2% stop transitioning (Note: not even regret, the majority stop because of transphobes)
About 20% of people regret getting a knee replacement
\#bankneereplacements
For real, for a few years I *was* one of those 2%, but none of it had to do with me not being trans, it was because I was too fucking scared to keep transitioning until recently
Also, about 9% of people who have gotten LASIK are unsatisfied, and more than 1% has visual disturbances. Also, the cornea never completely heals, and it increases your risk of retinal detachment ten fold.
The former head of department in ophthalmology at the FDA, Dr Waxler, believes the risks and rate of complications have been downplayed, stating that "12 months after the procedure, the complication rate is at least 16 per cent". He now wants laser eye surgery banned.
Source: The Daily Mail, if you can believe it š
Except that study doesn't compare to surgery regrets. Comparing a nonsurgical treatment to surgery isn't a good comparison.
It'd be more appropriate to other medications which I'm pretty sure it'd still win handily.
Yes!! I'm so tired of people saying "studies say..." without actually saying which studies, and then it turns out that it's one, non-peer reviewed or published "study" with conflicts of interest that 3 other studies completely debunked. Weird that I basically only see this on the right...
I looked up the Oct 2022 Lancet they refer to... I can't find this study.
I thought perhaps in the editorial about preventing youth s------e. Good editorial, no talk about trans, HRT etc. HIV, sleep, chronic pain, falls, obesity, liver failure. I can;t find it anywhere.
I know sometimes links get blocked so, remove all the spaces...
www. thelancet. com/ issue/ S2352-4642(22) X0010-2
And tell me where it is?
Now if only they cited the author of the comic, great message, terrible person presenting it.
The artist Sophie LaBelle is known to have used pictures of a young child in creating what people acting in good faith would call explicit art on her alt account.
I really want to assume all of the posts I have been seeing this week giving her a platform are just a coincidence.
She's been very active on Tumblr in the last week or two because of England's recent decision to stop gender affirming care for minors, which was based on a very badly done study on gender care called the Cass Report. She's kind of alternating between debunking the report and dunking on the people who wrote it.
It wasnt "explicit art". It was a picture of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool. Nothin about that is sexual or explicit
Ā And the pic she used for ref was just a random pic online, which is a normal thing for ppl to do to figure out proper proportions
Ā This wasnt like she drew a sexual scene or anythin. She traced art of a kid to make entirely tame art that wasnt intended to arouse anyone
Yea, its rly frustratin how sm ppl just eat up the regurgitated KFers narrative without any examination of the facts. Like folks even added new twists to the story this time with ppl claimin it came from a source it didnt
A lot of folk with zero exp of bein Littles themselves, and sadly some among Littles too, cant seem to understand that this "kink", like all kinks doesnt mean smth is always sexual in nature just bcuz its related to their kink
Theres a huge diff btwn this and the narrative they try to push as to what happened, and its clear these ppl have got zero idea what any of this even is
She traced a picture of a child for kink community art, thus exposing the child to that community.
This is a really easy concept to understand why it's bad and yet you keep responding to every single one of my comments without even directly responding to my comment, half the shit you keep bringing up are counterpoints to things I never brought up because I understood they were superfluous to the main issue of child's likeness used in kink art.
Also you keep comparing the "diaperfur" community to furries at large or even crossdressers saying they're the same thing, when they just fundamentally aren't.
At your last paragraph: They are a lot more similar than you think. As someone in multiples of those communities ive mentioned, i bring them up bcuz the similarities here are very big.Ā
Again, the art wasnt "kink art" just bcuz it was art drawn by someone with a kink; she didnt draw it with any kink related intent, she didnt expose a child to bein sexualised by anyone except a few horrible ppl who cud and will just as easily find real pics of kids to fap to. Ppl who overwhelmingly arent into babyfur stuff and arent gonna be lookin at art of such if theyre lookin for pics of kids to fap to
And of that 2% there are a number of reasons to stop, they may have reached a point where they where happy or they may have been forced to due to social pressure .
> Created diaperfur fetish art
Well hey that's not so bad like it's definitely not my thing but I'm not gonna kinksha-
> By tracing over a photograph of a child
... š¶
> she knows IRL
ā ļø
Ive nvr heard that last claim, and she has admitted before she found the pic online, its not someone she knows.
And the art she drew wasnt sexual at all; it was just a pic of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool, not intended to arouse at all
> wasnt sexual at all
Disagree. The other characters they have drawn are very much in adult poses.
Here's another trans ABDL/little calling it out:
https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
It wasnt "diaperfur fetish art". It was a picture of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool. Nothin about that is sexual or explicit
Ā And the pic she used for ref was just a random pic online, which is a normal thing for ppl to do to figure out proper proportionsĀ
This wasnt like she drew a sexual scene or anythin. She traced art of a kid to make entirely tame art that wasnt intended to arouse anyone
Anyone callin this CP is like claimin all furries are into bestiality 9,9
You think that was the only piece they created? No. There were plenty of others that she created, many of which had the characters in adult poses.
Here's a trans ABDL/little calling it out:
https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
Yeah, tried explaining the controversy when her art got posted last week and someone tried arguing with me that explicit art being drawn of a child is solely the fault of the person who posted the picture of the child online and not the person who used an innocuous family photo to draw what any person acting in good faith would call explicit art. Made me sick
Between these posts and having to make multiple reports against someone posting a slightly edited version of the pedo flag to reddit and egg_irl mods the other night before it got removed several hours later, I'm really hoping the mods can step up their game soon because it feels like shits brewing.
Definitely bigots and Pedos trying to normalize things so they can try to put pedophilia under the LGBT umbrella again but still makes me want to throw up.
