A statement regarding eligibility for the Women's Prize for Fiction

[HecatesCat]

Well it's 'In our terms and conditions the word 'woman' equates to a cis woman, transgender woman or anyone who is legally defined as a woman or of the female sex'

What a shitshow, they seem to have managed to upset both trans activists/gender believers as well as feminists/women’s SBR lobby!

Maya posted a thread giving some background.... twitter.com/mforstater/status/1313177787809828869?s=21 it all started as a non-binary person was offended that they were included for a women’s prize?

In 2018, the government revealed that only 4,910 people had legally changed their gender since the Gender Recognition Act came into force in 2004.

And how many of those are writers? This is good.

@ArabellaScott

Some sectors are doing well - cookbooks and ghost written memoirs. I think various factors are putting so much pressure on litfic in particular that it's probably not sustainable as an art form. I've seen advances cut and cut and cut and then scrapped, many friends leave the writing world as they just can't justify what has become effectively a hobby. Copywriting, even, has been so undercut by globalisation that other income streams for writers have also dried up. It's been an ongoing downward spiral since the net book deal was scrapped and supermarket books took over. Authors used to write a book every couple of years, are now pressured to put out two or three a year. For those reasons! I mean, people are producing books in huge quantities, but it'd be interesting to look at who is and how - increasingly I suspect it's more and more wealthy people who can afford to or 'celebs' with a name in another field. Author is not a vocation/profession like it used to be.

You've left out digital first publishing, which has revolutionised the industry. I know several writers who went this route after years of not being published. Within a year, having been picked up by excellent digital-first publishers, they've left their day jobs and some have sold over a million books. Many, many writers are going this route now. So it might be true that the traditional way of doing things is slowing down, but as publishers adapt, things will change and move forward.

This old lady regards the term “cis-woman” as a slur.

Posting the whole article (though no time to do the italics!) It's generally OK, though how anyone can say with a straight face that the publishing industry is transphobic is completely baffling. Do they live in an actual ivory tower??

Article -

The Women's Prize has issued a statement saying that eligibility for the prize extends to "all women" where a woman is defined as "a cis woman, a transgender woman or anyone who is legally defined as a woman or of the female sex".

The clarification was provided after writer Akwaeke Emezi, who identifies as non-binary, said on social media they would be required to provide information on their "sex as defined by law" by organisers. They were longlisted for 2019's prize for their debut novel Freshwater (Faber) but under the new terms and conditions will not be able to enter new novel The Death of Vivek Oji (Faber).

The prize emphasised it seeks to celebrate "the experience of being a woman in all its varied forms". However, organisers confirmed that "anyone who wishes to enter must also be legally defined as a woman or of the female sex to be able to do so". The two key documents required to demonstrate this are birth certificate or a gender recognition certificate.

The policy means transgender women who have yet to legally change their gender would not be able to enter. In 2018, the government revealed that only 4,910 people had legally changed their gender since the Gender Recognition Act came into force in 2004. Individuals who identify as non-binary would only be able to enter if legally their gender is female.

Joanna Prior, chair of trustees for the award, said: "The Women’s Prize for Fiction was founded 25 years ago to honour, celebrate and champion women's voices, and to shine a spotlight on phenomenal fiction written by women. Over the past quarter of a century, the prize has publicly championed and amplified a diverse breadth of women's voices, and holds the principle of freedom of expression among its core values.

"As a prize which celebrates the voices of women and the experience of being a woman in all its varied forms, we are proud to include as eligible for submission full-length novels written in English by all women. In our terms and conditions, the word 'woman' equates to a cis woman, a transgender woman or anyone who is legally defined as a woman or of the female sex.

"The Trustees of the Women's Prize Trust would like to reassert that we are firmly opposed to any form of discrimination or prejudice on the basis of race, sexuality or gender identity."

Emezi said on Monday that the Women’s Prize had informed their publisher, Faber, that "the information we would require from you regards Akwaeke Emezi's sex as defined by law", strongly criticising the policy.

"Forget about me–I don’t want this prize—but anyone who uses this kind of language does not fuck with trans women either, so when they say it’s for women, they mean cis women. And yes, this does mean that them longlisting [Freshwater] was transphobic," Emezi wrote on Twitter.

"It’s fine for me not to be eligible because I’m not a woman! But you not about to be out here on some ‘sex as defined by law’ like that’s not a weapon used against trans women."

The Women's Prize said in the aftermath of Emezi's longlisting in 2019 that it was "working to formulate a policy around gender fluid/transgender/transgender non-binary writers to provide clarity for the Prize in the future".

Reaction to the Women's Prize's stance has been mixed, with reaction ranging from those who welcomed its inclusion of trans women to those who took issue that the prize doesn't allow for self-identification, requiring verification of sex by legal documents, and to those who strong criticised the admittance of any trans women to the prize at all.

One comment on the announcement read: "Why say you unequivocally welcome trans women for the prize and then in the same breath define a woman 'legally' or by 'female sex'? if you support trans people - why bring law and sex, both used to invalidate our identities, into the conversation at all? Genuinely don't get it."

Another said: "Have a separate prize for transgender women, by all means. But keep the Women's Prize for women. Women authors deserve that. Women's rights were hard-won, and you're giving them away."

"Honestly horrified by the bile this has received," came opinion from another camp. "A welcome and overdue clarification that goes a small way to addressing some of the transphobia in this industry."

Possible, Malahaha, and it has been quite some years since I worked in the industry as a day job. It may change yet!

www.theguardian.com/books/2020/oct/05/akwaeke-emezi-shuns-womens-prize-request-for-details-of-sex-as-defined-by-law

Even the guardian is having a time with making out the last paragraph.

