Controversial Power Puff Girls Variant Cover

[Dano]

I think the "uproar" is that the PPG aren't women - they are 6-7 year old girls. And now, you are looking up the skirt of a 6-7 year old girl on the cover of this comic. I am pretty sure one of the articles posted about this says that the writer & artist both have said this isn't a "future depiction" of the PPG, this is them at 6-7 years old as depicted by the artist.

 

That is going to throw sparks...

 

 

 

-slym

 

Exactly. It's morally bankrupt at best.

 

Dan

[Ryan.]

Or the artist was just trying to draw what she thought would be a cool cover:

 

http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2014/01/artist-mimi-yoon-fires-back-in-powerpuff-girls-cover-controversy/

[valiantman]

You can't draw "grown up" and then claim they're 6 years old.

They are not drawn as 6 year olds, they are drawn as "grown up".

 

Whether the Power Puff Girls should be drawn as "grown up" is one question, but it's ridiculous to say they're still 6 in the drawing.

 

Show the drawing to any reasonable person and NONE will say "those girls are 6 years old".

If they don't know what Power Puff Girls are... they're looking at late-teens, early adulthood.

If they DO know what Power Puff Girls are... they might say, "Power Puff Girls are supposed to be young, but that makes them look grown up."

 

The key is that reasonable people WON'T be seeing six year olds. Sixteen, maybe. Adult, possibly.

 

When it comes to decency/obscenity, "reasonable person" is the definition.

 

Tom Hanks played a 12-year-old in a grown man's body in Big.

He was approached by a woman, in her underwear, at night, alone, for intercourse... which he didn't understand.

She saw a grown man. The audience knows he was 12.

Big is still a beloved kid's movie from 25 years ago.

Zero controversy. Ever. It plays on family and kids channels.

 

[slym2none]

Or the artist was just trying to draw what she thought would be a cool cover:

 

http://robot6.comicbookresources.com/2014/01/artist-mimi-yoon-fires-back-in-powerpuff-girls-cover-controversy/

 

Did she not think that showing the upskirt shot of a 6-7 year old girl was going to cause controversy?

 

I guess not... but what do you know, it happened anyway.

 

IOW, just because she sees it one way doesn't mean the rest of the world won't see it another. She has to accept public opinion - what she does with it from there is on her. Look at Affleck as Batman - he isn't ashamed or running away, he has obviously accepted that at least the fanboys aren't happy with him in the cape & cowl.

 

But Affleck isn't drawing pics of little girls in make-up & mini-mini-mini-skirts.

 

 

 

-slym

[Dano]

Sixteen is still a child in my humble opinion. These don't look like grown women to my eye - not really sure how a reasonable person could see it otherwise. So, it IS a big deal and I do understand what the "uproar" is all about.

 

Dan

[Ryan.]

They don't look like 16 year olds to me. They look like lines on paper.

[Dano]

They don't look like 16 year olds to me. They look like lines on paper.

 

 

Dan

[USArmyParatrooper]

You can't draw "grown up" and then claim they're 6 years old.

They are not drawn as 6 year olds, they are drawn as "grown up".

 

Whether the Power Puff Girls should be drawn as "grown up" is one question, but it's ridiculous to say they're still 6 in the drawing.

 

Show the drawing to any reasonable person and NONE will say "those girls are 6 years old".

If they don't know what Power Puff Girls are... they're looking at late-teens, early adulthood.

If they DO know what Power Puff Girls are... they might say, "Power Puff Girls are supposed to be young, but that makes them look grown up."

 

The key is that reasonable people WON'T be seeing six year olds. Sixteen, maybe. Adult, possibly.

 

When it comes to decency/obscenity, "reasonable person" is the definition.

 

Tom Hanks played a 12-year-old in a grown man's body in Big.

He was approached by a woman, in her underwear, at night, alone, for intercourse... which he didn't understand.

She saw a grown man. The audience knows he was 12.

Big is still a beloved kid's movie from 25 years ago.

Zero controversy. Ever. It plays on family and kids channels.

 

Bam. Nail on the head.

[USArmyParatrooper]

Sixteen is still a child in my humble opinion. These don't look like grown women to my eye - not really sure how a reasonable person could see it otherwise. So, it IS a big deal and I do understand what the "uproar" is all about.

