Lucy Spraggan 'When I was a boy'

[NancyDrawed]

A post promoting Lucy Spraggan's book appeared in my Facebook feed and I found it really interesting that she chose to post the following:

There’s a chapter in my book called ‘When I Was a Little Boy’ which talks about, well, when I was a little boy.
I was born biologically female but from a young age I chose to be called Max and lived - completely authentically - as a boy.
I talk about in all the ways that my family nurtured my identity and in all the ways that freedom to be myself, freedom to be Max, helped me to grow.
It was only recently that I discovered how much Max is still a part of me and I talk about that too.
Anyway, I wanted you to meet Max. So here’s some pics of me then

I wonder whether she will go all out and say she is glad, as a happy adult lesbian, that her family let her just work it all out for herself.

One of the comments:

'I love this. However, in todays society, Lucy’s parents would have been encouraged to give her hormones and other drugs to change her body from female to male which DOES have irreparable side effects. I agree with allowing children to be who they feel comfortable being, I don’t agree with giving them drugs and medication to make a life changing decision that they just aren’t equipped to make at such a young age. I too was “all boy” when I was younger but thank god I wasn’t given the opportunity to change my gender, I love being a woman and back then I had no concept of what being a man OR woman meant in the world. I just wanted to play football, and only boys were allowed to do that. Hence why I cut my hair short and tried to pass myself off as a boy for years as a kid. I had no concept though of what I was doing. Nature took its course and thank god it did, I love being a woman and I love all my womanly parts. Children need to be supported in whatever they want to do, but making life changing decisions is something they should decide as an adult.'

"This entire thread based on a rape victim (which literally came out yesterday) is in awful, awful taste."

Those words didn't need to be clearer. They needed to be completely different words.

We've been talking about Lucy, mainly in glowing terms, and may well continue to do so. I wouldn't have a bad word to say about her, even if I don't agree with everything she might say or do.

I accept that.

I dont think it has been glowing terms. Criticism of her donating to mermaids?

I love Lucy so I'm maybe biased but shes spoken out publicly about not only her assault but her mental health, her alcoholism..

I think its absolutely brutal to criticise her for a charity donation just because people dont like the charity.

I accept I should have been clearer in my wording but I still think the thread is in poor taste.

WildUnchartedWaters

Thank you for clarifying what you meant

I apologise to you.

Apology accepted.

Why have you reported the comments? It is not unreasonable to comment on the fact that she has donated to Mermaids, which is one of the most damaging charities around. The fact that she was raped isn't really material to that!

Because I wanted to.
Hope that's okay with you.

Thanks Op.

I saw Lucy being interviewed on the news yesterday and was very impressed by how eloquently she spoke. I don’t watch X Factor etc so I hadn’t heard of her before.

Its entirely possible to admire a courageous woman for speaking up about a private, awful thing to raise awareness, and at the same time to think she misjudged the most appropriate charity to donate her fees.

If people want criticize Mermaids, then I feel they should start their own thread focused upon that. Spraggan is not responsible for the problems with Mermaids.

Hang on, you cant have it both ways.
You claimed earlier that being a victim doesnt change people having an opinion.

I thought your comment was vile, as mich as I think this one is.

I'm ignoring the last bit where you try and bully me off the thread because its pathetic.

Your comment about denying you a voice is obscene.

In this instance, I think the choice of charity is very pertinent. Lucy has shared her experience of presenting as a boy up to the point of puberty. I will presume that she chose Mermaids as her charity of choice as they present themselves as the main charity supporting gender questioning children, and it is possible she is not aware of the issues surrounding this organisation.

However, regular readers of FWR know that if Lucy was a ten year old Max today, and turned to Mermaids for support, her path would and outcome would be very different. Therefore it is entirely relevant to comment on the irony of her choosing to support Mermaids at this time.

Part of the problem here is that Lucy has given two interviews about different experiences. I feel that people are confusing the interviews, and the donations, which has caused the thread to be as it is. Maybe two friends on each of her experiences would be better?

The thread title and the OP is about Lucy 'living as a boy' during her childhood.
I don't understand why you think this is not the right thread to discuss the fact that she has donated to Mermaids, who would have 'helped' her towards a future of medical dependence, sterility and impaired sexual function as an adult.

We know she's not responsible for the problems with Mermaids, and perhaps she is even under the impression that Mermaids provide valuable help to children who are like she was as a child. Why is a thread about her 'living as a boy' the wrong place to discuss her donation to Mermaids?

No, the Guardian published one interview with her, which included a few paragraphs about when she 'lived as a boy'. The other two articles are both extracts from her book. Neither of those mention her experience of 'living as a boy', but she donated her fee for them to Mermaids.

The thread title and tne OP are about the chapter of her book where she talks about 'living as a boy'. It was posted almost a week before any of the Guardian articles. Perhaps you should start your own thread if you want to discuss the other issues mentioned in her interview and book extracts and leave this one to discuss (as the title says), the chapter of her book entitiled 'When I was a little boy'.

It's interesting that the Guardian has chosen not to publish an extract from that chapter. Perhaps the revelation that she grew out of her opposite-sex identification at puberty (which we all know happens to something like 80% of children who identify as 'trans') would be too much for them.

Because most people have the tact and compassion when learning about Lucy's life not to publicly criticise her for donating to a charity just because they dont like it.

This thread is about Lucy 'living as a boy'. When we learnt about that, why is it wrong to discuss her donations to a charity which is harmful to children who are like she was as a child?

Where is your compassion for all those children?

You're missing the point. Lucy's troubles have been well documented and not just the recent ones.
There is a time and a place for making your point about Mermaids and this just isnt it (again, OP didnt know that when she made the thread).
Your opinions do not trump other peoples.

Your opinions do not trump other peoples.

Neither do yours. I've no idea what point you're trying to make.

The same point I've made throughout about it being in bad taste. You asked a question about why, so I answered it.

I was surprised, not critical, that Lucy donates to Mermaids, given she credits puberty with “curing” her of thinking she was a boy. Mermaids are all for STOPPING puberty and giving cross-sex hormones. Just seemed a little incongruous, that’s all. I’d never heard of her before reading the Guardian article at the weekend, which mentioned her childhood as a boy and how puberty made her accept she’s a woman.

You’ve mentioned bad taste, yet you are the one that earlier this afternoon made a post using words such as vile, pathetic and obscene. I find those words to be in bad taste.

Perhaps you could explain more why you think it’s bad taste to express our opinions and discuss Lucy’s choice of charity? Would it be bad taste for us to discuss it if, for example, as a rape survivor, she’s donated to Beiras Place?