Nylon Says Please Stop Sharing Those Hilarious Alien Cartoons—the Artist Is Pro-Life

The online fashion magazine warns readers that Strange Planet's Nathan Pyle is maybe pro-life and "we should be more careful with what we're sharing."


Screenshot via Strange Planet Instagram

If you have been on social media lately, you have probably seen Strange Planet, a four-panel cartoon strip by artist and author Nathan W. Pyle. The cartoons depict aliens doing mundane tasks and describing them in overly literal terms that make them sound ridiculous: A Valentine's Day card, for instance, is a picture of "a vital organ being wounded."

Funny stuff, right? Well, not anymore. Strange Planet is, as the kids say, #canceled.

On Monday, Nylonan online fashion magazine that reads like it's staffed entirely by 13-year-olds—signal-boosted a shocking discovery: Pyle is pro-life. He even had the nerve to share this opinion semi-publicly. Once, in 2017, he made a comment on his personal Instagram about how proud he was of his girlfriend and "all the courageous mothers" who attended the March for Life.

Nylon's intrepid reporter notes that we all should have seen this coming. "It's clear that we shouldn't have been surprised that he has such conservative views," she writes. "The first line in his bio is 'I follow Jesus,' which should clue you in about his religious leanings."

The subhed of the article: "We should be more careful with what we're sharing," as if re-posting a Pyle cartoon is akin to juggling knives.

I have complained many times previously about the pernicious tendency in certain hyper-woke circles to gang up on anybody who expresses the slightest dissent from leftist orthodoxy. Here, I'll simply close by noting that Pyle's alleged pro-life views are not exactly a fringe position.

NEXT: 'Music City' Doesn't Want You Making Music at Home

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Is it actually canceled or is it just that some online magazine few have ever heard of whined about it?

    1. Its an online magazine with no connection to the cartoonist whatsoever. The writer just felt the need to "out" the artist. Because reasons.

      1. Because the writer is a whiny 13 year old girl.

      2. I am making 80$ an hour? After been without work for 8 months, I started freelancing over this website and now I couldn't be happier. After 3 months on my new job my monthly income is around 15k a month? Cause someone helped me telling me about this job now I am going to help somebody else?
        Check it out for yourself ..
        CLICK HERE??

    2. Apparently not actually canceled, at least until Instagram gets around to responding.

    3. Man, whatever happened to free speech?

      1. The Stalinist - I mean 'Liberals' - of this country have NEVER been in favor of free speech. They have, occasionally, hidden behind the First Amendment, but that's a good deal difference from respecting it, or the rights of other people.

      2. I like to distinguish between leftists and liberals: liberals still stand up for free speech, while leftists want to stamp out anything that's not part of their GroupThink.

        Alas, leftists are dominant on Team Blue currently.

        1. While you're watching your Jordan Peterson videos, watch the one about ideologues and maybe come up with your own thoughts in your own words next time.

          1. You might want to do the same.

      3. Isn't it the height of libertarianism to be able to discriminate for any reason? Or no reason at all?

        1. No, that's the moronic caricature of libertarianism by the uninformed...

          1. Section 3.5 of the 2018 Libertarian Platform is a caricature of Libertarianism by the uninformed?

            That's pretty harsh. Whether or not they chose to write a caricature into the party platform is up for debate, but there's no doubt they were informed when they made that decision.

      4. This is an article about an op-ed in an online-magazine about a cartoonist. There are no calls for government action, just for folks to exercise their free association in a specific way. There is no inappropriate coercion or influence going on.

        Simply put, even if you don't like it, there are no free speech concerns here. Just someone using their free speech in a way you don't like.

    4. Why everyone is confused just join at home online job .This is really good opurtunity for home mom just join this website and Earn money by monthly check .So u cant be miss and join this site as soon as posible .
      Here what i am doo ?


      1. You should get an iPhone. Predictive speech will write better sentences for you.

        1. bots don't gots no iPhones....

  2. Could we have a list of all advertisers in 'nylon', so we can boycott them if we choose?

    1. You're learning from the left!

      Good job!!!

      1. No, he's suggesting he has a choice on whether or not to boycott. That's not leftist at all.

    2. Probably nothing a 'normal' person would want, let alone buy....its a fashion magazine, so God only k ows what kind of shit they hock in that rag.

