Lurker > superman 2000

Quite misogynistic of you, @Darmik , to assume that Lola having a bosom had everything to do with how she was perceived by a male character, and couldn't possibly have been because the artists just wanted to anthropomorphize her in such a way. As if Bugs had never before been attracted to a female character without boobs.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Conflict posted...

TC you need to see a therapist

No, I do not.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

I didn't say that.

The point is that boobs on the character says more than the lack of boobs. Lola had boobs in the original so Bugs had things to be attracted to.

All of this was pulled straight from your ass. Again, you're done.

Then again you're the guy who called Penelope the Nude Cat and called Lola a human with rabbit features so I don't think I can really make this sort of thing clear to a guy like you.

Ignoring the context of both statements to make them seem senseless. Very intellectually honest of you.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Also the target audience for Bluey is 5-7. I was in that age range when I watched Space Jam in the cinemas.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bluey_(2018_TV_series)

"Bluey is an Australian animated television series for preschoolers"

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Ryuko_Chan posted...

you are a grown man having a tantrum about this,

Never happened.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Nobody said anything about appropriate. I'm talking about popularity.

And your argument is rubbish.

No girl of any age gives a shit about Looney Tunes or Lola Bunny.

Demonstrably false.

This is their attempt to change that.

How does removing boobs make people care about Lola? Your argument is bad and stupid.

Meanwhile here you are crying to girls that they should want boobs on their cartoon animals.

Never happened once.

You're finished.


---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Ryuko_Chan posted...

just admit youre a furry

Way to rub those two brain cells together to come up with an original insult.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

And yet Lola Bunny never had her own show. Where are the girls outraged over her design change?

I'm sorry, but based on how often you move goalposts and use irrelevant arguments to make irrelevant points, it's become too obvious that you just don't know how to argue.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

That's not what I asked.

I'm basing it on characters popular with little girls right now. The concept of having to differentiate girl animal characters with breasts and human anatomy is dated

^You are comparing a cartoon for preschoolers with the Looney Tunes, which feature guns/bombs/dynamite/cartoonishly violent slapstick/etc. You do realize that kids as a demographic still comes with subdivisions, right? A cartoon for 8-to-12-year-olds may not be appropriate for preschoolers, and a cartoon for 14-year-olds may not be appropriate for 8-12.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

That's not what I asked.

ALL AROUND. As in with both girls and boys. Yes, that does answer what you asked; you're just splitting hairs and constantly moving the goalposts because you have nowhere to go.

I'm basing it on characters popular with little girls right now.

Lola having a bosom isn't going to be what kids use to determine whether or not they like her. Again, what are you basing this odd belief on??

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Also, @Darmik , you're once again making that weird implication that boobies would automatically make a female character less appealing -- even to her own demographic. Where exactly does this belief come from? You think girls would relate less to a female character that has a bit of a developed chest?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Emeraldious posted...

I don't feel like this topic warrants so many posts.

Truthfully, it doesn't. I expected to get a few pages worth of replies at the most, and some decent discourse out of it.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Was Space Jam a popular movie with girls?

Yes. Space Jam was commercially successful (though critically, not so much) all around when it came out. Did you not exist in 1996/1997?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

R_Jackal posted...

I mean, I covered that. The answer is marketing decided her "sultriness" didn't matter, the current product lead/artist decided to go a different way. Done deal.

Now, if marketing DID decide her being sultry would put more butts in seats and sell more gear, they absolutely would have pushed for it.

So long and short, she's not real and her character is malleable, so they changed it to fit the new gameplan.

Fair enough.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

So? Are they popular?

Yes, they were popular when Space Jam came out.


---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Just gonna leave this here again...

https://youtu.be/WP5s1pQ0AII?t=403

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

It's not a minor thing for stuff like toys. Again she's gonna be out on the same shelves as characters like Peppa Pig and Bluey.

There are toys and plushies of the original Lola Bunny.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

I'm talking about her design not her character.

