in her lawsuit against the U.S. Open when they denied her the right to participate. She is a transexual – male to female, however, and not a male. There is no “Ladies’” Tournament at the U.S. Open. Nor is there a “Gentlemen’s” Tournament, just to keep the record straight. It’s the Women’s Tournament and the Men’s Tournament.
(She once saved Keith Olbermann’s eye with surgery when it was damaged in an accident when he was in his early twenties. He wished her a happy 75th birthday recently on his program.)
Just a guess but could the discrimination laws have some sort of basis in the physical differences between the sexes?
Men are stronger then women generallyso it would be pointless say having a both sex weightlifting competition.
But for games like poker and chess all the players start off on the same footing so having a men/woman only event is in fact discrimination.
Women are allowed to play in the tournament. There just aren’t any who are good enough.
Women are not allowed to be members at Augusta, though, which is probably what you’re thinking of. The big debate was whether or not a private club should be allowed to sponsor a public event if the private club didn’t allow women to be members.
This argument always struck me as stupid. It would be like saying Curves shouldn’t be allowed to host a bodybuilding competition because Curves doesn’t allow men to be members.
Maybe this strays into GD territory but there is a GQ aspect to it (read I am adding a data point).
My dad was a member of the Union League Club of Chicago which into the 1980’s was a men’s only club (to the point that women had to enter through the side door). However, women were allowed as guests of the men.
They went “co-ed” because they determined that to be a men’s only club it had to literally be men only.
Seems if you want to be exclusive you have to be consistently exclusive. At least that was their assessment of it so they switched.
As such, not sure that Curves could allow men when it suits them but otherwise keep them out. It is fine if they want to be women only but then they need to be women only across the board.
As an aside I agree that male/female separation in competitions makes no sense to me when women and men can compete on an equal footing and being one sex or the other makes zero difference.
Men separated from women in (say) tennis makes a world of sense.
Men separated from women in (say) pool makes zero sense as gender plays no role in ability to compete. (Same for poker and chess and so on.)
Men have a clear advantage in pool, which is why billiards leagues are segregated by gender. Ever see a 9-ball tournament on ESPN? It’s always either all men or all women.
One of the female pros explained why she was no match for her pro husband. Men get much more action off the break due to being stronger. The odds of getting a ball in on the break are therefore much higher, and since pros can often run the table if they drop something on the break, well, there you go.
I didn’t follow your exclusivity argument. Martha Burke argued that a public event like the Masters should not be allowed to be sponsored / held at an exclusive club like Augusta.
I thought it had been established that private groups and businesses were free to discriminate all they want, but would suffer under the inevitably bad press. Is this incorrect?
- The categories of chess tournaments are:
- open to all
- restricted by rating (to give less experienced players a chance to win something)
- restricted by invitation (usually to invite only world-class players)
- restricted by sex (i.e. women only - N.B. there are no men-only events)
- restricted by age (i.e. for juniors)
- restricted by nationality (i.e. National Championships)
-
Because chess is vastly more popular amongst men, some women have asked for separate tournaments for women only.
It’s not a big thing and many strong female players play in open events. -
There is no such thing as the ‘Men’s Grand Masters World Chess Championship’.
There is an (Open) World Championship, which has run since 1886.
Following a dispute by Kasparov and Short in 1993, there was a period of two World Champions, which ended in 2006.
Women are eligible to play in this. So are non-Grandmasters.
No women or non-grandmaster has ever won it.
There is a Women’s World Championship, for women only. Some leading women don’t play in it.
There are various Junior World Championships. Some leading juniors don’t play in them.
It IS legal to have sex-separated contests where there is obvious physical differences that would affect the contest – thus many sports have mens and womens divisions. But I’d sure dislike being the lawyer who had to use this argument to defend a sex-segregated poker tournament: “Your honor, womens’ brains are so non-logical and subject to emotions that they could not possibly fairly compete with men at poker…” – you’d be laughed out of court.
In horse shows, we do have a few classes like this, for example, Ladies Western Pleasure. We balance it by also offering a Gentlemens Western Pleasure class, with equal procedures, equal prizes awarded, etc. I don’t know if this is a legal requirement, but it seems only fair.
Ladies Western Pleasure? Ooh la la.
Yes, exactly. But most groups face no such bad press. Curves, for example. The Boy Scouts / Girl Scouts is another.
Most people recognize that segregating SOME private clubs by gender isn’t just not bad, but actually good.
Why does that make her an idiot? She suggested splitting the pot and he refused stating that he’d only split if he got to keep the trophy. The money wasn’t that important to her (or him) so she declined the counter offer.