      1. Teen anal sex advice probably

        1. Which edition? Asking for a frie... Ok. Asking for me.

          1. Pretty sure their advice is, "Wait to have anal sex until you can be properly introduced to the pleasures of the practice by, oh, a writer for a fashion web site. And if he turns out to be one of those "Two Minute Wonders", count your lucky dirt star, girl!!"

  3. Kudos to Robby for having the steel will necessary to wade through such articles. I know that what I should do, as a critical thinker, is to also read it and develop my own opinion. But fuck me, I think I'd rather have my balls crushed by stiletto heels.

    1. That isn't free.

      1. No. They charge extra for the stilettos. Balls crushed with loafers is far more affordable.

        1. The women who would crush balls for free wear more sensible shoes.

          1. And braid their armpit hair

  4. What people in the fashion industry do not have the mentality of 13 year olds?

    1. None. It is a requirement for entry into the field. And it is actually a sensible requirement. The fashion industry is driven by the tastes of gay men and women who want to dress like teenagers forever. Given that fact, it is hard to see how anyone who didn't have the mentality of a 13 year old girl, could ever be successful in the industry.

      1. John is just mad that Bebe was not interested in his proposed line of striped, black and white, office sweatpants with American flags on the butt cheeks.

        1. Well yeah. How could they possibly have turned that down?

        2. Fortunately I bagged six pairs at $2 a piece from the surplus stock John was left with.

      2. Two ads I've been seeign a lot of on TV are for poshmark and the realreal, which if I understand correctly both are basically online consignment stores for "designer" fashions. For poshmark, there's one woman claiming she bought her new car with her poshmark money...I wonder how much money had she spent on clothes that selling them used could buy a car? And the realreal commercials?...I'm not sure who wears the stuff they include in the ad.

        In both cases, I'm stunned that the ads are ever running during the shows I'm watching. I simply cannot believe that anyone watching the Justice channel or the Comet channel (cord cutting means OTA TV for me) is in the demographic for used Hermes and Gucci.

    2. It's not known as 'the rag trade' for nothing.

    3. That is when most of them stopped developing.

  5. "We should be more careful with what we're sharing."

    "Please, boil your bodily fluids."

  6. If I were to refuse to listen to every musician with dumb opinions, it would be very quiet in my car.

    1. I sometimes think this. I miss the days of being blissfully unaware of other people's political opinions.

    2. I take that approach with Hollywood. There's a lot of good material out there... From the early 80s.

  7. What's going on at Reason today? We haven't even gotten the morning roundup and already there have been two pieces that failed to denounce anti-choicers.

    I mean, what's next? Are you going to start telling us "Hey, maybe people who oppose open borders aren't so bad after all"?

    1. It's clearly the Russians at work.

    2. Reason never censored pro-life opinions. They just happened to be held by a minority of the staff. Perhaps conservatives would be in favor of some sort of action to affirm that a certain percentage of the staff hold conservative opinions on abortion?

    3. You fucking suck. Do something different, you boring-ass parody person.

      1. Don't listen, OBL.

  8. "an online fashion magazine that reads like it's staffed entirely by 13-year-olds?signal-boosted a shocking discovery: Pyle is pro-life. He even had the nerve to share this opinion semi-publicly. Once, in 2017, he made a comment on his personal Instagram about how proud he was of his girlfriend and "all the courageous mothers" who attended the March for Life."

    This is just a brutal description. You have become ruthless Robby.

    Also, you shouldn't be surprised by this. Why do you think so many "journalists" (more aptly described as propagandists) were willing to accept that those Catholic kids were harassing a native american, despite video disproving their belief? Even that knucklehead from "Who's the Boss?" (who, amazingly, is actually dumber than Tony Danza) admitted that it didn't matter what the video showed because those kids were coming back from The March for Life.

    1. Robbie is becoming. It's been an interesting transformation.

      1. He was red pilled so hard by that Covington fiasco.

    2. Hate to say it but "reads like it's staffed entirely by 13-year-olds" is not ruthless, it's catty.

      1. He didn't preface it with "to be sure", so I'll take it.

  9. "The first line in his bio is 'I follow Jesus,' which should clue you in about his religious leanings." This might be the most hilarious line I've read in a long time.

