Nothing against you personally, Xprimental. You're my dude. We ride together, we die together, Bad Boys 4 life.
But I don't get how this is cancel culture other than the fact that we can affix that to the shifting of the populous's zeitgeist away from things others might consider benign.
The problem with everything should be allowed due to free speech is that we're allowing a number of 'acceptable' casualties due to capitalistic endeavors. I won't say Gangsta rap made people go shoot up situations. but I knew a good number of people trying to chase that stupid video life instead of paying attention in school that they had to make hard rebounds.
I don't see the issue of reasonable limits of what children can consume based on them not understanding what they are seeing other than exaggerated faces and funny violence that gets them to laugh. I mean, we almost universally know that a 5 year old shouldn't watch porn. We know that forcible assault on a woman isn't suitable for a young mind to associate with.
Hell, we basically teach our younger generation on how to interact with society via what media they consume. And they learn. They just emulate. What's wrong with making sure they are emulating things that are acceptable in society?
We're allowed differing opinions, of course; no need to apologize for feeling differently from me. But yes, Bad Boys 4 Life, indeed.
I say "cancel culture" because I think we've reached a point where any and everyone is actively
looking for things to be upset about. Pepe is 75 years old meaning several generations "survived" his existence without adverse effect, including those of more recent memory (i.e.: we're not going back to pre-womens' suffrage/pre-Civil Rights to find find children, boys AND girls, who watched his antics for laughs ignorant of the implications prescribed by "woke" adults,) yet "NOW" we've decided not to change him, but to
remove him, casting his legacy in a light of sordidness that was clearly never the intent of his creators. They created a silly, love-struck skunk, and we've turned him into a rapist for all intents and purposes, meanwhile the REAL world is rife with things to be genuinely outraged by and change, but we gloss over those things in lieu of condescending to stuff like this. Basically, as long as I have to explain why my Black life matters as much as any other, a cartoon skunk dishing out unrequited smooches isn't high on my list of priorities. As mentioned in another thread long ago when Family Guy decided to no longer voice Cleveland with a white actor; that doesn't "help," but I guess someone felt the limp-wristed handshake of an act would make them "progressive" in some people's eyes. Anyone know if they agreed to back off the "black" jokes at Cleveland's expense? Because Family Guy has no shortage of those. I suppose they could remove any semblance of humor from the character for fear of "offending," but at that point, the character becomes largely superfluous.
I'm not suggesting Le Pew couldn't have done with a makeover more befitting these hypersensitive times, just that in the end, it wasn't "romance" or "relationships" or "gender interactions" that Looney Tunes was selling; it was the absurdity of a skunk so dense and smitten, he couldn't recognize that a cat wasn't a skunk, a skunk who just happened to be a caricature of the overly-romantic Frenchman seen throughout cinema for decades upon decades. It made kids laugh, just like when Bugs dressed up as a woman and entranced an unwitting male character; are those episodes coming with warning labels, too?