They’re Making Lola Bunny Less Attractive, and This Was Supposed to Benefit Women, Somehow.

Hold on, what is this? I heard that Lola Bunny is getting a redesign, but that’s just gross. Is that piccie above really of Lola Bunny? She looks like some kind of freaky space-alien-looking-thing.

But that’s not the main thing about her that I’m hearing about. But before this post continues, here’s a short disclaimer:

WARNING: If you’re disturbed by mild sexualization of a cartoon character, you should probably get over yourself.

Now that that’s out of the way, apparently, Lola Bunny was given a breast reduction in an effort to make her less sexually appealing.

In the special way that Slate sees matters, “conservatives want you to be mad that Lola Bunny’s not hot anymore”. This lulzy position overlooks the greater problem that this is what feminism has done to women throughout the western world.

As depicted above, Lola otherwise still has highly feminine characteristics, including diminutive upper-body strength, narrow shoulders, softer eyes, broader hips, and so on. Those hips are quite well-defined, by the way. Those would be what’s referred to as “birther hips”, which are considered strongly appealing by, you know, men. Lola’s otherwise over-the-top feminine appearance makes her breasts all-the-more conspicuous in their absence.

As I see it, the designers of Lola’s character could design her as they wish for what they perceive as the creative benefit of the work that features her. Put another way, if it’s your character, you can design her however you want.

However, if it was the designer’s intention to distract from her sexuality, they’ve likely figured out by now how difficult that can be. In many ways, it couldn’t really be helped by virtue of the fact that sexuality is something that occurs in the mind. An artist can’t really control whether anyone could perceive a work in a sexual manner.

If an artist wanted to make something that was impossible to perceive with an element of sexuality, that in itself would be pretty-much impossible. Humans can perceive a sexual element, even in things that wouldn’t seem intrinsically sexual. Like pizza, which is a food item. I don’t get it, but it’s something that some people find sexual.

What’s more, sexuality is an intrinsic element of humanity. It might even be that sexuality is the most human of traits. The moment that something is humanized (such as, for example, when anthromorphizing a cartoon rabbit), it gains a sexual identity. The only time when it’s acceptable to not consider a sexual identity is when it’s not known, such as when the sex of an unborn child is not yet identified. But once it’s sex is known, it’s not acceptable to call the child an “it” again.

When you draw a cartoon character of your own, and call it a “her”, you’re acknowledging the existence of her vagina, provided that the character is a human female that is anatomically consistent with other human females. It is then assumed that this characteristic plays a role, even if slight, among other characters that they interact with (except in some cases when it is established that the character plays a non-traditional societal role).

If you think I just stated a lot of highly obvious stuff, you’re well enough off to not have to be told as much. But not everyone out there is as well off. Particularly, the radical intersectional feminists who mistakenly view sexualization as a form of objectification. But the fact that they’re wrong isn’t stopping them from passionately trying to become authoritarian moral busybodies.

Intersectional feminists, being absolutely tone-deaf, misses the irony of the fact that, on International Women’s Day, the design change of a cartoon rabbit that isn’t real, and therefore cannot be an actual victim, makes the news by becoming less feminine. While this is occurring, women in the middle-east have almost no rights to speak of compared to men, and are legally kept in harems as sexual slaves.

Priorities, much?

As one might imagine, the furry community is furious about this news. They’ve become yet another western creative community that has become negatively impacted by intersectionalism’s obsession with making everything it touches less entertaining. They’re a sorta-dubious addition to the club, but they’re an addition to the club, non-the-less.

You know whose cartoon bunnies remain unaffected by western censorship? Anime.

Today has shown us yet more reason why more and more westerners are turning towards Japanese manga and anime. One can really hand it to the Japanese for making sure that entertainment is still entertaining.

If you’re siding with intersectional feminism and have managed to stick around this far, please stand by for a send-off from Akira Kogami:

When western entertainment fails hard, along comes anime to sweep up yet more viewers. How long will it take for Hollywood et al. to figure out the obvious? I don’t know, but there’s a continual flow of new anime to watch in the time it takes for it to happen.

1 thought on “They’re Making Lola Bunny Less Attractive, and This Was Supposed to Benefit Women, Somehow.

Leave a Reply to Benjamin Goldstein Cancel reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out /  Change )

Google photo

You are commenting using your Google account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s