That makes your argument even worse. You're basically saying that Lola having boobs makes her a worse character overall, which is...actually pretty misogynistic.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

i mean so are you

I never said I don't care about this, like you did. See what I mean when I say you're bad at arguing?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

look the fact is youre an adult who spent the last several hours arguing about this

if you believe it, then that's creepy. if you don't, then that's still creepy but for a different reason lol

I don't care what you think. You're a nobody on the internet.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

That the original depiction of Lola is the more unique and awkward one compared to her current rendition.

You literally don't know this. Until the second movie comes out, all we can say about Lola's personality is that she'll likely be less sultry. Design-wise, she just doesn't have a bosom now. You can't say that her not having a bosom does something dramatically beneficial for the character without even knowing how she's going to handled overall, as if her breasts stood in the way of some profound marketability opportunities.


---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

who cares?

Clearly you, as you're still here.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

R_Jackal posted...

If we're being honest: The real reason is it doesn't matter to the intended audience. The previous Space Jam's audience is, well, aging. They're not going to go out of their way to consume the cartoons and other things the IP holders have. If you're buying your child a Lola action figure/doll solely because she has boobs I would honestly question your parenting approaching.

So for the long and short of it: Marketing analyzed your opinion beforehand. It doesn't matter to the bottom line.

Whether or not Lola has boobs is obviously very minor and inconsequential in the grand scheme of things. All I've been doing is challenging the notion that her having boobs (like, at all) is part of why she was inappropriate (flawed logic with problematic implications), when the reality is that what made her sexual/sensual was the fact that she wore a somewhat revealing jersey and was deliberately written to be semi-sultry in the original.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

@Doom_Art , you're not good at it though.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

nah no ya don't

Why are you here?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

like I said, it's obvious TC doesn't believe any of this but it's frightening that he's this into it.

I believe it.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

FortuneCookie posted...

According to most animators, breasts are propaganda perpetrated by males. Women don't actually have them.

Lol, sure seems that way sometimes.

Apparently, we're not alone though.

https://youtu.be/WP5s1pQ0AII?t=403

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

l0gic posted...

Even though TC is right, I'm frightened by how long this topic has lasted...

I had the day off and I love to argue.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

@Darmik , your argument has changed about 15 times. Which is it? Female cartoons with boobs are inherently sexualized? No, wait, why doesn't Penelope the nude cat have boobs? No, wait, Lola's competition prevents her from having boobs! Jesus, make up your mind already. Which easily refutable position do you wish to uphold?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

why are you humoring this nonsense, darmik

Because both of you love me.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Going by your topic here you never wanted to 'debate' about this either. You wanted to whine like a manchild that the bunny you had a crush on isn't designed for you anymore.

I have never had a crush on a cartoon character. I've been extremely patient with you, but now your strawmanning bullshit is annoying.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Lola was also a character created in the 90s that didn't fit anything set from Looney Tunes before. Was that a problem then? Or does that not count? Lola Bunny is competing with characters like Bluey with kids now. They're gonna do what they want to appeal to modern kids as they always have done. Rabbits with boobs is something that grown men on the internet care about.

What does literally ANY of this have to do with making Lola needlessly flat? You just went into a dumb, spastic, irrelevant rant analyzing everything EXCEPT the main point I've been making since post one.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Why? We have established that plenty of kids animal cartoon characters do not have breasts right? Including Looney Tunes?

We're going in circles. I already addressed this point, as well as the next point you're going to make, along with the one after that.

Lola had boobs. The new makers wanted her to be less sexy. Removing her sultry energy accomplishes that. Removing her boobs is overkill, because simply having boobs doesn't automatically = sex appeal. Therefore, she was over-corrected. The end.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Also, please stick to one argument. It feels like you're just moving goalposts on the fly at this point.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Design sensibilities can also vary from artist to artist and decade to decade for the same character yes?

But again, we know why they got rid of her boobs. I'm criticizing the reasoning.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Why doesn't Minnie Mouse or Daisy Duck have boobs?

Because design sensibilities vary from artist to artist, company to company, etc.. Why does Mickey Mouse wear pants, but not a shirt? Why does Donald wear a shirt, but no pants? Why doesn't Pluto speak, but Goofy does? Characters are allowed to be different.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Again she would literally be the only Looney Tune with human anatomy like boobs. Don't you think that's odd? Don't you think it's odd that the only Looney Tunes who have boobs are Bugs and Daffy's girlfriends?