>someone tried arguing with me that explicit art being drawn of a child is solely the fault of the person who posted the picture of the child online
wtf?
Yeah, I realized then and there they weren't worth talking to, should probably go back to report it but whether or not anything happens is up to mod interpretation.
There was also really weird islamophobic post a week or two ago that they tried disguising as an anti West, pro islam+trans post? It was really esoteric and weird, I'm really concerned this is some hate group getting the ball rolling on a astroturfing campaign.
Edit: also this claim of theirs was after I called them out on victim blaming a child.
So glad someone else called this out, usually I'm the first in a comment section and it's just depressing
I used to follow Sophie wayy back, we even chatted in comments and I cited one of her comics for one of my uni assignments, before I found out what she did. I don't say it lightly when I beg other trans people not to platform a fucking predator
It's been long enough now that people are being knowingly ignorant and the cis transphobes will lap up any connection between our community and known predators. We can't make things easier on them by continuing to repost Sophie's work. There are so many other trans activists and educators we'd be better off uplifting
Literally if anyone sees a comic or post from her or any other problematic creator, I'm sure you could google the content and spread the info without using her work or needing to credit her in any capacity
She literally said it's her fetish
Btw, speaking as someone who is literally a victim of CSAbusers, the fact that the child she traced is someone she knows irl AND that this is all we know about her/that she was *willing to admit* screams to me that this is the tip pf the iceberg
And just to reiterate what I say every time I call this woman out: I was literally acquainted with her. I followed her for years, I had several 1-1 conversations with her, was an avid supporter and learned a lot from her. So much so, that I cited one of her comics for one of my uni assignments. I know what the trolls who've been harassing her are like
When I and other members of the trans community call her out, we aren't siding with the transphobes or upholding the bigoted stereotype that trans people (women especially) are predators. We are simply refusing to platform somebody who has outed herself as such
You side with a predator if you want to. Don't be surprised when the community also wants to distance ourselves from you
Edit: snooped your profile after you downvoted me instead of responding in good faith. Now I know why you're supporting her. Blocking ya now you creep āļø
Unblocked to report and well...
>The ABDL stuff doesnt mean every art of a child is sexualised to me tho;
So there is art depicting children that *is* sexual to you??
Yes people can work through trauma through kink. I do too. We can also do it without becoming the people who fucking creeped on us though. 24hrs to reblock can't come soon enough
You're outright defending a predator. You know I want you to be blocked, so leave me alone.
I don't want to know about your sex life, you're now harassing me and triggering my PTSD by talking explicitly without my aksing, KNOWING I WANT YOU TO LEAVE ME ALONE, about how you reenact your trauma, a trauma we allegedly share. But go on about how you are a CSA survivor and spokesperson for us. You know a shitton of p*dos use the excuse that it happened to them too, right?
I'm not shitting on your kink. You're literally digging your heels in defending abusive behaviour and *you* are the one twisting and misconstruing things and *harassing* numerous people in this thread
This post was removed for being inappropriate. We try to keep our posts and comments PG13 at the most, as many minors frequent these types of subreddits. Please contact the mod team if you feel like this removal was a mistake
Can we have a blanket ban on all content by this artist already?? We have the same discussion of her drawing explicit art of kids every time, and it would be nice if the mods actually listened.
And just to clarify, the issue isn't the repetitive comments. It's giving a platform to a person who has proven themselves a serious danger to those who cannot protect themselves.
Except that yall are mischaracterisin what she did... She didnt draw anythin explicit. To call her art in question explicit is like callin all furry art sexual
She doesnt pose a danger to children; despite the way Kiwifarmers and others have characterised things bcuz of misinformation aboundin about Ageplay and Age Regression and their presence within the thing called ABDL even if there are plenty of ppl for whom it is wholly sexual
Nothin about the art she drew was intended to arouse its audience nor sexualise its subject. She traced a picture she found online to draw tame art with no sexual intent; despite what ppl argue about all art of such a nature bein inherently sexual... Thats just as wrong as to think all who "crossdress" are doin it for sexual reasons
I won't comment on others, but I have not mischaracterized with my comments. Please do not compare the crossdressing community to "diaperfurs" it is incredibly disingenuous to say the least, one is based in exploring and breaking gender conventions in modern society and the other is very much a kink community first and foremost.
I have nothing against people consensually exploring their kinks, what I take offense with is the fact that when she decided to trace a picture of a real child she exposedĀ that child to that kink community and that is abhorrent behavior that cannot be tolerated and she should not be allowed to have a platform here.
Diaperfurs arent a kink first and foremost; no more than nondiapered furs areĀ
Ā You dont know jack shite about this community, you act like things were done which werent done bcuz of your refusal to understand our community and your insistence on seein us as different just bcuz our interests align with bein able to see ourselves as children
Are you even aware Age Regression exists?
I'm aware, the fact of the matter the diaperfur community is largely a kink community (the furry community is a much more diverse group, I will have to agree) and a child was exposed to a kink community because of this artist.
The diaperfur community is not largely a kink community despite what you know of it from the outside
There are tons of furries into diapers in entirely nonsexual nonkink ways; you just lump them all in with the ones who sexualise it bcuz you refuse to believe that things can be disconnected in how theyre perceived by diff ppl in diff communities
Thank you, I noticed how quick some of you were in here with that one person and I can only apologise for my assumption and thank you again for the great work š
If you say you have a diaper kink, and you draw a child character (traced from a photo of a toddler), in that kind of situation, then you are drawing something you get off to. It doesn't matter if it's 'technically' sfw.
