Current Events > Sooo, why is Lola Bunny over-corrected?

(+) Yeah! (+)

I get it; she had too much "sexy" energy in the original. Fair enough. It was never that bad IMO, but whatever. They tone it down. But now she has like...no bosom whatsoever. Her chest is as flat as Bugs'. Why? Her chest was never exaggerated to begin with. By denying her boobs at all, they ironically push a "breasts = bad" message that's just as problematic as the "female = sexy" message they sought to go against.

---

---

Tifa got a reduction

---

She's a rabbit

---

because its too problematic now v____v

---

I get the feeling a bunch of sarcastic, devoid-of-critical-thinking, mob mentality posts are headed my way...oh boy.

---

Because you shouldn't be watching a kids movies for boobs.

---

It's a fucking cartoon... why do you care so much what their dimensions are?

---

Shes being groomed to be the next vs model

---

What the fuck type of furry shit is this

They want to curb any more children growing up to become furries.

---

eston posted...

She's a rabbit

What is your point? They still made a point to make her breast-less, despite them previously existing. Having breasts is a normal part of being female.

---

superman 2000 posted...

I get the feeling a bunch of sarcastic, devoid-of-critical-thinking, mob mentality posts are headed my way...oh boy.

You knew that before you made the topic.

---

Solar_Crimson posted...

They want to curb any more children growing up to become furries.

It's so we don't end up with these topics again when they make another remake in 20 years.

Wait. That makes no sense

---

Solar_Crimson posted...

They want to curb any more children growing up to become furries.

I thought that was the point of the reduced sex appeal. Getting rid of her breasts just denies her a basic aspect of femininity, and reinforces the idea that the very existence of breasts is problematic.

---

superman 2000 posted...

What is your point? They still made a point to make her breast-less, despite them previously existing. Having breasts is a normal part of being female.

Not for rabbits

---

purposeful design choice

that cartoon females must have boobs and eyelashes, no matter to what extent anthropomorphized, is a bit outdated

Its weird to give a rabbit boobs. We can find other means by which to determine that shes a girl rabbit. Womanhood is more than having boobs.

---

The fact that so many grown ass men still have weird crushes on cartoon characters from their childhood tells me it was a mistake to give her boobs in the old one tbqh

---

CapnMuffin posted...

purposeful design choice

that cartoon females must have boobs and eyelashes, no matter to what extent anthropomorphized, is a bit outdated

How so? By and large, most female characters have boobs. The size of and/or attention given to the boobs is what typically determines how "sexualized" they are.

AloneIBreak posted...

Its weird to give a rabbit boobs.

She's not really a rabbit, though. She's an anthropomorphized cartoon character -- essentially a human with bunny features.

---

If you wanna get horny from drawings, there's plenty of that online

---

eston posted...

Not for rabbits

You say this is as Lola Bunny is meant to be a realistic rabbit.

---

Doom_Art posted...

If you wanna get horny from drawings, there's plenty of that online

Let's not strawman, please.

---

I like that no one can give you an actual answer without insulting you

---

Well really, what are you hoping for out of this

---

eston posted...

The fact that so many grown ass men still have weird crushes on cartoon characters from their childhood tells me it was a mistake to give her boobs in the old one tbqh

Lola Bunny was deliberately characterized with sex appeal in the original Space Jam. That's what made her "furry bait" for many; not the sole existence of her boobs.

---

Doom_Art posted...

Well really, what are you hoping for out of this

Read the topic again, but this time without making assumptions about my character.

---

superman 2000 posted...

You say this is as Lola Bunny is meant to be a realistic rabbit.

I was only being half serious tbqh
But come on man no kid is going to look at a boobless cartoon bunny and interpret that as "boobs = bad" lol

---

I prefer flat and small chested women.

---

CM_Ponch posted...

I like that no one can give you an actual answer without insulting you

Yeah, I'm noticing that this board isn't really the place to expect nuanced thinking.