    1. Is Jesus on twitter? I'm surprised he hasn't been banned

      1. "Give Jack Dorsey that which is Jack Dorsey's."

      2. Shadow banned, probably.

      3. You testify against yourselves that you are indeed the descendants of those who murdered the prophets. Go ahead and finish what your ancestors started. Snakes! Sons of vipers! How will you escape the judgment of hell? - The Real JC @HaMashiach

        Account Suspended
        Twitter suspends accounts that violate the
        Twitter Rules

    2. Everytime I think there's no culture war, some clueless bint like this thirteen year old comes along and tells me I'm wrong. Merely believing in Jesus is beyond the cultural pale nowadays.

      1. In all honesty, "merely believing in Jesus" is different from making that belief the very first thing you mention in describing yourself. That doesn't make the fashion magazine's suggestion to boycott his cartoons because of his beliefs any less dumb, but still.

      2. Jesus may or may not exist, but I'm betting on the former. What has no chance of existing is anything positive coming from progessives.

      3. If someone believing in Jesus gets their panties in a bunch, I wonder what they would do if they understood my gods?

        Hint: they are war gods.

        1. Oh, poor Bear...

          Your gods are being castrated as we speak. There is woke heathenism, so woke that it drinks white guilt from the skull of it's (white) enemy.

          The Vikweens of today do not wear horns on their diva cups, and they sing the eddas in soprano, just like their wives.

        2. I'm an agnostic/atheist (depending on operating definition), so I don't believe in any of it.

          That said, if I had to choose, I'd go for most pantheons (including the Norse one) over any iteration of Abraham's god, for the simple reason that they don't claim to be perfect, and they don't demand un-earned love.

          TLDR;? Don't assume that people's objections to the god of Abraham extend to all gods.

          1. If I had to choose, I'd worship the sun no doubt. Without it, everything sucks for billions of miles.

        3. Do they dress really cool? Are they 40% gay and 10% trans?? Have they adequately denounced the alt-right?

  10. It is far more important not to sully yourself with anything created by someone who doesn't share your views than to find happiness in simple things. If anyone with even the smallest tangential impact on your life thinks differently from you, you must reject them wholly and then loudly broadcast your unbending stance on such travesties.

    1. It seems that's the actual belief system of the far left.

    2. Accurately stated.

      I wonder if they think his comics are somehow subversely attempting to brainwash people into thinking differently, rather than just being entertainment.

  11. The real reason for not sharing this comic is that it isn't funny.

    1. Thank you. Most of these online comics are total shit. I don't think I have ever had a genuine laugh out loud moment from any of them.

      1. Some of this one are funny, but the gag wears out fast. After the first few, my reaction was, "OK, OK, I get it already."

        For real online humor you want xkcd. I don't know how that guy keeps coming up with them.

        1. I don't know how that guy keeps coming up with them.

          He's no Gary Larson and even then, fire enough shots in enough different directions and at least a few are bound to land.

          1. Even Gary Larson missed once in a while.

        2. "For real online humor you want xkcd. I don't know how that guy keeps coming up with them."

          He's not a Christian, is he?

          1. No idea.

    2. He created one of the funniest comics I've seen in a long time:

      Not bad for a christfag.

      1. Clearly this proves he's not a creationist.

    3. I actually think his comics are pretty good. Better than like 95% of the stuff I ever see on the web.

  12. Comrades, Nylon's thought police has reported Nathan Pyle for thought crimes and will be taken to Room 101.

    1. What's in room 101?

      1. "You asked me once, what was in Room 101. I told you that you knew the answer already. Everyone knows it. The thing that is in Room 101 is the worst thing in the world."

        In Nineteen Eighty-Four by George Orwell, Room 101 is the tortune chamber in the Ministry of Love where persons with doubleplus ungood thoughts are corrected.

        1. Well, thanks for explicitly outlining my implicit reference. Did I just get Libsplained?

          1. The sobriquet had hitherto been a mere shadow, a meaningless thing, to me. The first glance at him reveals the origin of his sobriquet. Working his will whithersoever he fancies, unseen, unknown but for his sobriquet.

