Sophie Labelle Verville / Guillaume Labelle / Serious Trans Vibes Comics / Assigned Male / Candycore Comics / Pastel Sexy Times / WafflesArt - Obnoxious webcomics and horrific porn by a crazy fat pedo troon

Counterpoint: asking "why" is ok, but pressuring someone continuously is bad, almost - but not quite - the point of rape.

Saying "you're not WOKE if you don't suck my flaccid girldick" is psychological pressure that can be considered tantamount to rape, but not quite. Asking, "why" and getting the answer "I don't like transwomen, sorry" is an OK question to ask... but it shouldn't be very surprising.

You chose to troon out, now you get what you fucking deserve (other troons)
 
Biphobia?

When I first heard the term decades ago within the gay community, it related to a gay man's fear that a bi male lover would leave for a woman. Which is a serious dynamic of such a relationship. And it was an issue which could be discussed among gay and bi men without having a screaming denunciation fest. Notably, most gay men have at least tried sex with a woman, so there are fuzzy dividing line issues too.

What biphobia might have meant (if anything) among lesbians (or transwomen) of that era, I have no clue.

It now seems to be a pretext for novelty hunting within the realm of looking to be outraged, with transwomen in the lead.

But what might biphobia mean in a trans context, if we're honest about it?

Suppose a bi (and "cis") man has an affair with LaBelle? At some point he lets slip that he's attracted to LaBelle's biological male traits (and doesn't consider stuff such as long hair and dressing in pink to be female traits)? We're back to the original definition and the issue of sexual jealousy, except LaBelle would be jealous of her male self. :lit:
 
From Boxer Ceiling's reviews
View attachment 1086055
View attachment 1086071

"message from a trans person who supports this page and who mentioned SL in their message "
View attachment 1086079
All this Nicole/Boxer Ceiling banter is podracing at lightspeed, jesus christ :story:
Boxer's got the high ground, but they're both hilariously slapfighting
 
Buy my patches!
1578416757950.png
 
Counterpoint: asking "why" is ok, but pressuring someone continuously is bad, almost - but not quite - the point of rape.

Not to sound overly argumentative but that's less of a point and more of just a statement.

I'm curious as to when you think asking "why" is okay and if, when you ask this, what you're looking for either than something to soothe your own wounded ego (by being able to get angry at their answer and be the justified victim, or by hearing an "acceptable" excuse like they're already seeing someone (<- there's a reason that's considered the safest excuse. Yes. SAFEST, like mom's teach their daughters to say it so they don't get beat up kind of safe)) or a loophole to change their mind.

And yeah, if I'm reaching for absolute exceptions it's probably okay to ask your best friend with whom you share everything why they turned someone down if you're concerned something may have happened to them, or if you're playing matchmaker and have 4 more m-t-fs lined up for them to meet, but I'm of the mind that finding one extreme example of a rule breaking situation doesn't invalidate a point.
Or maybe you can convince me it does, I'm really curious actually.

I guess I also don't see why pressure has to be applied continuously for people to see it as an issue, and sorry TaimuRadiu, I'm not saying that you meant exactly this by that but I guess I don't see the difference between ignoring someone's "no" once or ignoring their "no" 8 times. It doesn't make the situation any less gross if they convince or coerce their target into changing their mind after one attempt to bypass their defenses or 100.



My fave are the ones that aren't traced!
(So none)
 

The brown one on the bottom left looks like a cartoon fart with “gassssssssssy” on the banner

I'm curious as to when you think asking "why" is okay and if, when you ask this, what you're looking for either than something to soothe your own wounded ego (by being able to get angry at their answer and be the justified victim, or by hearing an "acceptable" excuse like they're already seeing someone (<- there's a reason that's considered the safest excuse. Yes. SAFEST, like mom's teach their daughters to say it so they don't get beat up kind of safe)) or a loophole to change their mind.

Lol there’s literally no way to ask someone why they don’t want to fuck you that won’t result in
1. You sounding like a pathetic insecure whiny crybaby
2. You sounding like someone who thinks they deserve an explanation & want to bicker over whether or not it’s a “good enough” explanation
3. The other person being put on the spot, made to feel like “no” isn’t enough, feeling like they have to comfort you, and probably scrambling to tell a lie.

