• When you click on links to various merchants on this site and make a purchase, this can result in this site earning a commission. Affiliate programs and affiliations include, but are not limited to, the eBay Partner Network.

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

Controversial Power Puff Girls Variant Cover

Started by USArmyParatrooper,

60 posts in this topic

Crimebuster

Crimebuster

Posted
Posted
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.

 

 

Except the characters are, in fact, six year olds. So I'm not sure how considering them to be six year olds is unreasonable.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
USArmyParatrooper

USArmyParatrooper

Posted
  • Author
Posted
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.

 

 

Except the characters are, in fact, six year olds. So I'm not sure how considering them to be six year olds is unreasonable.

 

And the 12 year old boy in the Tom Hanks movie BIG ended up in an adult body and had sex. Zero outrage. But depict an older version of the Powerpuff girls wearing short skirts and stop the press!

Link to comment
Share on other sites
valiantman

valiantman

Posted
Posted
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.

 

 

Except the characters are, in fact, six year olds. So I'm not sure how considering them to be six year olds is unreasonable.

Because they're not drawn as six. Not even close.

 

When you draw a picture of a teenager... it's a picture of a teenager.

When you draw a picture of a young adult... it's a picture of a young adult.

 

You can't tell a reasonable person that they are wrong for seeing what has actually been drawn.

That's like saying, "don't think of pink elephants".

 

"Don't see teenagers... they're six!"

 

They look like teenagers... at least... and they're all clothed more than anyone at the local swimming pool.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted
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.

 

Why does it say 'Little' in the top left corner?

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Santos208

Santos208

Posted
Posted

Nothing wrong IMO, there worst cover out there, like way way worst.

 

The monkey isn't really looking up their skirts, his eyes are pointed towards the reader, not up the skirts.....

 

IDK what the big deal is. I've seen variants with half naked females or sexually exposed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
gradejunky

gradejunky

Posted
Posted

I see nothing wrong with the cover. If others find it offensive then I can agree to their sentiments. What I will say though is that the world, and this country in general, is becoming way too politically correct. Let's all take a step back and realize what is really important in this day and age-like preventing a full scale world war, not letting the gov't of this country disarm the law abiding citizens, stopping overpopulation/deforestation/total depletion of non-renewable resources on a global scale etc.

 

Again, maybe this cover is a bit risque, but it has been pulled and that is that. They did the right thing by not inadvertently setting themselves up for a lawsuit by the first individual who saw a payday in their future....'nuff said.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Crimebuster

Crimebuster

Posted
Posted
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.

 

 

Except the characters are, in fact, six year olds. So I'm not sure how considering them to be six year olds is unreasonable.

Because they're not drawn as six. Not even close.

 

 

That's exactly why some people had a problem with the cover.

 

(shrug)

 

I understand where you are coming from. But I get the impression you don't understand where people on the other side are coming from. Not sure where the disconnect is here.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Gunnz

Gunnz

Posted
Posted

Ok, time to play both sides of the fence (debate wise.... I know what you were thinking...)

 

Yes the cover is awkward and I'm not really sure if its for little girls as a grown up representation, big girls with a more relatable design, or guys who think young girls dressed like older girls is hot...

 

Ok, that last line changed my mind. Its weird.

 

Think Strawberry Shortcake would sell again if they gave her a bigger rack?

 

Answer....

 

No one should ever know that answer.

 

So, what I've learned from this.

 

A. I can out debate anyone, including myself.

 

B. despite the artists best intentions, there are creepy peeps out there who see this in a way its not meant to be seen.

 

C. This cover had ruined my memories of Power Puff Girls.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Comicopolis

Comicopolis

Posted
Posted
I blame the overly sensitive comic store owner who started it all...wonder if he double bags his saga comics so the kiddies can't look inside.

 

Would have saved me a lot of trouble if they had been.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Go to topic listing