---

Anyone who thinks this will stop future generations from developing attractions to animated characters is sorely mistaken.

Maybe it was foresight so they wouldn't have to give her realistic jiggle physics in 3d.

---

The answer is kinda obvious. She now looks like a lot of athletic women, where you don't see there breasts a pronounced (mostly due to the type of clothes they wear and, also, due to their body types.)

You can still tell she's female so accentuating her boobs doesn't matter.

superman 2000 posted...

She's not really a rabbit, though. She's an anthropomorphized cartoon character -- essentially a human with bunny features.

The fuck?

---

eston posted...

I was only being half serious tbqh
But come on man no kid is going to look at a boobless cartoon bunny and interpret that as "boobs = bad" lol

The creators are on record saying they deliberately sought to mitigate Lola's sex appeal. Now, she doesn't have boobs. I'm asking why having boobs at all is apparently considered "sex appeal". Her original design isn't what some people found "offensive" about the character.

---

Turbam posted...

Tifa got a reduction

She actually didnt.

---

why do you care about bunny boobies

---

In the end, it kinda doesn't matter. She's still sexy and there is a ton of art about how she's wearing a sports bra and is still hiding mammoth mammaries. The rule 34 artists have her bustier than ever before. I get my porn and I don't have to watch a Lebron James movie. It's a win/win.

There's also been a lot of spite art of Pepe Le Pew, sometimes shipped with Lola, and that's a good thing too.

lolife67 posted...

The answer is kinda obvious. She now looks like a lot of athletic women, where you don't see there breasts a pronounced (mostly due to the type of clothes they wear and, also, due to their body types.)

You can still tell she's female so accentuating her boobs doesn't matter.

She doesn't look more athletic now.

---

All they really did was cover her midriff.

---

superman 2000 posted...

You say this is as Lola Bunny is meant to be a realistic rabbit.

Then if you're not concerned about realism, there's nothing that would prevent boobs disappearing.

---

Dayum. She actually lost some muscle tone. Worth it to lose the boobs, eh?

<_<

BloodMoon7 posted...

The fuck?

Why are you confused? Are you unaware that Bugs Bunny, Mickey Mouse, Sonic the Hedgehog, etc. are just stylized cartoon animals with human traits?

---

superman 2000 posted...

The creators are on record saying they deliberately sought to mitigate Lola's sex appeal. Now, she doesn't have boobs. I'm asking why having boobs at all is apparently considered "sex appeal". Her original design isn't what some people found "offensive" about the character.

I would assume that the changes to her character go beyond just toning down the boobage. You said yourself that the original was deliberately characterized for sex appeal. This one is not. That's your answer.

And as someone else pointed out, her body type is now closer to what you would expect to see on an athlete.

---

superman 2000 posted...

She doesn't look more athletic now.

She does to me. She looks like a lot of women basketball players I've seen. You also seem to be under the impression that if you can't see her breasts protruding then they aren't there.

Trumble posted...

Then if you're not concerned about realism, there's nothing that would prevent boobs disappearing.

My question is why the deliberate decision to remove her boobs in the first place, especially when every other character looks the same as they did in the first movie.

---

Tbh, the original Lola wasnt stacked or anything.

So CE could really try to even slightly address TCs question.


---

cuttin_in_farm posted...

So CE could really try to even slightly address TCs question.

I did, actually.

lolife67 posted...

She does to me. She looks like a lot of women basketball players I've seen. You also seem to be under the impression that if you can't see her breasts protruding then they aren't there.

We can both plainly see that she is now as flat as Bugs Bunny himself. There's not even the slightest bit of protrusion in the chest area. Here are Kim Possible characters in cheerleading outfits:



by your logic, they would suddenly look more athletic if they didn't have boobs. Your line of reasoning is confusing.

---

lolife67 posted...

I did, actually.

Neat. Theres still too many posters not and claiming its just horniness or fake confusion.

---