Woman wins women's prize

[pachyderm]

www.theguardian.com/books/2019/mar/04/non-binary-trans-author-nominated-for-womens-prize-for-fiction

Oh wait, she's trans nonbinary and doesn't identify as male or female even though she is clearly female!

FFS at this utter nonsense. I feel like I'm trapped in an unending episode of Brass Eye.

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.

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.)

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.

Well, I think your reading is rather off, considering that it's been repeatedly explained to you why posters are somewhat askance at this situation.

As an aside, that’s not how endometriosis is diagnosed, and a hysterectomy is not the first line treatment of endo (it’s actually not a treatment for endo at all, but we’d wander every further off topic if I explained why).

Sadly, I can on,y see this as a form of self harm, and they have melded the superstitions, the desire not to have children and the trans thing into one in order to get to the end goal of the hyst. I’m heartbroken for them because having one at such a young age is a one way ticket to many unnecessary health issues down the road -speaking from bitter experience here.

And yes, it’s entirely obvious to me that the issue on this thread is that this person is absolutely eligible for the award by meeting the criteria of being a woman, except that this person doesn’t believe they’re a woman, so why isn’t this upsetting and distressing for to be given the reminder that they are? It doesn’t make any sense in a world of mandated pronouns and such wrenching angst over Not Being A Woman.

One last thing: At times like this I always ask myself, what would @TitaniaMcGrath say?

twitter.com/TitaniaMcGrath/status/1102479583176261632

FloralBuntingIsObnoxious
Really? Despite some posters saying they disagree with someone winning a prize for women when they don't identify as a woman, and another (with another poster agreeing) saying it's like a confirmed atheist marrying in church for the photo opportunity? So despite these comments my reading of the thread is off?

My reading of it is that some posters think that only women, identifying as women, should be eligible. Do explain how the above comments prove me wrong.

Goodbye world.

The article says she's non binary- transgender. I don't understand what that means and I usually wouldn't care, but as it's a women's prize, I do wish to know.

Weetabix: we know that Emezi is eligible. The question is: why does Emezi think they are, when they insist that they are not a woman?

Emezi would doubtless be offended and upset if I called them a woman, so why are they Ok with being given a prize for women and why does that not upset them?

It’s really obvious what’s being said here.

Non-trans, binary gender would make more sense, I expect that’s what she (they?) really meant.

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.

Wow, Weetabix, you got there in the end. Congratulations.

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.

Any posts in particular? Because I haven't seen anyone saying that.

But why does it matter how the author feels? That's what I am asking. Why is that question being asked here where usually everyone denounces feelings and identity because only biology matters?

Trans woman identifies as a woman and posters on here refuse to accept it and maintain that regardless of how they feel they will always be male.

Now it's a case of a person born female, identifies as non binary but nominated for a woman only award - posters asking why they are participating if they don't identify as female.

Why aren't the posters on the board just accepting that this author is doing exactly what the posters on this board advocate - abiding by biology?

It just seems strange to me - if a trans person aligns with their birth sex eyebrows are raised. If they align with the gender that they identify with, eyebrows are raised.

It just seems that some posters will not accept anyone that identifies as trans, no matter what they do.

Non binary - so are you a woman or not? No? Give the prize back then you idiot.

I cannot talk to you any more Weetabix as I now identify as dead. Please respect that.

It was the only way to get myself off this thread.

Any posts in particular? Because I haven't seen anyone saying that.

Well here's one, from the 1st page

Non binary but happy to be nominated for the The Women’s Prize for Fiction. Handy.

And here's another

Non binary - so are you a woman or not? No? Give the prize back then you idiot.

As an aside, that’s not how endometriosis is diagnosed, and a hysterectomy is not the first line treatment of endo

Ah, that would explain why she wasn't offered that as a treatment. But it seems odd that it's the first line of treatment for being 'trans non binary'.

Weet, I'm not sure if we can spell it out any more clearly for you, but I'll have one more try.

It's clear that the judges don't believe that she's not a woman, because they nominated her, and she doesn't even believe it herself, because she accepted the nomination.

I don't think anyone on this thread has said she shouldn't have been nominated, just that she's a hypocrite for accepting, while simultaneously declaring that she's not a woman.

Or non-trans, binary, remember.

So things that are incredibly triggering for trans and NB people include:
People noting your accurate sex
Accurate pronouns
Hats
Doctors taking medical histories
People using accurate terms such as “breastfeeding”
People stating facts such as “only men have a penis”

Things which are fine

• people accurately noting your biological sex if there’s a chance of cash
• using your body for the literally most female things possible (pregnancy, child birth, breastfeeding)
• talking endlessly about your penis
• being invited to health screenings which are wholly irrelevant

But why does it matter how the author feels?

It shouldn't matter but we've reached the point now where women's safety, medicine, biology, fairness, safeguarding, rationality, women's sport and all the rest have to go in the bin because of how some men people feel.

nauticant

But the author was born female. So how does is your post relevant here?

So basically what you are all saying is biology is what matters, not feelings. Unless the trans person is abiding by your rule of "biology matters, not feelings" in which case suddenly feelings are more important? Right, got it.

Unless the trans person is abiding by your rule of "biology matters, not feelings"

Why do you think the trans person in this case is abiding by the rule "biology matters, not feelings"? Whilst all the time insisting that they are not a woman?