Women's Prize for Fiction ‘greatest honour' as an intersex woman, says winner
The book, which explores repressed desire and the unresolved aftermath of the Holocaust in post-Second World War Netherlands, was described as an 'astonishing debut' by the head of the judges.
The ceremony, held in central London on Thursday, saw the non-fiction prize awarded to physician Dr Rachel Clarke for The Story Of A Heart, which explores the human experience behind organ donation.
In her winner's speech, after thanking the judges, van der Wouden said: 'I was a girl until I turned 13, and then, as I hit puberty, all that was supposed to happen did not quite happen.
'And if it did happen, it happened too much, and all at once my girlhood became an uncertain fact.
'I won't thrill you too much with the specifics, but the long and the short of it is that, hormonally, I'm intersex.
'This little fact defined my life throughout my teens, until I advocated for the health care that I needed.
'The surgery and the hormones that I needed, which not all intersex people need. Not all intersex people feel at odds with their gender presentation.
'I mention the fact that I did, because in the few precious moments here on stage, I am receiving, truly, the greatest honour of my life as a woman, presenting to you as a woman, and accepting this Women's Prize.
Aria Aber, Miranda July, Nussaibah Younis, Elizabeth Strout, Sanam Mahloudji and Yael van der Wouden at the ceremony (Ian West Media Assignments/PA)
'And that is because of every single trans person who's fought for health care, who changed the system, the law, societal standards, themselves. I stand on their shoulders.'
The NHS website says intersex, or differences in sex development (DSD), is a group of rare conditions involving genes, hormones and reproductive organs that mean a person's sex development is different to most.
In contrast, people who are transgender identify as a gender separate to the sex they were born in and sometimes go through gender-affirming surgery.
Van der Wouden's novel follows Isabel, a young woman whose life in solitude is upended when her brother's girlfriend Eva comes to live in their family house in what turns into a summer of obsession, suspicion and desire.
The chairwoman of the judges for the fiction prize, writer Kit de Waal, said: 'This astonishing debut is a classic in the making, a story to be loved and appreciated for generations to come. Books like this don't come along every day.'
Van der Wouden will receive £30,000 and a limited-edition bronze statuette known as the Bessie, which was created and donated by artist Grizel Niven.
Rachel Clarke won the non-fiction prize (Ian West Media Assignments/PA)
The judging panel for the Women's Prize for Fiction included novelist and journalist Diana Evans, author and journalist Bryony Gordon, writer and magazine editor Deborah Joseph, and musician and composer Amelia Warner.
Clarke said she has 'literally been a feminist since I was too young to know what that word even meant', as she collected her award.
The physician's book recounts two family stories, documenting how medical staff take care of nine-year-old Kiera in her final hours after a car accident, while offering a new life to nine-year-old Max who is suffering from heart failure from a viral infection.
Clarke, who is behind the books Breathtaking and Your Life In My Hands: A Junior Doctor's Story, will receive £30,000 and a limited-edition piece of art known as the Charlotte, both gifted by the Charlotte Aitken Trust.
The judging panel for the non-fiction prize included writer and broadcaster Dr Leah Broad, whose work focuses on women's cultural history, and novelist and critic Elizabeth Buchan.
Previous winners of the fiction prize include Tayari Jones for An American Marriage and Madeline Miller for The Song Of Achilles, while the first non-fiction prize was awarded last year to Naomi Klein for Doppelganger: A Trip Into The Mirror World.