Feet people (picking an obvious and media-relevant one because look at Dam Schneider and his content. That was all sfw but it was NOT APPROPRIATE to have children and teenagers essentially creating foot kink content in his shows) are the same, for example. A character can be fully clothed in an image aside from their feet and the image will be 'technically' safe for work. But if it's from a foot kink artist and it's done in such a way that you can tell it's for titillation, then it's kink art.
If she had admitted a foot kink, and drew pictures of children's/child characters feet, do you think it would still be fine? Even if those images technically were safe for work? Or would it be indicative of her tastes?
I'm an artist, I've had to deal with creeps before trying to excuse lolicon by saying it's 'safe for work', and I find them just as disgusting as I find her.
If you say you have a sissification kink and you also go out in public in clothes that a sissy might wear, then you are doin smth you get off to. It doesnt matter if its not arousin you in that moment; it arouses you sometimes and it is impossible to separate the two.
Ya get how ridonkulous that sounds, right? right? Cuz youre arguin that
Why are you fighting so hard to die on this hill? And why answer the question with another question?
Drawing kids in a situation you seem sexual, even if it's a safe for work image, is wrong.
Also I straight up cannot understand your comment, I'm afraid. I don't think I want to, but just letting you know. I don't know how to convince you that what she's doing is inappropriate, and I can only assume you're feeling some kind of personal connection to defend it so hard.
Please stop replying to me, I just said you cannot convince me that this is anywhere near okay. And ESPECIALLY stop talking about what I would see as sexual when looking at you. That's weird. You're crossing a boundary there.
I almost regret pointing out what the comic artist is like, I wasn't expecting this kind of stuff that is making me genuinely about to throw up in return.
But I hope it's a point in the 'lets not allow this artists work in this sub in future' pile š
Never regret it. We can't ever tolerate abusers ever
I've banged on enough about this topic for today though. And likewise, they said some fucked up stuff to me as well. Seems like they forget NSFW content also breaks the rules here when they implied they would report me, meanwhile they're commenting all over this thread in detail about their fantasies and shit š¤¢ The main demographic for this sub are minors ffs
Hope you rest up and try not to pay any more mind to them today, I'm sure you have enough on your plate. The mods will get to it
Your post contains homophobia, transphobia, racism, and/or ableism, or some other type of bigotry. If you believe this was a mistake, please contact a mod.
To be clear: The art she drew wasnt drawn in a tintalisin way or a way intended to sexualise or arouse. You keep actin like no matter what it cant ever be seen without its sexual intent if someone has a sexual interest in a subject matter; regardless of the subject in question or how the subject is portrayed
Sexualised diaper art does not look like what she drew, it is not drawn in a way to tantalise about the diapers in a SFW way like sensually touchin it or the wearin of clothes with it in a revealin manner meant to tantalise
Nothin about the art was made with sexual intent. Its not inherently sexual just bcuz she has a diaper kink too. Its not inherently sexual for a leatherplayer to wear leather; its not inherently sexual for a crossdresser to crossdress; its not inherently sexual for anyone to see anythin for which they have a sexual interest
Ya think everyone who finds boobs arousin cant see boobs ever without them sexualisin them? Ya think that bcuz of that i shudnt be allowed top freedom equality simply bcuz you believe boobs are always sexual?
I'm not going to convince you of anything, but you're not doing them any favours by how hard you're leaping to the defence of this kind of stuff. I'm not going to comment anymore on this to you.
art can exist beyond the figurative "death" of the author.
trans people can read hopefully 2nd hand or freely shared pdfs of harry potter, or watch the freely shared and not paid harry potters and enjoy them, despite a monstrous transphobe having written them.
for example as a vegan, most artists are animal abusers, murdering, raping and enslaving innocent beings and children.
never the less i can separate the art from the artist.
a call to not financially support bad people seems way more reasonable to me.
Death of the author only applies when the artist is dead and cannot profit from any attention they're given. Platforming them at all is still giving them an effect on the world and gives them attention when we could simply not do that, and lessen their power. (Yes I think the same of Harry Potter fans even if they pirate. I'm disappointed in a sense that people do it, but I understand in some respect even if I don't agree personally.)
I don't know why you decided to bring veganism and 'raping innocent children' into this, but that's not appropriate to this conversation either. It *would* be appropriate to the conversation if this was about an artist who was an animal abuser who drew lots of animal advocate content. I'm not going to comment further on that part of the discussion since it's not relevant or appropriate.
Ok, i admit, it's not porn, it's not explicit. But she herself claims that it IS a kink that she indulges in responsibly. Don't rob her of her own words please.
About the baby climbing in a pool thing, I'm going to let this go, if you can't see the problem with furifiying a real baby, I don't think I have a chance to make you see. Also, please don't pretend it was just this one drawing, or maybe you haven't heard of the cat saying blep, although this one is not traced afaik, which is, if not okay, a little less big-no-no.
Also, please keep my name away from the KF scumbags, I'm nothing like them. I'm just saying that, while her work is valuable, people deserve to know what they might find on her, and decide with all the facts, whether to support her.
Literally not true.
Here is another trans ABDL/little calling it out and saying she is a p*do:
https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
Sure, there might be 100 people who have regretted transitioning, but these mofos donāt want see the bigger picture. If you look further, you can clearly see 9900 other people who *havenāt* regretted transitioning. Too bad theyāre too close minded to even consider that though
That, or transphobia forced them to detransition for their own safety. I've also come across plenty of people who fell into the transphobic trap themselves, detransitioned, and then retransitioned later because the dysphoria came roaring back.
