Creator of “assigned male” comics is a “little”

[HermioneWeasley]

Statement here. Basically a “little” is an adult baby fetish. Sophie draws their image as a young girl and fantasises about sleep overs with other little girls where they talk about their genitals. Anyone else think this has more red flags than a Chinese communist party shindig?

In plain sight is a thrill for some people.

This is a reddit thread from five years ago, including trans people in the debate, discussing things that bothered them about the comic.

Since then, the comic has only become more and more radical. (It keeps popping up on FB for me.)

www.reddit.com/r/asktransgender/comments/37i0oc/heres_why_i_think_the_webcomic_assigned_male_is/

It truly alarms me that the moment people read the artist is trans, they worry more about being perceived as discriminatory against trans people than anything else.

@Ereshkigalangcleg

In plain sight is a thrill for some people.

Yes. Or not quite in plain sight, like Rubber Toilet Wank man.

The defences we're seeing of Labelle and their fetish look rather similar to what we saw with the NSPCC RTW man. Effectively that it's bigoted to get in the way of what a man wants to do for his sexual jollies.

Who would want to defend this disgusting stuff:

twitter.com/LabelFreeBrands/status/1364478915679449092

Why did they choose 'little'? 'Little person' is a well known term used by another community.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_people

Labelle is a children's author. Available at major bookstores.

www.waterstones.com/author/sophie-labelle/3182686

www.goodreads.com/author/list/8522395.Sophie_Labelle

Published by Jessica Kingsley Publishing

uk.jkp.com/collections/author-sophie-labelle-pid-220945?_pos=1&_psq=sop&_ss=e&_v=1.0

As I previously posted I thought it was ok in private between consenting adults etc etc, but from what people have said about the cartoons (I really don't want to look at them ) it is sounding more and more sinister.

And as pp have said - why do you have to come out about a kink which should only take place behind closed doors? Reminds me of those who dress up as dogs at Pride marches and interact with children - just no need for it.

[quote Thelnebriati]Why did they choose 'little'? 'Little person' is a well known term used by another community.
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_people[/quote]
Same reason they choose "kind". It's a euphemism.

@SunsetBeetch

Yes. Or not quite in plain sight, like Rubber Toilet Wank man.

😂 who?!

Like you VexedofVirginiaWater I was thinking back to previous discussions about kink and how, so long as it was legal, it was fine if people kept it to their own private spaces, and then wondering why, in that case, there's a problem with Labelle.

It's simply this: Labelle has a high profile as someone pushing out a misleading trans activist message, and pushing it in particular to children, while having a fetish around children and their toileting activities. The solution would be for them to recognise themselves for who they are and to assume some responsibility by removing themselves from anything to do with children. Instead we get one of the fundamentals of the current identity mania: so long as it gives me a thrill, who cares if it might harm anyone else?

Have a search for these terms ifitpleasesandsparkles:

rubber toilet nspcc

IIRC, a man who worked at the NSPCC and decided to put videos on his social media profile of himself in fetish gear masturbating at work, in the workplace toilets.

Which presumably means that before the trip to the toilets, he was wandering around the office, in the rubber fetish gear? Or did he get changed in there?

Can you imagine how uncomfortable and awkward it would be if a work colleague turned up dressed in a kink outfit and you had to just ignore it?

@nauticant

Have a search for these terms ifitpleasesandsparkles:

rubber toilet nspcc

I originally googled rubber toilet wank man

Bad idea.

Hahahaha! Yes, you do need to include "nspcc" as a search term to avoid going seriously off piste.

There's an interesting bit of doublethink in the screenshot provided by SunsetBeech:

There's a difference between enjoying coloring with crayons and thinking you're actually 5

OK. Is there a difference between enjoying wearing a dress and thinking you're actually a woman?

@nauticant

Hahahaha! Yes, you do need to include "nspcc" as a search term to avoid going seriously off piste.

Or seriously pissed off! 😂

@aliasundercover

There's an interesting bit of doublethink in the screenshot provided by SunsetBeech:

There's a difference between enjoying coloring with crayons and thinking you're actually 5

OK. Is there a difference between enjoying wearing a dress and thinking you're actually a woman?

🏆 for you you.

They make it up as they go along!

@MechantGourmet

Um, yeah, because I totally pee out of my clitoris, right?

I am somewhat concerned for the understanding of biology here. My school used to teach Botany rather than Biology at GCSE so they could by-pass the issue of human /animal reproduction (it was fine for plants). But at least nobody actually intended to teach us error for this.

I know Pratchett would argue that in the early part of our education, teaching is lying to children but even so…

Plus, some of the false equivalences here are giving me uncomfortable flashes to some of the PIE material that's been discussed on FWR previously - back in the days when they convinced NCCL, Harman and others that they were harmless.

www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-26352378

It's a little OT, but I immediately remembered the slating Assigned Male got/has on the Bad Webcomics wiki.

badwebcomicswiki.shoutwiki.com/wiki/Assigned_Male

Even people who are all trans/queer etc are involved in the discussions and on the discussion forums saying how much they hate this comic.

I am not surprised by this news. A while ago I got unfriended on FB by a woman after getting involved in a TRA debate. She cited this comic as a great way to learn more. If I wasn't blocked I'd be tempted to ask her what she thinks of this and if she still is a supporter.

I think this quote for the Bad Webcomics wiki really sums things up perfectly.

'I know transgenderism is the current hot topic that "good people" are using to publicly prove their "goodness" with, by acting as if any slight is the same as the final step before transgenocide. There are a lot of people who might willfully choose to see a transgender comic getting a bad review through a filter of "this reviewer must be a bigot" because they want some "evil" to make sure everyone sees them "vanquishing".'

Do most of the people who defend things like this comic really believe what they are saying? Or are they just trying to gain brownie points with fellow people who also do not really believe what they are saying and are just trying to gain brownie points with people who... (you see where this is going).

I'd say many of them are past the point of being concerned with whether what they say is correct*. These days factual correctness comes a long way behind "how will what I say be received by my tribe?"

• "puberty blockers are completely reversible [continues to be stated after the revised NHS guidance and the Keira Bell decision]", "no one on our side ever talked about being born in the wrong body", "transwomen in women's prisons never cause any problems", etc

It seems that Labelle doesn't have a problem with 'littles' being sexualised either since they ❤'d the attached comment along with 122 other people on the post.

I'd say yes. Having looked at this for years I think that when you take (the relatively very few) transsexuals out of the equation, a large part of what remains is males with a paraphilia related to having a feminine identity and young females who are rejecting growing up as women when they see what social media and expectations of porn have to offer women.

If someone has one paraphilia, it's quite likely they're going to have others.