 

Dan

 

He gave an age range because nearly impossible to nail down a specific age, and it's impossible all together with cartoon style art work. So he says age 16 *minimum* to young adult, and presto... you go with the smallest number.

 

By the way, in some states it's legal to get married at 16. In some countries it's quite common and not at all taboo.

[Dano]

.

[slym2none]

Sixteen is still a child in my humble opinion. These don't look like grown women to my eye - not really sure how a reasonable person could see it otherwise. So, it IS a big deal and I do understand what the "uproar" is all about.

 

Dan

 

He gave an age range because nearly impossible to nail down a specific age, and it's impossible all together with cartoon style art work. So he says age 16 *minimum* to young adult, and presto... you go with the smallest number.

 

Are you projecting here?

 

By the way, in some states it's legal to get married at 16. In some countries it's quite common and not at all taboo.

 

To get married at 16, you have to have parental consent.

 

In some states, it is legal to marry & have children with your first cousin.

 

In some countries, it is quite common and not at all taboo to kill a rape victim instead of punishing the criminal.

 

What does any of that have to do with this?

 

 

 

-slym

[USArmyParatrooper]

Wow. That is an awful thing to insinuate. I'm done with this. You guys win.

 

Dan

 

You're right. That wasn't called for. I edited it out. I apologize.

[Ryan.]

Isn't this about a drawing? These aren't actual children.

[USArmyParatrooper]

 

To get married at 16, you have to have parental consent.

 

In some states, it is legal to marry & have children with your first cousin.

 

In some countries, it is quite common and not at all taboo to kill a rape victim instead of punishing the criminal.

 

What does any of that have to do with this?

 

 

 

-slym

 

I was making a point that 16 or 18 or whatever is just a number that our government and our culture decided. Different people emotionally mature at different rates. Some 16 year olds vastly more mature than "adults" in their twenties.

 

Am I saying people should display provocative pictures of 16 year olds? No. But it's vastly different than doing so for children.

[slym2none]

Not in the eyes of the law in the USA. And how I feel about it or how another country feels about it is moot. No matter how mature they may be, if I was to take "provocative" pictures of a 16 year old, I would be branded a pedophile.

 

So really, it isn't any different. Both will get you sent to jail, and both will have the inmates really ganging up on you, as I hear that even hardened criminals usually don't treat pedophiles well when incarcerated. The person can say "but they were so mature!" all they want, won't save them either in court or in prison.

 

 

 

-slym

[Dano]

Wow. That is an awful thing to insinuate. I'm done with this. You guys win.

 

Dan

 

You're right. That wasn't called for. I edited it out. I apologize.

 

Thank you and no worries. I think I'm still done with this line of conversation - whether it be lines on a page or real life, I don't think that pointing out that children are being exploited for financial gain is Werthamesque or prudish. This cover was deliberately provocative and in poor taste and realizing their error in judgement, it was rightfully pulled.

 

Dan

[USArmyParatrooper]

Not in the eyes of the law in the USA. And how I feel about it or how another country feels about it is moot. No matter how mature they may be, if I was to take "provocative" pictures of a 16 year old, I would be branded a pedophile.

 

So really, it isn't any different. Both will get you sent to jail, and both will have the inmates really ganging up on you, as I hear that even hardened criminals usually don't treat pedophiles well when incarcerated. The person can say "but they were so mature!" all they want, won't save them either in court or in prison.

 

 

 

-slym

 

Not a pedophile, but depending on your age I agree it's wrong. A pedophile is someone who's sexually attracted to prepubescent children. I don't see anything wrong if a 19 year old (legal adult) dates a 16 year old. But a 40 year old doing so is a bit creepy, and illegal in most states.

 

This is all a side note, though. The image depicts adults, not children. As the other posted noted, much like the movie Big - considered a family movie.

[Comicopolis]

So how old are those lines on the page supposed to be?

[Awax]

Tree Fidy.

[valiantman]

If my example of Big made too much sense... let's step back and see what is being objected to...

 

A drawing.

 

Of at least teenage girls... NOT six year olds in the eyes of ANYONE who is reasonable.

 

It's not like it's a very, very short skirt on an ACTUAL teenage girl who is still a minor.

 

Like, say... this one: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:..._Baby_One_More_Time_%28album%29.png

 

...which sold 30 million copies.