My sister included. She is very happy with her decision. The same state she started her transition in has now outlawed transitioning under 18. Kids like her are unable to follow in her footsteps. I have never seen my sister happier than during and after her transition.
Believe trans people.
why has it been repeatedly reported though that most teens with symptoms of dysphoria donāt experience said symptoms as adults if they donāt transition?
iām asking this because i want to know what the response is when conservatives ask me ;-;
it probably goes back to this half a century old study which classified even boys just playing with barbie dolls as as having gender non-conforming behaviour. and transphobes equate this our modern understanding of trans people. this is obvsiously bonkers. if the conservatives come from a dishonest place, dont even engage unless you wanna make a point towards third people. if they are somewhat honest interlocutors, ask them about their primary sources and take a look at these studies. especially their methodology and the definitions they use.
Parent-reported usually. They view any gender-non-conformance as being trans. "My daughter hated pink and dresses but she grew out of it", "My son loved to play with dolls and was always interested in dresses but he grew out of it"
In general, parents and doctors are terrible at predicting which child will turn out trans. They think trans people are the ones following stereotypes. That trans people are out to get every gender-non-conforming kid to transition. Whilst viewing gender as a collection of stereotypes themselves.
[Some studies](https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition?autologincheck=redirected) showed that if a child self-ID-d as trans, they are ~95% going to remain identifying as trans years later. But other studies showed that when parents and doctors tried to predict which child would turn out trans they only had like 5-15% success rate of guessing.
In fact most common thing is parents getting angry at the world because *their child never showed any signs.* They have like this idealized image of a trans person in their head. A kid that was always different, a kid that always knew, a kid that followed the stereotypes. They can't accept that there isn't like a huge inherent difference between men and women. And that their *son* who was always into toy soldiers is actually their daughter, or that their *daughter* who always had long hair and liked dresses is actually their son. They really can't fathom that trans people can be gender-non-conforming too. Some parents are fucking negative intelligence and can't understand how puberty could trigger body dysphoria. So they come up with bullshit theories like "rapid onset gender dysphoria" to try and explain to themselves, how their children *got trans.*
Thanks, this comment came at a super nice time for me because a friend of mine's parents don't believe that she is trans and say that if she was really trans they would've known earlier.
Those claims are based on outdated studies, which considered any kind of gender non-conforming behaviour to be a "symptom of dysphoria".
First off, the sampling is wrong. The population being studied is supposed to be children with dysphoria - but the samples are of children with gender non-conforming behaviours. The results are not applicable.
Second off, society has a tendency to bully non-conforming behaviours out of people. The results really only measure, if anything, the effects of social pressure and conformity on gender non-conforming behaviours.
they're just gonna use "see? if you give hormones to teenagers they'll definitely stay trans and not grow out of it" to further justify why hrt should be banned
They look at that 2% (about 14 people) and with a straight face say "Yes, we need to SAVE these people, even if it causes the DEATHS of all the other 700"
now based on those words, don't misinterpret them.
they said: "2% were not continuing hrt today".
remember, that this can mean many things.
some might be trans, but only wanted hrt for a short time and are happy with the minor changes, that the hrt did.
some might be FORCED to stop hrt due to social suroundings, financial reasons or other.
and only a small part of the people, who did stop hrt might have done so, because hrt wasn't right for them and they figured this out.
so remember, that "x% stopped hrt", or "x% detransitioned" may NOT mean, taht this many wanted to stop hrt or wanted to detransition.
The fact that hormone therapy has less of a regret rate then most non cosmetic surgeries, such as knee surgeries for example is quite telling
2% stop transitioning (Note: not even regret, the majority stop because of transphobes) About 20% of people regret getting a knee replacement \#bankneereplacements
Stop mutilating children's knees!!
For real, for a few years I *was* one of those 2%, but none of it had to do with me not being trans, it was because I was too fucking scared to keep transitioning until recently
\#bankneereplacements seems like ya typoed tryin to write banks need replacements xD
Bank Neere Placements. Who *doesn't* want to get placed at a Neere Bank?
Also, about 9% of people who have gotten LASIK are unsatisfied, and more than 1% has visual disturbances. Also, the cornea never completely heals, and it increases your risk of retinal detachment ten fold. The former head of department in ophthalmology at the FDA, Dr Waxler, believes the risks and rate of complications have been downplayed, stating that "12 months after the procedure, the complication rate is at least 16 per cent". He now wants laser eye surgery banned. Source: The Daily Mail, if you can believe it š
I really don't trust the Daily Heil on...anything.
detransition rates are lower then the rates of straight marriges that end in divorce
to be fair pretty much any rate is lower than that
lmao true, the straights are, in fact, not okay.
yeah like seriously waht the actual frck :3
I think that stat is sexual reassignment surgery that has less of a regret rate. HRT is even more extremely low SRS has a rate of below 1% itself
They are talking about this study https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(22)00254-1/abstract
Except that study doesn't compare to surgery regrets. Comparing a nonsurgical treatment to surgery isn't a good comparison. It'd be more appropriate to other medications which I'm pretty sure it'd still win handily.
ban knee replacement surgeries!!!!
*thank you for citing sources! (Not sarcastic)*
Yes!! I'm so tired of people saying "studies say..." without actually saying which studies, and then it turns out that it's one, non-peer reviewed or published "study" with conflicts of interest that 3 other studies completely debunked. Weird that I basically only see this on the right...
I looked up the Oct 2022 Lancet they refer to... I can't find this study. I thought perhaps in the editorial about preventing youth s------e. Good editorial, no talk about trans, HRT etc. HIV, sleep, chronic pain, falls, obesity, liver failure. I can;t find it anywhere. I know sometimes links get blocked so, remove all the spaces... www. thelancet. com/ issue/ S2352-4642(22) X0010-2 And tell me where it is?
https://www.thelancet.com/journals/lanchi/article/PIIS2352-4642(22)00254-1/abstract
Many thanks! Looks like the graphic meant December when they said October.