The awards were announced by the Women's Prize Trust, a UK charity that aims to 'create equitable opportunities for women in the world of books and beyond'.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Leader Live
an hour ago
- Leader Live
Manufacturers given 18 months to cut sugar and salt in baby food products
Accompanying new guidelines to clarify labelling on baby food will help parents make informed choices about what they feed their children, the Department of Health and Social Care said. Manufacturers will be challenged to change the recipes for their products to reduce levels of salt and sugar, without the use of sweeteners, which are not permitted for use in commercial baby food. For example, baby desserts and breakfasts such as rice pudding, custard and ready-to-eat fruity porridge should contain less than 10g of total sugar per 100g, while baby meals should have no more than 60mg of salt per 100 calories or 100mg per 100 calories if cheese is included in the recipe. The guidelines will also tackle misleading labelling that often conflicts with official feeding advice. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months on directly contradict government recommendations that children aged between six and 12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to stop using misleading marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are, for example products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' when they may be high in sugar. The move comes as data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey, published in June, shows that more than two thirds of children aged 18 months to three years are eating too much sugar, while more than a fifth of children aged four to five years are overweight or living with obesity in England. High sugar intake in children's diets is a significant factor contributing to high rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in western Europe. Obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s, including among children. Obesity costs the NHS £11.4 billion a year and is one of the root causes of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Public health minister Ashley Dalton said: 'Every child deserves a healthy, happy start to life. But babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food, holding them back and piling up pressure on the NHS. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt. 'Our plan for change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. 'I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. 'From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools, our 10-year health plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.' Katharine Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, said: 'For too long, commercial baby foods have been promoting high-sugar products disguised as 'healthy options', using misleading packaging. 'These new guidelines put the industry on notice: this practice must end. 'Making it easier for parents to buy healthier products is a baby step in the right direction – but what's really needed is a giant leap. 'It should not even be possible to sell baby food that goes against official feeding guidance, and the public agrees, with three in four people supporting a ban on high-sugar baby foods. 'If the industry fails to act quickly, the Government must step in with mandatory rules to set children up for a lifetime of good health.' Dr Kawther Hashem, head of research and impact at Action on Sugar, said: 'Our research has consistently shown excessive levels of sugars in commercial baby foods. 'These long-overdue voluntary guidelines are a step in the right direction, but they must not be the final word. 'Consuming too much sugar on a regular basis means children are taking in excess calories that, if not used for energy, are stored as fat. 'This increases the risk of weight gain and, if it starts early, that excess weight is often carried into adolescence and adulthood, raising the risk of overweight, obesity and agonising tooth decay. 'If we're serious about protecting our youngest children, these guidelines must be made mandatory. 'We urge the Government to closely monitor progress and act swiftly if companies fail to change.' Professor Simon Kenny, NHS England's national clinical director for children and young people, said: 'I can't overstate just how important good nutrition is during these formative months for babies' health in the long term, and you can't beat fresh foods. 'Reducing the salt and sugar levels in shop-bought baby food is a really important step, and these new guidelines alongside clearer labelling will help empower busy parents to make nutritious choices that give their children the best possible start in life.' Dr Hannah Brisden, head of policy and advocacy at the Food Foundation, said: 'Giving every child the best start in life begins with good nutrition. 'Today's announcement on commercial baby foods highlights the need to protect families from aggressive marketing and end misleading claims on sugary products. 'Our research found up to 43 claims on a single baby snack, despite many being high in sugar. 'The industry has been warned to clean up their act with voluntary guidelines, but to truly protect children, mandatory standards are needed. 'We urge the Government to monitor progress closely and be ready to step in if companies don't act.'
ITV News
2 hours ago
- ITV News
New health standards and labelling rules to be introduced for baby food
New government guidelines are being introduced to reduce the amount of sugar and salt in baby foods. Manufacturers will be given 18 months to implement the new rules for baby foods aimed at children up to 36 months old. They will be required to change recipes to reduce sugar and salt, without the use of sweeteners. High sugar intake in children's diets is a major contributor to rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in Western Europe. Obesity currently costs the NHS around £11.4 billion a year. There will also be new rules about labelling on baby food to try and clamp down on misleading claims about ingredients. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months onwards contradict government recommendations that children aged 6-12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to cease using marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are - for example, products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' - when products may be high in sugar. Minister for Public Health, Ashley Dalton, said that babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt," she said. 'Our Plan for Change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. "I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. "From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools – our 10 Year Health Plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.'
