Woman wins women's prize

My point is, that surely (according to what I have read on this board) how a person feels or identifies isn't relevant. Only sex at birth is relevant.

Therefore, no matter what this person identifies as it is not relevant. Only that they were born female.

If that is exactly the point you are all making and your point of contention is simply why is anyone raising an eyebrow at this author being nominated for a prize then fair enough.

But my reading of some of these comments is that some posters are not happy that a person, born female but who doesn't identify as female, should be nominated for a prize meant for women.

Now I’m older and wiser, I make a point of not reading books by people who are evidently troubled and confused, so I’ll be avoiding this one. (Had I avoided them when younger, I might have been less troubled and confused myself.)

She wanted a hysterectomy because she believes she is an ogbanje
Not convinced.

I thought that was what she said in her essay, but reading it again, maybe she's just identifying as an ogbanje.

it’s important for an ogbanje never to reproduce ...Removing a uterus is an efficient way to make sure this never happens.

The possibility that I was an ogbanje occurred to me around the same time I realized I was trans, but it took me a while to collide the two worlds... the surgeries were a bridge across realities, a movement from being assigned female to assigning myself as ogbanje; a spirit customizing its vessel to reflect its nature.

All in all she comes across as quite troubled and confused.

I think it's the equivalent of me, a confirmed, occasionally gobby atheist, insisting on getting married in a church cos the photos will be nicer.

It is.

I take it they won't accept the prize if they win then 🤷🏻‍♀️

We're at an impasse then Weetabix as I'm finding your posts just as strange as you seem to be finding this thread.

Me too.

A lot of these people are a bit Nathan Barley too.

I just wanted to say that the thread title is incorrect -- she hasn't actually won the women's prize. She's in a longlist of 16 women. She might yet win, but she first has to get into the shortlist.

I'm not sure what there is to be shocked about

There is nothing to be shocked about. This thread is a shock-free zone (although there might be some here who are secretly identifying as shocked.)

The Guardian, in another article about this, is trying to whip of controversy because that would be consistent with the gender identity ideology. The Guardian are on the hunt for shock. The GC among us are pretty much "meh" about this.

I'm not sure what there is to be shocked about

I'm not shocked at the inclusion of this writer. I'm irritated that the person who nominated them and the Guardian are making a big deal about their inclusion as though every other writer can be fitted into a binary gender category.

www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/mar/04/non-binary-writer-womens-fiction-longlist-akwaeke-emezi-gender-politics

We're at an impasse then Weetabix as I'm finding your posts just as strange as you seem to be finding this thread.

I've explained three times now so this is the last time I'm going to say that we agree that the writer is entitled to be entered for an all women's prize if they are female. I only say 'if' because the writer will not acknowledge being female, but has agreed to the nomination. They are of course entitled to be entered, however I think we are also entitled to say, what a knob.

I think it's the equivalent of me, a confirmed, occasionally gobby atheist, insisting on getting married in a church cos the photos will be nicer.

Over and out.

She wanted a hysterectomy because she believes she is an ogbanje
Not convinced. I think she's struggling with the expectations of Nigerian people in her life, her Western scientific studies and her gender feels, and happened across a way to address all three issues.

The only problem is the assumption that this writer is unusual and ground breaking because, unlike all the other female writers, they don't have a specifically female identity. That is insulting.

I agree with that. Which is why I find this thread quite strange. I'm not sure what there is to be shocked about, apart from the reaction to this author winning on the basis of their identity.

If you don't identify as either male nor female, or if you identify as trans then what do you do? If you can't compete as the gender that you choose then the only other option is to compete according to your birth sex, if that is what society forces you to do.

There are plenty of literary prizes that aren't segregated by sex. This prize is specifically for women because women are underrepresented in literature. You might think it's all bullshit and that there is no reason to have a special literature prize for women, but the only thing that women share is a sex. There is no female identity.

I think this writer is perfectly entitled to take part in this competition because of their sex, and it's also obvious that their work explores specifically female experiences.

The only problem is the assumption that this writer is unusual and ground breaking because, unlike all the other female writers, they don't have a specifically female identity. That is insulting.

Just to make things clear, weetabix, I have no problem with this woman being nominated for a women's prize. She is, after all, a woman. I don't think Philip Bunce should get a woman's award, because he's a man who occasionally likes a bit of cross dressing.

Non-binary and gender fluid just seem to be ways of being whichever sex gives you the best outcome at any given moment in time.

Does that help you to understand my argument a bit better? Hope you manage to read it before it gets deleted for massive amounts of misgendering and wrongthink.

weetabixandahreddies A transman, although female, would not identify as such and therefore wouldn’t likely be nominated.

If a transwoman (ie a man) was nominated for a prize for women I’d be really quite pissed off.

In which case it doesn't matter how this person feels or identifies - they were born female.

Well, exactly. Do you really not see the hypocrisy in someone who insists they are not a woman - despite being one - accepting a prize for women? It's almost as though this person doesn't really believe in trans ideology themself. Or should that be themselves? Trans grammar is difficult to deal with.

Seeing as this individual has accepted a nomination for a women's prize, I feel I should be using the appropriate pronouns for a woman, but I don't know if that would get my posts deleted.

We're not objecting - we are taking the piss.

Can you really not see the difference?

The writer did not have to agree to be nominated. They've already had their book published - to glowing reviews.

Well I really don't know why, because I'm not them.

However, given that society appears to be insistent that people have to fit into either male or female boxes for certain things I guess what choice did they have?

If you don't identify as either male nor female, or if you identify as trans then what do you do? If you can't compete as the gender that you choose then the only other option is to compete according to your birth sex, if that is what society forces you to do.

Would you still object if this person was a trans man?

For some reason, I have more disdain for women who present as female calling themselves “non-binary” than anyone else. Oh, you’re a woman but don’t FEEL female? Who fucking does?

Anyway, then this tweet popped up on my feed and I saved it for future reference because it’s great.

Once again, we accept that the writer is eligible for a women's prize. That is not in dispute.

What is being expressed is surprise - and some amusement - that they have accepted a nomination for a women-only prize even though they refuse to admit that they are female.

As Crone has already asked - why do you think this person has done that?

OldCrone

Under this person's belief system, this person is not a woman, therefore shouldn't be eligible, but they have accepted the nomination.

So would you accept a trans woman, who identifies as and believes they are a woman, winning this award? Or would you revert to the objective reality argued on here that they were born male and so are therefore not eligible, regardless of how they feel?

In which case it doesn't matter how this person feels or identifies - they were born female.

And also hypocritical of posters who insist that trans women are men and should always be treated as such for the purposes of sex segregated spaces, sport, awards for women because it is only birth sex that matters.

Yet when faced with a person born female you then can't accept them being eligible for women only awards because they identify as non binary? Given that I've many times on here seen the argument that gender is a social construct and one that many would like to see the back of really, what is the issue?

If birth sex is all that matters, a trans man would be eligible for this award because of their genetic make up, according to many posters on this board.

Presumably, following the arguments on this board a trans man would be eligible for this prize, so of course a person born female who now identifies as non binary should be eligible to win.

Exactly. But that's not what this author believes. Under this person's belief system, this person is not a woman, therefore shouldn't be eligible, but they have accepted the nomination. Why do you think they have done that, weetabix?

Weetabixandshreddies
But the argument on this board is that you can't change sex

And the argument of the genderists is that their gender is more important than their actual sex. So it seems a bit hypocritical of her to accept the nomination, since by doing so she is also accepting that she's a woman.