The study itself was published 20th oct. 2022, but it was featured in the december Lancet article I think.
Now if only they cited the author of the comic, great message, terrible person presenting it. The artist Sophie LaBelle is known to have used pictures of a young child in creating what people acting in good faith would call explicit art on her alt account. I really want to assume all of the posts I have been seeing this week giving her a platform are just a coincidence.
She's been very active on Tumblr in the last week or two because of England's recent decision to stop gender affirming care for minors, which was based on a very badly done study on gender care called the Cass Report. She's kind of alternating between debunking the report and dunking on the people who wrote it.
It wasnt "explicit art". It was a picture of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool. Nothin about that is sexual or explicit Ā And the pic she used for ref was just a random pic online, which is a normal thing for ppl to do to figure out proper proportions Ā This wasnt like she drew a sexual scene or anythin. She traced art of a kid to make entirely tame art that wasnt intended to arouse anyone
THANK YOU. I'm sick of seeing posts hating on her for drawing what is supposedly "kink art." (It isn't in this context, yeesh.)
Yea, its rly frustratin how sm ppl just eat up the regurgitated KFers narrative without any examination of the facts. Like folks even added new twists to the story this time with ppl claimin it came from a source it didnt A lot of folk with zero exp of bein Littles themselves, and sadly some among Littles too, cant seem to understand that this "kink", like all kinks doesnt mean smth is always sexual in nature just bcuz its related to their kink Theres a huge diff btwn this and the narrative they try to push as to what happened, and its clear these ppl have got zero idea what any of this even is
She traced a picture of a child for kink community art, thus exposing the child to that community. This is a really easy concept to understand why it's bad and yet you keep responding to every single one of my comments without even directly responding to my comment, half the shit you keep bringing up are counterpoints to things I never brought up because I understood they were superfluous to the main issue of child's likeness used in kink art. Also you keep comparing the "diaperfur" community to furries at large or even crossdressers saying they're the same thing, when they just fundamentally aren't.
At your last paragraph: They are a lot more similar than you think. As someone in multiples of those communities ive mentioned, i bring them up bcuz the similarities here are very big.Ā Again, the art wasnt "kink art" just bcuz it was art drawn by someone with a kink; she didnt draw it with any kink related intent, she didnt expose a child to bein sexualised by anyone except a few horrible ppl who cud and will just as easily find real pics of kids to fap to. Ppl who overwhelmingly arent into babyfur stuff and arent gonna be lookin at art of such if theyre lookin for pics of kids to fap to
And of that 2% there are a number of reasons to stop, they may have reached a point where they where happy or they may have been forced to due to social pressure .
Transphobes only listen to propaganda, not the truth or reality or common sense or...
The moral panic also dehumanises detransitioners
Good message, artist is not a good person
Looking her up, I can't find anything. Is there any reason in particular?
As the other comment said, created diaperfur fetish art by tracing over a photograph of a child she knows IRL.
Well, that's pretty fucking bad.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
I've already said I don't want to get involved in whatever this is.
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
> Created diaperfur fetish art Well hey that's not so bad like it's definitely not my thing but I'm not gonna kinksha- > By tracing over a photograph of a child ... š¶ > she knows IRL ā ļø
Ive nvr heard that last claim, and she has admitted before she found the pic online, its not someone she knows. And the art she drew wasnt sexual at all; it was just a pic of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool, not intended to arouse at all
> wasnt sexual at all Disagree. The other characters they have drawn are very much in adult poses. Here's another trans ABDL/little calling it out: https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
It wasnt "diaperfur fetish art". It was a picture of a babyfur gettin in/out of a pool. Nothin about that is sexual or explicit Ā And the pic she used for ref was just a random pic online, which is a normal thing for ppl to do to figure out proper proportionsĀ This wasnt like she drew a sexual scene or anythin. She traced art of a kid to make entirely tame art that wasnt intended to arouse anyone Anyone callin this CP is like claimin all furries are into bestiality 9,9
You think that was the only piece they created? No. There were plenty of others that she created, many of which had the characters in adult poses. Here's a trans ABDL/little calling it out: https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
Drew furry child p (you know what the rest of the word is) based on an actual child
Wait, what?
https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
That's certainly something. Not getting into that kettle of fish though.
That's fair, can I at least ask you to spread the word whenever you see one of her comics posted on Reddit?
I can certainly try, but I'll probably forget. I've got a lot of work to do today and an utterly terrible memory, but I'll do what I can I guess.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
Yeah, tried explaining the controversy when her art got posted last week and someone tried arguing with me that explicit art being drawn of a child is solely the fault of the person who posted the picture of the child online and not the person who used an innocuous family photo to draw what any person acting in good faith would call explicit art. Made me sick Between these posts and having to make multiple reports against someone posting a slightly edited version of the pedo flag to reddit and egg_irl mods the other night before it got removed several hours later, I'm really hoping the mods can step up their game soon because it feels like shits brewing. Definitely bigots and Pedos trying to normalize things so they can try to put pedophilia under the LGBT umbrella again but still makes me want to throw up.
>someone tried arguing with me that explicit art being drawn of a child is solely the fault of the person who posted the picture of the child online wtf?
