Lovely People aka 'the bunny comic'

[celsient]

first of all, apologies: this is my first post here, and i've only read the first 4 pages of this thread in great detail, skimming through the rest.

i agree with so many of the points brought up here but a detail i want to talk further about is the whole "father/mother/universe" thing. while a lot of Lovely People was very weird and a little gross for me, this pushed it further into the abyss. i've seen a little bit of talk about it but i think i have some more to bring to the table.

i'm a nonbinary person living in a country where transphobia is rampant and acknowledgement of trans (particularly nonbinary) people is delivered in snark on genitalia, the "number of genders", or similar topics. "father/mother/universe" seems like exactly that kind of snark; the same kind of comedy (dare i call it such a thing) that birthed the "attack helicopter" jokes of yesteryear. "man/woman/attack helicopter/train/pikachu", you know it.

it creates a ridiculous strawman of what "those kooky transes" want, assembled for the purpose of tearing apart and "proving us wrong". they present these "new genders" as something to include in a similar way to how man/woman have been included in modern western history instead of abolising the gendered nature of things and using an all-inclusive term.

(for me personally, i find gender categories as a whole rather silly and prefer to think about my gender as purely an individual identity thing, no one else having the same gender as me; though i understand that for many gender categories are important and that's fine too. it's all a matter of individual preference as long as you're not hurting anyone)

blaming it all on "social justice" and "political correctness" is exactly the kind of defense transphobes pull up whenever they spout transphobic rubbish. they're not transphobes, they're simply protecting everyone from these ridiculous ideas implimented into society by a grand authoritarian power; a world council, if you will.

while i'm certainly not saying minna is transphobic (at least not intentionally), through "father/mother/universe" she's perpetuating the same strawman arguments that transphobes do. she can turn to christ as much as she likes and that's completely acceptable, but you shouldn't just give up on being nice to people in our current realm of existence because of the promise of salvation afterwards.

[esedege]

Hello, everyone, newbie here!

I’ve been reading this thread since its inception, even before I read Lovely People (I was out for a week and came back in time for p412).

I’d like to add my point of view about the whole ordeal, as a Spaniard who’s grown up in a somewhat rural environment, where Catholicism is the root for lots of social norms.

Details about my relation with that religion in the spoiler below. TL;DR As a gay man living in Spain, I’m very wary of anything that, as the “summary” for Lovely People, mentions religion without any apparent need to do so.

Spoiler: show

Here in Spain, anytime a progressive law passes, you know for sure there’s gonna be some bishop or archbishop calling the media to twist it publicly. Most recent example, we’ve passed a law to regulate euthanasia. Only those who are in irredeemable pain can ask for it, twice and only if their mind is sound. For some bishop, “Spain has become an extermination camp.” https://www.elcomercio.es/sociedad/obispo-alcala-henares-eutanasia-campo-de-concentracion-20210324124826-nt.html (in Spanish)

I’ve had to learn to live my life having to hear, both in public and in private:
- that I’m not a real man, or a man at all,
- that I’m a pedophile in disguise,
- that they wish I die (both an AIDS-ridden death and plain unflavored one),
- that they will be happy watching me rot in hell from heaven,
- all the Spanish jokes (and believe me there are lots of them) that revolve around gay butts and manliness.
To top that, there’s been a recent and somewhat strong resurgence of the far-right francoist party. For those who don’t know, Franco was a dictator that got into power via civil war and created a Catholic dictatorship where the Church was ingrained and all powered. Spain transitioned into a democracy not passing judgement over that period from 1975 onwards.

Some other situations I’ve witnessed that I cannot comprehend:
- I was spat on my face (at my own door!) when I grew tired of being nice trying to refuse a couple of Jehovah Witnesses. I had told them at least three times I was not interested, fourth was a ‘Leave me alone, I’m gay!’ Cue spit.
- A priest that was told not to say anything during a civil funeral went and proclaimed that my eleven-year-old relative was in a better place dead than alive and with her widowed mother.
- The priest that gave mass to my grandparents for al least two decades was unable to remember my grandfather’s name during his funeral.

Furthermore, I’ve been ostracized by half of my relatives because I’m gay.

—-

I consider religion, and spirituality, very private matters (me lacking both) so I refrain myself from “proselytize” atheism, and have always a “Thanks but not thanks” attitude when someone approaches me. I fondly remember a conversation I had in Manchester with a Mormon girl who invited me to know more about them. I told her I was a proud gay, she picked up I was not British (she was American herself) and we went on talking about customs, countries, life and such, religion forgotten.

In short, Lovely People felt tiresome and intellectually insulting for me.

I knew what was awaiting me when I picked it up. Maybe it’s because I’ve grown accustomed to peer pressure into believing in god where I live, but Minna’s afterword wouldn’t be out of place here where I live: people who use their god as a shield and a weapon at the same time.

Lovely People presents a false dichotomy in such a bland way that it not only falls flat but also detracts from what could have been a positive message about religion. Religion as a strength, as a safety net, as a community of peers an likeminded individuals eager to help each other during hard times. (I don’t think religion is needed for that as much as basic civic responsibility, but I respect those who disagree.)

