Even an implication can cause harm

Have you ever heard of a sprinter being banned from competing because they have a genius-level IQ? Or a weightlifter being banned from competing because they speak a dozen languages? That’d be pretty strange right? We wouldn’t expect a person’s intellectual capability to have much impact on their physical capability. Some folks seem to think the opposite can be true.?

In a recent statement the International Chess Federation (FIDE) announced that trans women will not be allowed to compete in the women’s category. The statement adds that trans women can keep any titles they won before transitioning but trans men will lose any titles they won before transitioning. They leave open the possibility that a trans woman may be allowed into the women’s category after ‘further analysis’ over a period no longer than two years. This strongly suggests that FIDE places a higher value on men’s performance than women’s.?

Is there any basis to believe men have an inherent advantage in chess? To get an initial indication we can look at gender differences in exam performance. The OECD PISA study records scholastic performance in different countries on reading, writing and mathematics tasks. Their latest release from 2018 finds a small advantage for boys in mathematics and a large advantage for girls in reading. Add to this a 2019 study in Nature based in part on 2009 PISA data which finds that girls can sustain exam performance longer than boys. Not much reason to believe boys and men have an inherent academic advantage.?

Suppose a statistically significant difference was found between male and female chess performance. That wouldn’t be surprising as significant performance differences in virtually every domain. Forbes reports that in 2023 10% of Fortune 500 CEOs are women. An analysis by Sky on found that only 3 women have won the best director award. An American Press Institute release from 2016 points out that in the previous 100 years only 16% of Pulitzer Prize winners were women. But do we consider these differences to be biological? If anything the last example contradicts the biology argument given women’s advantage in reading performance.

Now let’s consider the implications of FIDE’s decision. By suggesting men have a biological advantage in chess, FIDE has essentially said men are better able to spend a long time exerting large amounts of mental effort. Think of the domains that could apply this argument. Law, programming, politics. All of these, like chess, require long hours of intense mental work.?

A person isn’t necessarily responsible for how others interpret what they say. But they may be responsible for making unsubstantiated implications, particularly in high stakes areas like gender equality. By implying a gender advantage in chess without evidence, FIDE risks contributing to a harmful stereotype that biology determines intellectual performance.