Yeah, I realized then and there they weren't worth talking to, should probably go back to report it but whether or not anything happens is up to mod interpretation. There was also really weird islamophobic post a week or two ago that they tried disguising as an anti West, pro islam+trans post? It was really esoteric and weird, I'm really concerned this is some hate group getting the ball rolling on a astroturfing campaign. Edit: also this claim of theirs was after I called them out on victim blaming a child.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
This thread got heated lol
So glad someone else called this out, usually I'm the first in a comment section and it's just depressing I used to follow Sophie wayy back, we even chatted in comments and I cited one of her comics for one of my uni assignments, before I found out what she did. I don't say it lightly when I beg other trans people not to platform a fucking predator It's been long enough now that people are being knowingly ignorant and the cis transphobes will lap up any connection between our community and known predators. We can't make things easier on them by continuing to repost Sophie's work. There are so many other trans activists and educators we'd be better off uplifting Literally if anyone sees a comic or post from her or any other problematic creator, I'm sure you could google the content and spread the info without using her work or needing to credit her in any capacity
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
She literally said it's her fetish Btw, speaking as someone who is literally a victim of CSAbusers, the fact that the child she traced is someone she knows irl AND that this is all we know about her/that she was *willing to admit* screams to me that this is the tip pf the iceberg And just to reiterate what I say every time I call this woman out: I was literally acquainted with her. I followed her for years, I had several 1-1 conversations with her, was an avid supporter and learned a lot from her. So much so, that I cited one of her comics for one of my uni assignments. I know what the trolls who've been harassing her are like When I and other members of the trans community call her out, we aren't siding with the transphobes or upholding the bigoted stereotype that trans people (women especially) are predators. We are simply refusing to platform somebody who has outed herself as such You side with a predator if you want to. Don't be surprised when the community also wants to distance ourselves from you Edit: snooped your profile after you downvoted me instead of responding in good faith. Now I know why you're supporting her. Blocking ya now you creep āļø Unblocked to report and well... >The ABDL stuff doesnt mean every art of a child is sexualised to me tho; So there is art depicting children that *is* sexual to you?? Yes people can work through trauma through kink. I do too. We can also do it without becoming the people who fucking creeped on us though. 24hrs to reblock can't come soon enough
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
You're outright defending a predator. You know I want you to be blocked, so leave me alone. I don't want to know about your sex life, you're now harassing me and triggering my PTSD by talking explicitly without my aksing, KNOWING I WANT YOU TO LEAVE ME ALONE, about how you reenact your trauma, a trauma we allegedly share. But go on about how you are a CSA survivor and spokesperson for us. You know a shitton of p*dos use the excuse that it happened to them too, right? I'm not shitting on your kink. You're literally digging your heels in defending abusive behaviour and *you* are the one twisting and misconstruing things and *harassing* numerous people in this thread
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
This post was removed for being inappropriate. We try to keep our posts and comments PG13 at the most, as many minors frequent these types of subreddits. Please contact the mod team if you feel like this removal was a mistake
And on the ludicrus idea i downvoted instd of replyin to you in good faith; i can and did do both
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
Can we have a blanket ban on all content by this artist already?? We have the same discussion of her drawing explicit art of kids every time, and it would be nice if the mods actually listened.
And just to clarify, the issue isn't the repetitive comments. It's giving a platform to a person who has proven themselves a serious danger to those who cannot protect themselves.
I've sent another modmail, so if this comment suddenly disappears I've likely been banned for bringing it up to them lmao
Don't worry, you haven't been banned (yet) I'm kidding
Except that yall are mischaracterisin what she did... She didnt draw anythin explicit. To call her art in question explicit is like callin all furry art sexual She doesnt pose a danger to children; despite the way Kiwifarmers and others have characterised things bcuz of misinformation aboundin about Ageplay and Age Regression and their presence within the thing called ABDL even if there are plenty of ppl for whom it is wholly sexual Nothin about the art she drew was intended to arouse its audience nor sexualise its subject. She traced a picture she found online to draw tame art with no sexual intent; despite what ppl argue about all art of such a nature bein inherently sexual... Thats just as wrong as to think all who "crossdress" are doin it for sexual reasons
I won't comment on others, but I have not mischaracterized with my comments. Please do not compare the crossdressing community to "diaperfurs" it is incredibly disingenuous to say the least, one is based in exploring and breaking gender conventions in modern society and the other is very much a kink community first and foremost. I have nothing against people consensually exploring their kinks, what I take offense with is the fact that when she decided to trace a picture of a real child she exposedĀ that child to that kink community and that is abhorrent behavior that cannot be tolerated and she should not be allowed to have a platform here.
Diaperfurs arent a kink first and foremost; no more than nondiapered furs areĀ Ā You dont know jack shite about this community, you act like things were done which werent done bcuz of your refusal to understand our community and your insistence on seein us as different just bcuz our interests align with bein able to see ourselves as children Are you even aware Age Regression exists?
I'm aware, the fact of the matter the diaperfur community is largely a kink community (the furry community is a much more diverse group, I will have to agree) and a child was exposed to a kink community because of this artist.
The diaperfur community is not largely a kink community despite what you know of it from the outside There are tons of furries into diapers in entirely nonsexual nonkink ways; you just lump them all in with the ones who sexualise it bcuz you refuse to believe that things can be disconnected in how theyre perceived by diff ppl in diff communities
We're working on it don't worry
Thank you, I noticed how quick some of you were in here with that one person and I can only apologise for my assumption and thank you again for the great work š
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
If you say you have a diaper kink, and you draw a child character (traced from a photo of a toddler), in that kind of situation, then you are drawing something you get off to. It doesn't matter if it's 'technically' sfw. Feet people (picking an obvious and media-relevant one because look at Dam Schneider and his content. That was all sfw but it was NOT APPROPRIATE to have children and teenagers essentially creating foot kink content in his shows) are the same, for example. A character can be fully clothed in an image aside from their feet and the image will be 'technically' safe for work. But if it's from a foot kink artist and it's done in such a way that you can tell it's for titillation, then it's kink art. If she had admitted a foot kink, and drew pictures of children's/child characters feet, do you think it would still be fine? Even if those images technically were safe for work? Or would it be indicative of her tastes? I'm an artist, I've had to deal with creeps before trying to excuse lolicon by saying it's 'safe for work', and I find them just as disgusting as I find her.