Instead, what we get is half-baked, where religious people don’t care about non followers, eager to throw technology away as if it was inherently evil (Does Minna know that whatever money she’s got from her work has come directly or indirectly through tech?) and served through a crude bait-and-switch, as some of you have already stated.

Her reaction to the backlash makes me think that she was perfectly aware of the pain she was gonna inflict. As days pass, I’ve gone from “I’ll keep reading SSSS until she finishes it unless it all goes south” to “I don’t think she’s gonna continue it after this break, unless she wants more money from us who she disrespects” to “I’m starting to feel as trapped as I felt at the end of that toxic relationship I’m not sure I’ve completely healed from.” So right now I’m not sure if I want to keep reading, feeling that both characters and I are her hostages and she seems fond of it.

Oh, and BTW, the dismissive tone she uses to explain the abandonment of CoH is also quite gratuitous.

I've decided to stop wasting my time playing videogames, and the same goes for making them.

For me that sentence’s structure makes it all inconsiderate even when I take into account that Spanish is quite more frank and direct than English, so we usually sound brassy, harsh and even ill-mannered when speaking through direct translation, and I am ready to accept it also happened here. There’s intention in it.

i agree with so many of the points brought up here but a detail i want to talk further about is the whole "father/mother/universe" thing. […]

i'm a nonbinary person living in a country where transphobia is rampant and acknowledgement of trans (particularly nonbinary) people is delivered in snark on genitalia, the "number of genders", or similar topics. "father/mother/universe" seems like exactly that kind of snark; the same kind of comedy (dare i call it such a thing) that birthed the "attack helicopter" jokes of yesteryear. "man/woman/attack helicopter/train/pikachu", you know it.

I feel you, but I think this was intended more as a jab at those religions that consider the Universe as a divine force itself (religion is not a theme I’m versed in, so I won’t say any example)

[Pessi]

I feel you, but I think this was intended more as a jab at those religions that consider the Universe as a divine force itself (religion is not a theme I’m versed in, so I won’t say any example)

I thought this too, but then again I'm a straight cis woman so as hard as I try I'm probably very much tone deaf when it comes to jabs at trans people. Whether or not Minna meant it as such it obviously reads as such by many people who have already been hurt by that kind of thing way too many times.

The thought of a "world soul", anima mundi or psychè kósmou or whatever it has been called in different cultures, is older than Christianity. It's come up again and again in different religions and philosophies through ages. I for one find the thought of a spiritual connection between all living things and the planet they inhabit, a vital force connecting everything, more logical than any petty parochial religion claiming that only those who adhere to it's dogma can attain a connection to a god. But I can see how the rather indeterminate thought of an anima mundi can be appalling for someone who wants clear rules from their religion, and by her posts Minna is at the moment in a state where clear rules and strict guidelines to salvation are a priority.

Spoiler: Theological content • show

I'm also one of those people who, while still Christian, started to call God also a mother and not just father. My view was that if God is indeed perfect and all encompassing, then She/He can't represent just one gender and then it should the same what parental word I use when I pray. Yes, Jesus only uses the word Father, but he was a child of his culture. Years ago, when I was in after-confirmation training to become "isonen", a kind of "older sibling" for kids coming to confirmation camps, we were taught a System of three S:s for reading the Bible (an isonen is expected to read the Bible with the "little ones" and try to help them understand what it says). The S:s stand for Sisältö (content), Sanoma (message) and Sovellutus (adaptation). This means that when reading the Bible we must first read the text as it is, then do our best to understand what it's core message was in it's original context (this would actually require extensive knowledge of Judaism, the antique history of Middle East and the languages spoken then, but hey, at least we tried) and then adapting that message instead of the verbatim reading of the text to our time and culture. By this system I concluded that for someone living around the year 30 AD in a very patriarchal Jewish society and wanting to talk about a parent who holds the fates of all their children and has ultimate authority over them the only choice is to say Father. In our time and society where parents are considered more or less equal and they both have a say in everything affecting their children the word used could as well be Mother. The core message here is not God's gender but the fact that She/He/They are our parent and we are Their children, so we should respect and obey Them the same way children in Jesus' time were expected to respect and obey their human parents.

It's obvious Minna doesn't hold these views. But Christendom has always been and always will be full of conflicting renditions of what the Bible actually says as well as different views about who in the first place is even allowed to make any kind of rendition, let alone teach it to others.

[JoB]

Looks to me like the discussion in the comments of page 409 has died down by now, if only for technical reasons(*). Or is that just my browser (fiery vulpine riding a penguin) acting up?

(*) Read, when I keep the page open and click on any "new reply/replies" markers popping up, I see entire branches of the Disqussion collapse away, more often than not taking the exact comment(s) I wanted to read with it. Just happens (for me?) whenever the comments section goes noticeably beyond its usual size. Makes me wonder how fractured the communication must be on those websites where current pages garner tens of thousands of comments ...