  13. Stories like this make me want to go have a sammich at Chik-Fil-A...

    1. Feminists should be tied to the Chick-Fil-A fryers with enough rope to reach the bedroom.

      1. They really shouldn't, though. The most refreshing thing about Chick-Fil-A is their outstanding service and attitude. I'd hate to sully that by turning it into a sweatshop for perpetual complainers who have no productive marketable skills.

  14. Never heard of this guy before now - maybe some kind of bastardized version of the Streisand effect going on here, with more people knowing about this dude's work. In any case, on his facetagram page he posted this. The fucking responses to it are abhorrent. The woke-ing class shit-heels are ravenous.

    1. Then they should stop killing each other.

  15. All it takes is for one person or blog day a thing and then it spreads like wildfire without anyone actually looking into it. My feed is of people "canceling" him without even a link for people to look into.

    Nathan's wife is Soojin which is a Korean name. His tweet that shows his "anti-choice" belief was a actually a retweet of her own story about how she wasn't aborted. South Korea began population controls in the 60s and boys were preferred over girls. It's not surprising that her life being threatened by tight government mandates and social beliefs would make her a staunch anti-abortion proponent.

  16. The subhed of the article: "We should be more careful with what we're sharing," as if re-posting a Pyle cartoon is akin to juggling knives.

    More like sharing a used needle.

  17. Oh my God, fuck people.

    A very mainstream political opinion about abortion is so problematic that comlpetely apolitical art by someone holding the view must be censored?

    What is wrong with people? Talking to people who you disagree with is good. A diversity of opinions is good. Fuck.

    1. Diversity of opinion is NOT good. If people think whatever they want, how can they think the right things?


      1. No one believes more firmly than Comrade Napoleon that all animals are equal. He would be only too happy to let you make your decisions for yourselves. But sometimes you might make the wrong decisions, comrades, and then where should we be?

    2. Monty Python had it figured out decades ago.

      "And pray that there's intelligent life somewhere out in space, cause there's bugger all down here on Earth."

    3. Choosing to not give someone free publicity is not the same as censoring them.

      1. This is true, and I completely support people who see the article and decide to stop sharing the comics themselves.

        The pernicious part of this, is the implicit call to shame, call out, and "cancel" people who DO continue to share.

        1. So a boycott is permissible only so long as you don't tell anyone about it?

          Yeah, that makes sense.

  18. Really?
    13 year old kids censoring other people's speech?
    Oh, well.
    Might as well start them out young before the learn the meaning of freedom of speech.

    1. This actually is a lot more Animal Farm than 1984.

    2. There are no actual 13 year olds involved here.

      1. Just those of mental age 13 and younger.

  19. Never heard of nylon and will try to erase any memory of it from here.funny is funny, nyloners

    1. I can't cotton a magazine with a synthetic title.

  20. I'd been told that it was folks like white supremicists that didn't want people who are not like them to have any rights, but it turns out it's Progressives.

    Who'd a thunk?

  21. I'd been told that it was folks like white supremicists that didn't want people who are not like them to have any rights, but it turns out it's Progressives.

    Who'd a thunk?

    1. Not supporting an artist is the same as denying them rights?

      1. Maoism is pretty explicit in its desire to coerce.

  22. So I'm guessing no one at Nylon spoke up and said "Hey, maybe we could not be assholes?".

  23. Burn the Unbeliever! BURN!

  24. If I stopped watching movies because I disagreed with the actors, I'd have to stop watching movies.

    1. You say that like it's a bad thing.

  25. This is an astoundingly badly-written article for giving the impression that the cartoon is canceled without any confirmation that is the case.

  26. Nylon article is by Casey Miller.

    "The guy who writes these Nylon articles has really bad opinions on abortion."

  27. Google pay me $280 to 390$ each hour for internet working from home.i have made $35K on this month on line do business from home.i'm a ordinary understudy and that i paintings 2 to 5 hours in keeping with day in my greater time efficiently from home..every body can perform this interest and win extra dollars on-line in low renovation via truly take after this connection and take after subtle factors


  28. The Left's belief system is so fragile and delicate that it can't allow opposing views to live in the light of day.

    1. So the 1972 LP running candidate John Hospers is now the left to y'all Landover Baptists? Hospers helped organize the Libertarian Defense Caucus urging NO surrender to the Soviet communist empire.