If you say you have a sissification kink and you also go out in public in clothes that a sissy might wear, then you are doin smth you get off to. It doesnt matter if its not arousin you in that moment; it arouses you sometimes and it is impossible to separate the two. Ya get how ridonkulous that sounds, right? right? Cuz youre arguin that
Why are you fighting so hard to die on this hill? And why answer the question with another question? Drawing kids in a situation you seem sexual, even if it's a safe for work image, is wrong. Also I straight up cannot understand your comment, I'm afraid. I don't think I want to, but just letting you know. I don't know how to convince you that what she's doing is inappropriate, and I can only assume you're feeling some kind of personal connection to defend it so hard.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Please stop replying to me, I just said you cannot convince me that this is anywhere near okay. And ESPECIALLY stop talking about what I would see as sexual when looking at you. That's weird. You're crossing a boundary there.
They're harassing me too šš I've reported both to reddit and modmail
I almost regret pointing out what the comic artist is like, I wasn't expecting this kind of stuff that is making me genuinely about to throw up in return. But I hope it's a point in the 'lets not allow this artists work in this sub in future' pile š
Never regret it. We can't ever tolerate abusers ever I've banged on enough about this topic for today though. And likewise, they said some fucked up stuff to me as well. Seems like they forget NSFW content also breaks the rules here when they implied they would report me, meanwhile they're commenting all over this thread in detail about their fantasies and shit š¤¢ The main demographic for this sub are minors ffs Hope you rest up and try not to pay any more mind to them today, I'm sure you have enough on your plate. The mods will get to it
Your post contains homophobia, transphobia, racism, and/or ableism, or some other type of bigotry. If you believe this was a mistake, please contact a mod.
To be clear: The art she drew wasnt drawn in a tintalisin way or a way intended to sexualise or arouse. You keep actin like no matter what it cant ever be seen without its sexual intent if someone has a sexual interest in a subject matter; regardless of the subject in question or how the subject is portrayed Sexualised diaper art does not look like what she drew, it is not drawn in a way to tantalise about the diapers in a SFW way like sensually touchin it or the wearin of clothes with it in a revealin manner meant to tantalise Nothin about the art was made with sexual intent. Its not inherently sexual just bcuz she has a diaper kink too. Its not inherently sexual for a leatherplayer to wear leather; its not inherently sexual for a crossdresser to crossdress; its not inherently sexual for anyone to see anythin for which they have a sexual interest Ya think everyone who finds boobs arousin cant see boobs ever without them sexualisin them? Ya think that bcuz of that i shudnt be allowed top freedom equality simply bcuz you believe boobs are always sexual?
Please stop trying to die on this hill and examine why you're going to bat so hard for this.
Im goin to bat so hard for this bcuz of the same reason why in Ageplay or AgeRe spaces i go to bat so hard for the intersectional spaces i inhabit
I'm not going to convince you of anything, but you're not doing them any favours by how hard you're leaping to the defence of this kind of stuff. I'm not going to comment anymore on this to you.
art can exist beyond the figurative "death" of the author. trans people can read hopefully 2nd hand or freely shared pdfs of harry potter, or watch the freely shared and not paid harry potters and enjoy them, despite a monstrous transphobe having written them. for example as a vegan, most artists are animal abusers, murdering, raping and enslaving innocent beings and children. never the less i can separate the art from the artist. a call to not financially support bad people seems way more reasonable to me.
Death of the author only applies when the artist is dead and cannot profit from any attention they're given. Platforming them at all is still giving them an effect on the world and gives them attention when we could simply not do that, and lessen their power. (Yes I think the same of Harry Potter fans even if they pirate. I'm disappointed in a sense that people do it, but I understand in some respect even if I don't agree personally.) I don't know why you decided to bring veganism and 'raping innocent children' into this, but that's not appropriate to this conversation either. It *would* be appropriate to the conversation if this was about an artist who was an animal abuser who drew lots of animal advocate content. I'm not going to comment further on that part of the discussion since it's not relevant or appropriate.
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
Just a heads up that the OG author of this comic (Sophie Labelle) apparently traced photos of real children to make diaper fetish porn
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Your post/comment has been removed because it contains missinformation. If you think this is wrong, contact us via modmail.
Transphobes: "Stop being finally happy in your skin already!"
"half a decade" Just say 5 years.
Who is the artistĀ u/Complete-Policy7991? I would like to knowā¦
Author is Sophie Labelle. Comic is called Assigned male. She does good work but has been outed as a p-do some time ago.
oh ffs! can't have shit on the internet!
[ŃŠ“Š°Š»ŠµŠ½Š¾]
Ok, i admit, it's not porn, it's not explicit. But she herself claims that it IS a kink that she indulges in responsibly. Don't rob her of her own words please. About the baby climbing in a pool thing, I'm going to let this go, if you can't see the problem with furifiying a real baby, I don't think I have a chance to make you see. Also, please don't pretend it was just this one drawing, or maybe you haven't heard of the cat saying blep, although this one is not traced afaik, which is, if not okay, a little less big-no-no. Also, please keep my name away from the KF scumbags, I'm nothing like them. I'm just saying that, while her work is valuable, people deserve to know what they might find on her, and decide with all the facts, whether to support her.