The Trustees of the Women's Prize Trust would like to reassert that we are firmly opposed to any form of discrimination or prejudice on the basis of race, sexuality or gender identity

So basically, this is a prize which anyone - female or male - can enter ...

The trouble is, if they let a transgender woman win, it actually works in their favour, because most people say "great" without thinking very deeply about it. What no one notices is that trans men continue not to win the men's prize because, guess what? They're women.

"'The Trustees of the Women's Prize Trust would like to reassert that we are firmly opposed to any form of discrimination or prejudice on the basis of race, sexuality or gender identity.'"

But not sexism

Abs, that is very helpful and really what my second post on this thread had construed from the original statement. My only uncertainty was if "transgender" included self declaration rather than a legal change and they have made it clear it does not.

In that case I have no problem with the rules .

Seems pretty straightforward to me. It's not self definition as a woman but legal definition. You can't just enter competition as a woman who decides that on the day you'll be a woman. You have to be living as a woman. If there's doubt that a man has entered the competition but for the sake of it called himself a woman then they won't have the legal backing & so would be disqualified.

That makes sense to me

Stupid question, but is there a difference between a transgender woman and a transwoman? I first thought that by transgender woman, they meant a woman who was transgender (identifies as a man), whereas if they said transwoman, that would mean a man who identifies as a woman. And I thought that was ok as it meant women who identified as other than female would be included in that. But I think now I have understood it wrongly. And both of those things mean men identifying as women? Which I agree shouldn't be allowed. I think a lot of general public might not understand either though and make the same mistakes I did.

If it is based on a birth certificate or GRC then I am fine with that. It’s going to upset the Twitterati when they realise.

@Xenia

That is not particularly clear.Eg in English law you change your gender through a legal process, have the surgery and only after that are you the other gender. So the definition above needs to define "transgender woman" I think we know legally defined as (see my previous sentence) and we know the female sex (i.e. xx chr.)

Xenia this isn’t the case, you do not need to have any surgery at all to get a GRC and it is unusual to have surgery, most transpeople do not.

@umbel

I think they mean to include c!s women (woman by birth), trans women (women by self identified gender), non-binary people who have female on their birth certificates and non binary people who had male on their birth certificate but are now in receipt of a GRC making them legally female (since you can’t be legally non-binary).

So anyone then. Everybody is “non binary”. I am so tired of this, a prize set up to help women writers achieve recognition . Female writers should refuse to put their work up for this prize. I see on twitter that one female author has done just this.

Maybe you have to choose a name usually associated with women. Would that fulfil living as a woman?

It is really hard choosing a name. Some believe adopting a name normally associated with the opposite sex completely changes your sex.

Get rid of that Shakespeare line 'A rose by any other name would smell as sweet'. It is obviously false. It is a widely know fact that if I call a rose a potato, I can make lovely chips and mash out of it.

Actually, I might plonk the newspaper down in front of the family tonight and say 'here is a lovely roast dinner with all the trimmings'.

Transitional by Munroe Bergoff - it’s bound to win!

Xenia this isn’t the case, you do not need to have any surgery at all to get a GRC and it is unusual to have surgery, most transpeople do not.

It's also not clear that they would insist that somebody had a GRC, as the term 'transgender' does not imply that.

@SapphosRock

There needs to be a rule that trans people with a GRC must wait a set period of time (say 3 years) before being eligible for these types of things.

A bit of lived experience as a woman should surely be essential before receiving a women's prize.

I don't think those with a GRC (unless FtM maybe) should ever qualify for womens awards/prizes.

As they are for female people.

Those 'non binary' people who are female would also qualify should they wish to. However, not 'non binary' males. No males at all, regardless of struggles or whatever they might possibly have had to face. A woman is not just someone who has been disadvantaged in some way (not saying you said this btw, just incase!)

@merrymouse

Xenia this isn’t the case, you do not need to have any surgery at all to get a GRC and it is unusual to have surgery, most transpeople do not.

It's also not clear that they would insist that somebody had a GRC, as the term 'transgender' does not imply that.

Yes, 'transgender' is markedly simply someone who simply 'identifies' regardless of anything else. We are repeatedly told this by transactivists and stonewall. If its just 'identity' which is entirely internal and not possible to verify in any actual way, then adding 'transgender' means its literally anyone who wishes to identify (even just for a day, as identity can change and thats fine!) and I think would also involve the likes of crossdressers anyway?

@AntsInPenzance

I would welcome and support a writing prize exclusively for trans authors, which would actually be a better way of promoting trans authors than this nonsense.

Agree 100%. There would be some who would buy the writings of trans people where they might not otherwise, simply because of such recognition.

Interesting that (when reading all replies, I answered first, sorry ) this appears to have been 'clarified' to be anyone with female on their birth certificate. So 'cis' women and transwomen with a GRC only. This will NOT please transactivists at all if thats what they were hoping for. Though it does make it a little fairer on women, in that its not open to all males, only those who have gone through the GRC process, they might be about to learn that giving an inch does not work at all with TRAs. I hope they are ready for the onslaught they will get for being 'inclusive' but not inclusive enough..

@Pluckedpencil

The trouble is, if they let a transgender woman win, it actually works in their favour, because most people say "great" without thinking very deeply about it. What no one notices is that trans men continue not to win the men's prize because, guess what? They're women.

What men's prize? There's no book prize earmarked just for male entrants.

The Booker was first awarded in 1969 so out of 50 winners 20 were female so it's not even the case that women weren't being treated fairly by the Booker judges.