Sexy Powerpuff Girls Cover Gets Pulled For Being Too Controversial

Sexy Powerpuff Girls Cover Gets Pulled For Being Too Controversial

Bubbles! Blossom! Buttercup! ...what are y'all wearing? At least, that's what some of the internet found itself asking about this Cartoon Network commissioned Powerpuff Girls comic cover.

Sexy Powerpuff Girls Cover Gets Pulled For Being Too Controversial

The cover caused the owner of a comics retailer, Dennis Barger Jr, to take to Facebook a few days ago and ask "Are we seriously sexualizing pre-teen girls like perverted writing fan fiction writers on the internet???? is that what this shit has gotten to?"

The remarks caused some controversy around how the girls should be depicted and whether or not they were being sexualised. The artist of the cover, Mimi Yoon, didn't seen so happy with the controversy surrounding the cover — using Facebook, she wrote "one opinionated dog barks (i'm fine with that)… and the rest of the pack barks 'pretending' to know what they're barking about (hate those idiots)… tsk tsk tsk."

IDW, the comic publisher, was nonetheless sympathetic to the concerns of people like Barger — their VP of marketing, Dirk Woods, responded to the whole thing as follows:

We love making comics for kids, and always want them to be appropriate. For what it's worth, CN has been a great partner in that regard… I know an 8 year old and 10 year old really well, and always look at these kinds of things through their eyes… Half of the employees have kids here, and we pride ourselves in making comics they'll enjoy and not give them a warped view of the world (except, you know, in a good way). Anyway, I certainly see your points, and we'll be sensitive to these things, as I think we mostly have been.

Eventually, Cartoon Network decided to pull the cover. In a statement to ICv2 they said:

In conjunction with our licensing partners, Cartoon Network Enterprises from time to time works with the artist community to reimagine and reinterpret our brands using their talents and unique points of view. This particular variant cover for The Powerpuff Girls #6 from IDW was done in the artist's signature style and was intended to be released as a collectible item for comic book fans. We recognise some fans' reaction to the cover and, as such, will no longer be releasing it at comic book shops.

Personally, I think that if you're going to put latex and thigh highs on the girls, they might benefit from being 'The Powerpuffs'.

(Via The Mary Sue)


    Girls grow up, they often try to shed "good girl images" (eg. Britney Spears and Miley Cyrus). So just because this is a comic book it's sexualising and wrong? If they did this in the cartoon would it get the same outcry? Probably not. (Oh wait, they did. The episode is "City of Clipsville" and features the girls looking WORSE -

    To me, this is nothing more than someone making the girls look a bit older than they have been since the show began in 1992. But of course, people usually do not bother with thinking in that manner and go right to the now all-too-common "OMG! That girl has boobs! She's wearing a skirt and is in good shape! EVIL!! BAN IT!! LOOKING GOOD IS EVIL AND MUST BE PUNISHED!!!"

    Yes I understand that sexualising young, presumably underage girls is wrong, but people really need to stop going to such extremes. In the end, it's a comic book FFS.

    ---- You may now begin your downvotes of my comment like you always do ----

    Last edited 25/01/14 4:43 pm

      100% agree, people up in arms cos they are sexualising pre-teen girls when clearly the artists rendition is them as a bit older

      I fully agree with what you say if the image is taken in isolation. But the fact this is the cover of the magazine supposedly aimed at young girls make this image more complicated.

      But again, I fully agree with you, I'm just pointing out a complication.

      It seems like a reflection of the actual viewer making these complaints.
      Someone finding sexuality in an image where others might not.

      I'm conflicted... you sir deserve a down point for linking me to those... fish... "things"

      On the other hand your 100% correct on your point! xD

    To be honest, I really didn't see this as being a sexualization of the characters. Their clothing isn't any different than most female 'superheroes', (which I can understand could be argued that they're all probably sexualized in they eyes of some) but they're adequately dressed, the breasts haven't been -over- emphasized, and they don't appear to be overtly skinny or anything. Hell, it even appears as if a human female was the one to have drawn the image. This is no different than the 90's Superman cartoon series version of Supergirl.

      Hell, it even appears as if a human female was the one to have drawn the image.

      Ummm yeah. Mimi Yoon is a human female as stated in the article

      Yeah, female superheroes are often presented worse than this. I also assume that this "comic retailer" doesn't stock any manga...

      I think their clothing IS a bit different from most female superheroes... most female superheroes look pretty slutty, where as the picture in question is extremely tame in comparison.
      All in all it's quite ridiculous

    I'm more offended by the extraordinarily unappealing art style.

    Maybe they shouldn't have chosen Yoon to do the image if this is her usual fare:

    Last edited 25/01/14 5:36 pm

    This is such bullshit.

    I don't even care about the Powerpuff girls or the artwork. I'm just disappointed that people are wasting time and effort whinging about this.

    There's no way in hell those girls depicted could be considered "pre-teen". What idiot would think that?

Join the discussion!

Trending Stories Right Now