So yeah sure, asking why is “okay” the same way that wiping your own shit all over your face at a bus stop is “ok.” You can do it but everybody is going to be like “yikes” and feel fear/pity
 
I guess I also don't see why pressure has to be applied continuously for people to see it as an issue, and sorry TaimuRadiu, I'm not saying that you meant exactly this by that but I guess I don't see the difference between ignoring someone's "no" once or ignoring their "no" 8 times. It doesn't make the situation any less gross if they convince or coerce their target into changing their mind after one attempt to bypass their defenses or 100.
the difference with what I'm saying is that if I'm asking chaddington out 50 times I'm not telling him he's bigoted if he doesn't suck my gigantic girldick

"I'm just not that into you" is an "acceptable" answer, why do people get angry if a woman doesn't like them anyway?
 
the difference with what I'm saying is that if I'm asking chaddington out 50 times I'm not telling him he's bigoted if he doesn't suck my gigantic girldick

"I'm just not that into you" is an "acceptable" answer, why do people get angry if a woman doesn't like them anyway?
Because it's never been about being into someone. It's about having power over someone. If a normal person found out someone wasn't into them, they may be upset (depending on how they felt about that person) but they'll move on. Troons don't move on, though. They say "I don't care how you feel, you're going to do X with me whether you want to or not, or I'm going to sue the shit out of you/have you arrested." Whether X is sucking that girldick or having them girlballs waxed, it is about forcing the other party to engage in the act. If you point this out, you're a transphobe and a bigot.
 
Honestly it's something EVERYONE should be frustrated about, and I'm about to repeat a rant I've gone on in the past for anyone who even ever feels even a tiny stir of guilt when someone plays that card (this is not aimed at you, Fingal):

You are NEVER wrong or bad for not being attracted to or wanting to have sex with someone.
You should NEVER feel guilty about not being attracted to or wanting to have sex with someone.
You NEVER have to justify to anyone in ANY situation why you're not attracted to or don't want to have sex with someone.

Anyone who says otherwise is using coercive tactics to try and convince you to say yes to sexual and romantic advances and situations that you are not comfortable with or would otherwise willingly enter into.
There is NEVER a single case or situation where coercing someone through guilt, force or deception into a sexual or romantic situation that they do not want to be in is justifiable.
If you think you have a situation you can present where you think coercing someone through guilt, force or deception into a sexual or romantic situation that they do not want to be in IS justifiable then you are a BAD PERSON who is WRONG and needs to reevaluate your perspective and priorities.

And no, that fact does not change if you think the reason someone is not interested in your romantically or sexually offensiveand it especially does not change if you think they'll like it or you if they just give it a chance (I nearly threw up a bit writing that sentence).
They are not wrong for not wanting to be sexually or romantically involved with anyone.
And you are not right for trying to convince someone to accept a sexual or romantic situation that they do not want.
There are no exceptions to this.
People who think there are exceptions are the people that can't take no for an answer. If you can't take no for an answer when in pursuit of a sexual or romantic entanglement you are a BAD PERSON who is WRONG.

If you find yourself asking someone who has said no to your romantic or sexual propositions "why" then you are looking for one of two things: a way to change their mind or a reason to get angry at them. I should not have to explain to anyone who is old enough to be pursuing sexual or romantic encounters why seeking either of these things is BAD.
When someone says no it is NEVER any of your business why and they NEVER have to justify it.
No means they're not interested and no is where it should end.
Attempting to change their mind after they've said no means you don't respect their boundaries or their choices, it means you care more about your romantic or sexual satisfaction than their comfort or feelings, it means (say it with me class) you are a BAD PERSON who is WRONG.

And I know the "counter" arguments and they're always the same. "No one's saying they have to sleep with/date them, just that their reason for not sleeping with/going out with/giving them a chance is wrong."
No it's not.
Because it doesn't matter what they say or the root of the reason or how it makes your feel; they have expressed that they don't want to enter into that romantic or sexual situation and they should not be rewarded or punished based on which combination of words YOU want to hear afterwards.

Pop Quiz Time! Let's see what you've learned:

Which of these reasons are wrong for not giving someone you met at the bar a "chance"?

a) I'm already seeing someone
b) I don't like vaginas/penises/blondes etc
c) I'm part of a dying native tribe and to keep our blood pure I only date other tribe members
d) I'm part of a whites only cult and to keep our blood pure I only date other cultist
e) I can't get it up after that many shots
f) I find the combination of a masculine jawline and stubble paired with double D's unattractive.

If your answer was any of these you're WRONG and a BAD PERSON (switched it up on you there). There are probably answers you don't like (although if you're asking in the first place and are honest with yourself, there's no answer anyone could give that you WOULD like) and probably ones that offend you, and you don't have to agree with their sentiment but all of them are RIGHT because they are all saying the same thing: I am not comfortable and/or willing to enter into this sexual/romantic situation.

