A Review of “Assigned Male”

I originally posted a brief criticism of Sophie Labelle’s webcomic “Assigned Male” on Facebook, and I was met by little response save one claiming that such a webcomic was not fit for review, due to two primary factors. Firstly, criticisms of the comic’s quality would be overly subjective and secondly, criticisms of the comic are in poor taste due to the history of threats and hit pieces against the author. I understand Sophie’s history of threats and whatnot, and I by no means condone that, but I do seriously disagree with the content of the comic in three main ways that I do not believe are inherently subjective. Furthermore, I believe that the wide spread of the comic requires address and review from a position that is not solely transphobic.
THE ART
I’ve not read her entire comic, but I’ve read a few dozen early comics and I’ve read a few dozen recent comics, and while I’ve seen a marked increase in the quality of the art in the comic, I still see problems that have existed without address since her first panel.
First, her backgrounds are devoid of anything. While this is fine in a comic such as XKCD or the like, Assigned Male is, purportedly, a “slice of life” comic, as such the art needs to draw the reader in to the world the characters inhabit. I mean, even if Sophie herself is not capable of drawing complex panels, the comic makes enough money for her to bring in another artist to do the background work.

On top of that, there is an ever-present “same face syndrome” that permeates the comic. Again, this would not be a problem with a comic like XKCD, where the indistinct nature of the characters just helps to highlight the witty writing. Assigned Male is not supposed to be supported by writing alone, since it is a slice of life comic. Take a comic like Questionable Content; EVERY character is drawn uniquely, even background characters with little screen time, because we’re supposed to be drawn into the world, something Assigned Male flatly does not do.
THE WRITING
The writing in this comic is bad for several reasons, the largest and most glaring of which is the fact that the comic stars an 11 year old who is as well versed in queer intersectional theory as someone with at least a few semesters of college under their belts who frequently comes into ideological conflict with paper thin caricatures of “transphobes and bigots” (who have committed acts of aggression as minor as being confused by reading an outdated ID card) and who always emerges victorious in these engagements. Stephie is a Mary Sue, and an annoying one at that given that Sophie seems to occasionally try to maintain the facade of Stephie’s youth by making her randomly overly emotional, in contrast to the strong independence portrayed throughout nearly the entire comic. She’s secure enough in her identity to challenge oddly verbose schoolyard bullies, her principal, and even a guest lecturer, yet she falls to pieces when someone misgenders her on account of her coat. While it is true that people have varying mental states, and something that in one context may be brushed off once may strike home another time, but Sophie does not set that up for us. No warning would be given that Stephie was in such a state, the character would snap into a new childish persona as jarringly as Jekyll snaps into Hyde.

On top of that, the rest of the cast is a mess. They seem to exist either as sounding boards for theory, and as somewhat tokenized minorities. They don’t have characterization beyond their identities, and despite the full name of the comic, they do very little “adventuring”. On top of that, the supporting cast are the only ones that ever change in the comic, though usually incredibly rapidly (Sandr@/Ciel goes from being cis to gnc in a single comic, the sort of transition that can take many people years).
Contrasting that, Stephie is never faced with meaningful self-doubt or growth as a character, which I think is ridiculous. When I was 11 I believed new things daily, and it is not like a 5ish comic arc wherein Stephie changes her mind on a subject, only to gradually bring it back through the course of some sort of “adventure” would ruin the subject matter. If we compare this to another “slice of life” comic, we see this repeatedly; the “does the MC really love the primary love interest???” arc is comparable. Obviously they do, but the time spent with that doubt only reaffirms it, strengthening the theme. Plus, having the MC taken aback by an argument of one of the “villains” would make the ultimate dissection and refutation of their point more organic, satisfying, and less condescending.
These issues could be addressed largely if the comic wasn’t about primary/middle schoolers, and wasn’t slice of life. I could see Assigned Male being something along the lines of Existential Comics or even SMBC, wherein we could have figures who aren’t children (or are fantastical representations of children) discussing these issues in a more humorous educational setting. This frees the comic from the required narratives that are implied with slice of life comics, and can present the ideas more positively, ie, as discussion and elaboration instead of debate.
THE IDEOLOGY OF “ASSIGNED MALE”
I disagree with both many of the ideas Sophie presents in “Assigned Male” and how she seems to claim that her line is the only morally acceptable line. Leaving the fact that she and I presumably disagree with what intersectionality and trans-liberation entail (with me holding the Marxist line of oppression as a function of the Class Struggle, and liberation only coming with the destruction of Capitalism; she has stated that she believes oppression is rooted in the dichotomy between privileged identity vs marginalized identity) she seems to, from the very first comic, hold an unhealthy idealism.
Frankly, someone misunderstanding an ID card only to be corrected by someone whose understanding of transexuality varies minutely with what is correct is not a valid reason for an 11-year-old to forego medical care. In the very first comic, Sophie claims otherwise. On top of that, in the comic Sophie has a penchant for blaming individuals who have internalized prevailing social narratives for personal failings rather than blaming the social narratives that gave them that oppressive opinion in the first place. That is condescending, and is not really educational, as it fails to illustrate the social structures that are REALLY to blame for the issue at hand.
A store clerk who is upset at kids messing up the aisles of the store in which they work is not the enemy, EVEN IF their actions are supporting oppressive structures. Same goes with a fast food guy who is unsure whether to give a GNC kid a girl’s or a boy’s toy. The enemy here are the corporations that force those workers into roles that support oppression, not the workers themselves. Herein is a point I’d like to make: Refutation does not inherently imply condescension. When educating this is indescribably important, and if Sophie does hope to educate with her comic she must be willing to try and understand that difference. It is possible, and indeed is more useful, to reply to people ignorant or even hostile towards the trans movement in a way that does not attack them. Of course, the methodology we use must vary on a case-by-case basis, but when one tries to educate the public using the same tactics we use when fighting reactionaries in the streets all we do is give those reactionaries ammunition to use against us.

On top of all of that, Sophie glosses over a lot of real issues facing both trans/generally non-cis people in favor of ever more put downs against our opponents. For instance, I have never seen anything by her describing the side effects of puberty blockers and transitional medication. I mean, even supposing she writes for the educational benefit exclusively of trans folks shouldn’t this be mentioned at some point? If I was a kid on puberty blockers, reacting poorly to them, wouldn’t it be better to see a comic sympathizing with my struggle and reassuring me of my difficult decision rather than yet another “Gotcha, truscum!” comic? I get that Sophie has gotten threats and has a totally justified hatred of transphobes, but that does not warrant a hyper-focus on that specific issue alone, and seems to be exactly what the transphobes want, given how often I’ve seen “Assigned Male” panels out of context in fascist propaganda.
IN SUMMARY
“Assigned Male” is a difficult comic to review, mainly because the number of threats leveled against the creator, and the creator’s subsequent lumping in of all criticism with those threats. But that does not mean that it can remain un-criticized. Like it or not (and I don’t like it) “Assigned Male” has become a sort of flagship for the Left in general and critics of cis-normativity in particular. Unless we are willing to completely own the comic (which I do not believe is the correct course of action) we NEED to criticize it’s failures. Sophie Labelle may not have signed up for that when she first published the comic, but it is the responsibility she assumes when she takes thousands of dollars a month for it, so she must be held to call for it.