No, because that's just how most female animal characters are anthropomorphized; they're usually given realistic hair (not just elongated strands of fur/feathers, like Bugs & Daffy), a bosom, some clothes (to at least conceal the bosom), eyelashes, and sometimes lipstick. And that's when they're not just female versions of the male character with a bow (ala Minnie Mouse).

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Even then the example is from a recent Looney Tunes show to fit the style already established by Lola.

This is assumption. Some female characters simply have breasts and aren't sexualized. It's harmless.

Now ask yourselves why the artists 'desire' the things they do and maybe you'll figure it out.

We know that Lola was deliberately designed with sex appeal in mind for the original Space Jam. The writers of the sequel have stated that they want her to be less sexualized, so they understandably took away her sultriness. I just find it weird that they also got rid of her boobs, because there's nothing about her having boobs that inherently means "sex appeal". Therefore, I feel it's an over-correction.

Penelope shows just fine that Looney Tunes can depict animals as female without boobs and swaying hips and she is a significantly older character than Lola. Is bringing Lola back to a consistent artstyle with the other Looney Tunes that bad?

Lola being a clothed character with generic boobs wouldn't be out-of-place in the Looney Tunes universe.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

I don't think your example showed that at all.

Why are you dragging this out by being intellectually honest, needlessly? Melissa Duck is a looney tune. Melissa Duck has boobs. Melissa Duck isn't a sexualized character. Therefore, Melissa is a looney tune with boobs who isn't sexualized. Your previous assertion was incorrect. Let's move on.

Hmm now it's getting interesting. Why is Lola a clothed character when most Looney Tune animals are nude?

The same reason Porky Pig wears a shirt and bowtie: it's what the artists desired. You're essentially asking, "why do some characters look different than others?"

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

I'm still waiting for your explanation as to why Penelope doesn't have boobs but characters like Lola need them.

Your argument was that female Looney Tunes characters with boobs only have them to be sexualized. I showed you an example of a female Looney Tunes character with boobs who isn't sexualized. Now you're moving the goalposts.

And anyway, Penelope is a nude character. A female character obviously isn't going to be bare-chested with boobs.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

VanananaHeyHey posted...

Now whose attestations of credibility must be taken as sarcasm? Jeezy petes, bro.

This board is an interesting place.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

VanananaHeyHey posted...

I do have masterful sarcasm, and, despite being probable that

You just lost all credibility. It's very obvious that that's what Daffy is looking at.
Also, assuming you understand the rules of basic logic, I objectively proved Darmik incorrect.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

LOL

You've yet to earn the right to an explanation

So basically, you're just here to be rude. Yeah, think I'd rather be weird than an asshole.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

VanananaHeyHey posted...

Literally looking at her breasts in the image. The most generous interpretation you could give to his gaze in this screenshot is that he's looking at her feet or that it's some sort of "schllucks, we're wearing the thame thing".

Darmik is correct.

Not sure if you're joking or not. I hope you are, because that is some impressive sarcasm.


---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

Like it's just bizarre to see him going back to it continuously

It's obvious he doesn't actually believe any of it but tbh that makes it kinda weirder.

I do believe what I'm saying. You've yet to clarify what about my argument is dumb.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Darmik posted...

Because the only Looney Tunes characters who are given breasts is to highlight their sensuality. Girl characters who aren't don't have breasts.

This argument assumes that any female Looney Tunes character with boobs only has them to be sexualized. The existence of boobs in & of themselves do not automatically make a character sexualized. For example,




---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

Not as weird as your silly lil questions

Doesn't matter tbh

Well, that was a productive exchange.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Actually, I'll bite: What's dumb about it, @Doom_Art ?

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

Yes it is

I disagree.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.

Doom_Art posted...

Your accountvis like 17 years old lol

That's another dumb question

I don't think every user clicked on my account to verify this before assuming. That would be a weird thing to do.

---

I don't hold grudges. Let's vehemently argue today and casually have a beer together tomorrow.