If there is someone out there who doesn't want to get romantically or sexually involved with you whether it's because of you (your age, race, gender, fur affinity account sexuality, weight, looks, smell, education level, finances, personality, political alignment, mental illness, religion, opinion of the current weather, anything) or if it's because of them (past trauma, sexual preference, gender preference, religion, response to your personal smell, mental illness, physical illness, already in a relationship, doesn't date celebrities, only dates celebrities etc etc) literally none of it matters.
No reason is more right/wrong, more/less moral, more/less acceptable or more/less justified.
Some sound prettier than others, some you'd prefer to hear more than others but they're all equal and all the exact same.

It's should ALWAYS be your choice to say no without consequence, no matter what wrapping paper you put on your "no" and you should NEVER feel guilty for saying it, or pressured into giving the "right" response.

Your body is yours, your time is yours and your reasons are yours.
Anyone who tries to change any of that is WRONG and a BAD PERSON.
And can go rot.

I find myself saying this a lot, but if somebody turns you down and says "no" because they're not into you being trans, why would you still want them to sleep with you? They've just pointed out why you're incompatible.

It sucks and it can hurt your feelings, but in the end, do you really want to fuck somebody who's not totally into fucking you back?

If you said "yes" to this question, hit the road, Jack, and don't you come back no more no more no more.
 
Only two reasons put pressure to someone to have sex is a) they are a prostitute, you two already made a deal and you want get started, b) you are in established relationship that has serious sex issues, especially lack of sex, and you want to know if this has potential to get better or should you two brake up.

Even still in the long term relationship the presure should less about having sex and more about working towards situation where having sex happily is realistic and being honest even if means relationship ending. There is no doubt that saying something like “unless our sex live improves I will leave you” puts pressure to have sex but it’s also kinda necessary so that the people in the relationship can know what’s going on, communicate about issues and make informed decisions. Staying in a relationship with a dry period is fine to reasonable people but most aren’t that intrested of permanently sexless marriage. Being able to have frank discussions about sex is important even if might feel like pressure sometimes.
 
Only two reasons put pressure to someone to have sex is a) they are a prostitute, you two already made a deal and you want get started, b) you are in established relationship that has serious sex issues, especially lack of sex, and you want to know if this has potential to get better or should you two brake up.

Even still in the long term relationship the presure should less about having sex and more about working towards situation where having sex happily is realistic and being honest even if means relationship ending. There is no doubt that saying something like “unless our sex live improves I will leave you” puts pressure to have sex but it’s also kinda necessary so that the people in the relationship can know what’s going on, communicate about issues and make informed decisions. Staying in a relationship with a dry period is fine to reasonable people but most aren’t that intrested of permanently sexless marriage. Being able to have frank discussions about sex is important even if might feel like pressure sometimes.
Sure but this was definitely a discussion about unmarried people/people dating/hooking up/whatever

Enough “wah, nwobody wants to touch my twanny peepee” spergs already Lol


Amber the Hedgehog makes an excellent point below. As someone who escaped a manipulative rapist p.o.s. husband I ought to have been more thoughtful and I stand corrected
 
Last edited:
Sure but this was definitely a discussion about unmarried people/people dating/hooking up/whatever

Enough “wah, nwobody wants to touch my twanny peepee” spergs already Lol
I noticed that but I still think bring up established relationships is reasonable because a) sexual coercion and rapes can happen in them b) people already in relationships transition. It’s super common to hear that a parter of a new tranny gets super hard presure to stay and support the tranny. No anger, disgust or sadness allowed because that would transphobic and shallow. You loved him so why can’t you love her?
 
Because it's never been about being into someone. It's about having power over someone. If a normal person found out someone wasn't into them, they may be upset (depending on how they felt about that person) but they'll move on. Troons don't move on, though. They say "I don't care how you feel, you're going to do X with me whether you want to or not, or I'm going to sue the shit out of you/have you arrested." Whether X is sucking that girldick or having them girlballs waxed, it is about forcing the other party to engage in the act. If you point this out, you're a transphobe and a bigot.
Yaniv actually summed it up quite well with his whining about “a protected class.” This kind of troon expects special treatment and often gets it. When they run into a circumstance where they don’t, they become resentful.
 
Trenders do not exist
View attachment 1088549
So the position is:
1. There are no transtrenders. There are no fake trans. Trans people are exploring the suppressed gender they’ve always been.
BUT
2. Detransitioning is a myth. No trans person would detransition. People who detransition were never trans in the first place.
 
So the position is:
1. There are no transtrenders. There are no fake trans. Trans people are exploring the suppressed gender they’ve always been.
BUT
2. Detransitioning is a myth. No trans person would detransition. People who detransition were never trans in the first place.
I like the arrogance of this position. Labelle et al given themselves the authority to determine who is or isn't transgender, entirely on the basis of their own authority.
 
Back