  29. Wouldn't it be fun to put together a website where you would be asked for your agreement with certain statements from 1-5...strongly disagree to strongly agree.
    We could do 20 questions...or maybe even 30.
    For example relative to this article
    "There should be no restrictions on abortion at all".
    But then we add all the others...
    "All guns should be confiscated"
    "Everybody should be able to open carry a gun"
    After 20 questions are answered you are then shown the # of people that agree with you.
    But after 20 questions the likelihood of a match is on the order of 1-out-of-95,367,431,640,625 or unlikely you would match anybody in the world. There might be some bias to low/high answers that would make it more likely for a match...but still pretty unlikely. Especially when you can put in all your friends names/email or such and it would ask the other person to allow them to see your matching and end up showing you that they don't agree with you....but not tell you on what....would drive 'em nuts.

    1. Nah.

      You've got three problems.

      First is your math problem: you fell right into the Birthday Paradox. The probability of collisions is exponential.

      Second is the social problem: people don't hold values in vacuums. There are many values that will correlate, many trend-lines to find, and so-on. Further, when folks form social groups (families, friends, clubs, whatever), they tend to share values over time. While a group initially might have very divergent views on many topics, over time they'll start to conform with each other on many topics.

      And then there's the big one: some views are strong beliefs strongly held. These are the ones people fight over. But many of those beliefs are going to be weak beliefs weakly held. Folks might disagree, but they don't really care. For most people, most of their beliefs will be of this second group. It's just not important to them if you share a given belief.

      So I don't think it'd be as bad initially as you do. And then when folks talked to each other to figure out where they disagreed, they'd find that most of it was on the stuff that wasn't as important to them anyway (otherwise they'd have already selected their friends for those beliefs).

  30. Ask Robbie whether believing that vaping is more dangerous than smoking is a fringe position. Sullum says the superstition is spreading. The 1972 Libertarian Platform urging men with guns to back away from pregnant ladies was a fringe position when male George Wallace Dixiecrats were printing up laws telling women how to reproduce--or else! Then the Supreme Court promptly copied that population plank into the Roe v Wade decision extending individual rights to women in accordance with the first three words of the 14th Amendment. An individual right as a moral claim to freedom of action does not change--not even when the number who regard the notion with bovine incomprehension increases. It is in Canada a legal claim to freedom, and even Ireland has escaped the thrall of coercive superstition.

  31. Thanks for posting this, it prompted me to sign up for his Patreon. This witch hunt nonsense has gotten tiresome.

  32. I realize that I might be compartmentalizing a bit much but I've never liked basing your enjoyment of someone's work on whatever else they're involved in. Some of the actors that I enjoy watching in movies and TV shows, some of the writers whose book I enjoy reading, some of the folks that create cartoons and other media have political ideologies that are about as opposite as they could be from mine. I've decided that it doesn't affect their ability to do what they do for a living and so it doesn't conflict with my ability to enjoy their work. (I just tend to ignore what they say in their off-hours.)
    I've noticed that a lot of liberals have trouble with that kind of compartmentalizing. Sometimes it's full-blown virtue-signaling. Other times it's simply just the lack of capacity to let go of ideology. So you get boycotts of Chick-fil-a simply because the owner supports pro-life causes. You get backlash against a movie based on an enormously popular book because the writer of that book has blogged something about believing that homosexuality is wrong.
    And you get this attempt to keep people from reading something they like because the writer is pro-life.
    What's notable in all these cases is that the work these people do doesn't contain their political ideology. You couldn't tell from the food, the HR policies, the script, or the cartoon. There's something over-zealously jugemental about the type of reaction Nylon had.

  33. Speaking of obtuse prejudices against content creators, Robby, you're ageist to say that Nylon "reads like it's staffed entirely by 13-year-olds".

    Admittedly, some folks are too woke on some things. But on youth rights, most folks still aren't woke enough.

  34. That doesn't make the fashion magazine's suggestion to boycott his cartoons because of his beliefs any less dumb, but still.

  35. Daniel. true that Esther`s storry is surprising... on tuesday I got a great Smart ForTwo since getting a check for $5857 this last 5 weeks and a little over ten grand this past-month. this is actually the nicest work I have ever had. I actually started 9-months ago and straight away started to bring in over $73.. per-hour. I follow the details here,

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.