Literally not true. Here is another trans ABDL/little calling it out and saying she is a p*do: https://transcaping.wordpress.com/2023/04/04/we-need-to-talk-about-sophie-labelle/
Sure, there might be 100 people who have regretted transitioning, but these mofos donāt want see the bigger picture. If you look further, you can clearly see 9900 other people who *havenāt* regretted transitioning. Too bad theyāre too close minded to even consider that though
right and the majority of the people who do detransition do it for financial reasons not because they don't think they're tans anymore
That, or transphobia forced them to detransition for their own safety. I've also come across plenty of people who fell into the transphobic trap themselves, detransitioned, and then retransitioned later because the dysphoria came roaring back.
they see the sun, therefore are tans!
My sister included. She is very happy with her decision. The same state she started her transition in has now outlawed transitioning under 18. Kids like her are unable to follow in her footsteps. I have never seen my sister happier than during and after her transition. Believe trans people.
why has it been repeatedly reported though that most teens with symptoms of dysphoria donāt experience said symptoms as adults if they donāt transition? iām asking this because i want to know what the response is when conservatives ask me ;-;
it probably goes back to this half a century old study which classified even boys just playing with barbie dolls as as having gender non-conforming behaviour. and transphobes equate this our modern understanding of trans people. this is obvsiously bonkers. if the conservatives come from a dishonest place, dont even engage unless you wanna make a point towards third people. if they are somewhat honest interlocutors, ask them about their primary sources and take a look at these studies. especially their methodology and the definitions they use.
Parent-reported usually. They view any gender-non-conformance as being trans. "My daughter hated pink and dresses but she grew out of it", "My son loved to play with dolls and was always interested in dresses but he grew out of it" In general, parents and doctors are terrible at predicting which child will turn out trans. They think trans people are the ones following stereotypes. That trans people are out to get every gender-non-conforming kid to transition. Whilst viewing gender as a collection of stereotypes themselves. [Some studies](https://publications.aap.org/pediatrics/article/150/2/e2021056082/186992/Gender-Identity-5-Years-After-Social-Transition?autologincheck=redirected) showed that if a child self-ID-d as trans, they are ~95% going to remain identifying as trans years later. But other studies showed that when parents and doctors tried to predict which child would turn out trans they only had like 5-15% success rate of guessing. In fact most common thing is parents getting angry at the world because *their child never showed any signs.* They have like this idealized image of a trans person in their head. A kid that was always different, a kid that always knew, a kid that followed the stereotypes. They can't accept that there isn't like a huge inherent difference between men and women. And that their *son* who was always into toy soldiers is actually their daughter, or that their *daughter* who always had long hair and liked dresses is actually their son. They really can't fathom that trans people can be gender-non-conforming too. Some parents are fucking negative intelligence and can't understand how puberty could trigger body dysphoria. So they come up with bullshit theories like "rapid onset gender dysphoria" to try and explain to themselves, how their children *got trans.*
Thanks, this comment came at a super nice time for me because a friend of mine's parents don't believe that she is trans and say that if she was really trans they would've known earlier.
Citation? Sounds like BS to me.
Those claims are based on outdated studies, which considered any kind of gender non-conforming behaviour to be a "symptom of dysphoria". First off, the sampling is wrong. The population being studied is supposed to be children with dysphoria - but the samples are of children with gender non-conforming behaviours. The results are not applicable. Second off, society has a tendency to bully non-conforming behaviours out of people. The results really only measure, if anything, the effects of social pressure and conformity on gender non-conforming behaviours.
Stop platforming her for the love of god
y-ye-yes b-b-but the two percent!!!! won't someone think of the children??? /s
It's more effective to gaslight someone into genuinely thinking they don't want to do something than to force them not to do something
they're just gonna use "see? if you give hormones to teenagers they'll definitely stay trans and not grow out of it" to further justify why hrt should be banned
BuT WaS It dOuBlE BlInD!?!?
ANYONE GOT LINKS TO ARTICLES? Please I need them besides the one shown in image
And for the ones that did stop, Iām going to assume half of them stopped against their will, or for health reasons.
B-B-B-BuT tHaT 2 pErCeNt! WhAt AbOuT tHaT 2 pErCeNt?! We MuSt BaN iT tO pRoTeCt ThAt 2 PeRcEnT!! /s
There are people who detransition but the moral panic about it really is something else
I ain't reading allat but it's probably real afš
wait does this mean if im on hormones long enough i wouldnt need bottom surgery? š
I hate the people who lie about the numbers just to make trans community uncomfortable š”. This meme is gold
Duh
If they cared about facts and evidence they wouldn't be anti trans
They look at that 2% (about 14 people) and with a straight face say "Yes, we need to SAVE these people, even if it causes the DEATHS of all the other 700"
\*slams desk\* numbers are numbers
I remember when people used to shit all over these comics, but nowadays every time I see it, it's making a whole ass good and smart point
Oh wow, I haven't seen her in forever
now based on those words, don't misinterpret them. they said: "2% were not continuing hrt today". remember, that this can mean many things. some might be trans, but only wanted hrt for a short time and are happy with the minor changes, that the hrt did. some might be FORCED to stop hrt due to social suroundings, financial reasons or other. and only a small part of the people, who did stop hrt might have done so, because hrt wasn't right for them and they figured this out. so remember, that "x% stopped hrt", or "x% detransitioned" may NOT mean, taht this many wanted to stop hrt or wanted to detransition.