North Wales Chronicle
2 hours ago
- North Wales Chronicle
Manufacturers given 18 months to cut sugar and salt in baby food products
Accompanying new guidelines to clarify labelling on baby food will help parents make informed choices about what they feed their children, the Department of Health and Social Care said. Manufacturers will be challenged to change the recipes for their products to reduce levels of salt and sugar, without the use of sweeteners, which are not permitted for use in commercial baby food. For example, baby desserts and breakfasts such as rice pudding, custard and ready-to-eat fruity porridge should contain less than 10g of total sugar per 100g, while baby meals should have no more than 60mg of salt per 100 calories or 100mg per 100 calories if cheese is included in the recipe. The guidelines will also tackle misleading labelling that often conflicts with official feeding advice. For example, some products labelled as snacks for babies from seven months on directly contradict government recommendations that children aged between six and 12 months do not need snacks between meals, only milk. Manufacturers will also be told to stop using misleading marketing claims that make products appear healthier than they are, for example products with labels such as 'contains no nasties' when they may be high in sugar. The move comes as data from the National Diet and Nutrition Survey, published in June, shows that more than two thirds of children aged 18 months to three years are eating too much sugar, while more than a fifth of children aged four to five years are overweight or living with obesity in England. High sugar intake in children's diets is a significant factor contributing to high rates of childhood obesity in the UK, which is among the highest in western Europe. Obesity rates have doubled since the 1990s, including among children. Obesity costs the NHS £11.4 billion a year and is one of the root causes of diabetes, heart disease and cancer. Public health minister Ashley Dalton said: 'Every child deserves a healthy, happy start to life. But babies' development is being harmed by poor diets and unhealthy food, holding them back and piling up pressure on the NHS. 'Too often, parents are bombarded with confusing labels, disguising unhealthy foods packed with hidden sugars and salt. 'Our plan for change will tackle this, giving parents the information they need and providing children with good nutritious food. 'I'm determined to make it far easier for parents to keep their children healthy. 'From working with influencers to get children exercising, to banning junk food ads near schools, our 10-year health plan will help kids today be part of the healthiest generation of children ever.' Katharine Jenner, director of the Obesity Health Alliance, said: 'For too long, commercial baby foods have been promoting high-sugar products disguised as 'healthy options', using misleading packaging. 'These new guidelines put the industry on notice: this practice must end. 'Making it easier for parents to buy healthier products is a baby step in the right direction – but what's really needed is a giant leap. 'It should not even be possible to sell baby food that goes against official feeding guidance, and the public agrees, with three in four people supporting a ban on high-sugar baby foods. 'If the industry fails to act quickly, the Government must step in with mandatory rules to set children up for a lifetime of good health.' Dr Kawther Hashem, head of research and impact at Action on Sugar, said: 'Our research has consistently shown excessive levels of sugars in commercial baby foods. 'These long-overdue voluntary guidelines are a step in the right direction, but they must not be the final word. 'Consuming too much sugar on a regular basis means children are taking in excess calories that, if not used for energy, are stored as fat. 'This increases the risk of weight gain and, if it starts early, that excess weight is often carried into adolescence and adulthood, raising the risk of overweight, obesity and agonising tooth decay. 'If we're serious about protecting our youngest children, these guidelines must be made mandatory. 'We urge the Government to closely monitor progress and act swiftly if companies fail to change.' Professor Simon Kenny, NHS England's national clinical director for children and young people, said: 'I can't overstate just how important good nutrition is during these formative months for babies' health in the long term, and you can't beat fresh foods. 'Reducing the salt and sugar levels in shop-bought baby food is a really important step, and these new guidelines alongside clearer labelling will help empower busy parents to make nutritious choices that give their children the best possible start in life.' Dr Hannah Brisden, head of policy and advocacy at the Food Foundation, said: 'Giving every child the best start in life begins with good nutrition. 'Today's announcement on commercial baby foods highlights the need to protect families from aggressive marketing and end misleading claims on sugary products. 'Our research found up to 43 claims on a single baby snack, despite many being high in sugar. 'The industry has been warned to clean up their act with voluntary guidelines, but to truly protect children, mandatory standards are needed. 'We urge the Government to monitor progress closely and be ready to step in if companies don't act.'