But I can see how the rather indeterminate thought of an anima mundi can be appalling for someone who wants clear rules from their religion

If we're talking about a single "world soul", i.e., pantheism, that should actually further the clarity of the rulings, as there's only a single (and hopefully coherent) source for them - same basic setting as in modern monotheistic religions, in a sense. Now animism, OTOH, where there's a different ruler with own rules (and grudges) just a couple steps away ...

[Sc0ut]

@JoB

Spoiler: offtopic theology • show

[quote author=JoB link=topic=1169.msg180096#msg180096 date=1617086694]
If we're talking about a single "world soul", i.e., pantheism, that should actually further the clarity of the rulings, as there's only a single (and hopefully coherent) source for them - same basic setting as in modern monotheistic religions, in a sense. Now animism, OTOH, where there's a different ruler with own rules (and grudges) just a couple steps away ...
[/quote]
Problem is pantheism doesn't come with a nice little doorstopper of a book that you can read for presumably "clear rules" and bonk other people over the head with... nothing is clear when the way to communicate with your chosen deity is debatable

[catbirds]

I feel you, but I think this was intended more as a jab at those religions that consider the Universe as a divine force itself (religion is not a theme I’m versed in, so I won’t say any example)

Hello another new person, esedege! It's still good to hear people sharing their personal experiences, and my condolences that the bunny comic had that effect on Yet Another Person

Anyway, even if this were a jab at other religions (keyword: jab), that's just another reason people should be offended by p. 39, so it's a bit of a dead end no matter which interpretation you choose. To me, it reads as making fun of people who have a slightly different view on gender. To you, it reads as making fun of people who have a slightly (or drastically) different view on faith. Neither of these is better than the other because at the end of the day, it's made fun of some group of people at their expense. And I feel like that's what I've run into with interpreting the rest of the comic, that no matter how generous an interpretation I give, all the logic about why the world she made is the bad one we should avoid ends up either falling apart because it misses the point, or being flat-out discriminatory (or at the very least ignorant) to people actually struggling for their right to identify as who they are.

[wavewright62]

One of my most significant concerns is that with the derisive dig at gender inclusivity in the Bible in her comic, what she thinks of people in real life that do not abide by gender norms.

One of the things that made so many people fall in love with these SSSS characters was that they do not conform to the gender norms.  Most newbies misgender them, in fact.  Sigrun is the military leader (as are both her parents, and her great-grandma was a crack shot with a rifle), Mikkel does the household chores, Tuuri was the mechanic as well as the scholar.  The men of Reynir's line are bestowed with a gift usually only for women. The Swedish military guards on the dangerous train run are of mixed gender, as are the Sentinels of Saimaa in Finland.  The Icelandic sea captain had a suspiciously good-looking male crew, all wearing the product of her busy knitting needles.
Their body types were also atypical - rangy Sigrun (the fandom went bananas the first time anyone could see that she even *had* boobs, about 5 chapters in), *ahem* solid Mikkel, androgynous Reynir, short Emil and his magical long pageboy, tiny 'twig' Lalli, even shorter dumpling Tuuri with cropped hair, round-faced Onni (although now more gaunt, allowing the cheekbones to show through). 

Their sexuality is generally unknown.  These pages give very little canon clue about that, and Minna has stated that it's a comic about friendship.  She has also stated that she's not fussed about fans' ships of her character, we're free to imagine what we like.  (And we do, if the tags in AO3 and other media are any clue.)  Similarly, none of her characters seem to have a sense of themselves outside the binary; that's been for the fandom to bestow on them.  (See above) 

I think that it's less about inclusivity and more about her own preferences.  She "had an idea for the character that became Sigrun" - and all the concept art shows her looking competent and androgynous.  A keen consumer of video games and various comics in her younger days, the fact that her heroines are not busty or flirtatious nor her heroes muscular and posing has got to be deliberate. 

Or at least, it was.  The extra art of a feminine-looking Sigrun sitting in her flowery sundress eating ice cream alongside Mikkel, while the Reynir and Emil played beach soccer was a nice change, but I can see it as a harbinger of the more feminine Sigrun of Adv. 2.  The City of Hunger characterisations may also have been a tip-off - Onni had pretty darn buffed arms for a blimmin' cyborg, and Reynir cut his hair short.  (At least Emil wasn't taller.)

Evolving the characters further *toward* a more heteronormative design is as good a clue as we're probably going to get about her changing attitudes.

[Pessi]

If we're talking about a single "world soul", i.e., pantheism, that should actually further the clarity of the rulings, as there's only a single (and hopefully coherent) source for them - same basic setting as in modern monotheistic religions, in a sense.

The idea of anima mundi is not that there is some kind of one great consciousness outside ourselves that controls the world and can give us rules about how to live and how to get in contact with it. The idea is rather that the anima mundi is made of us all, that the connections between all living things on this planet form it's "soul". I got first acquainted with this idea in one of it's forms when we were going through Hinduism in secondary school and came to the idea of brahman and atman, but this has been a recurring theme around the world throughout ages. Nowadays this kind of thinking is often applied to the whole universe. It's however difficult to build clear rules for a religion when the "great transcendental being" comprises everyone and everything around you. Therefore this kind of thinking hardly pleases anyone who wants the security of clear rules.

[JoB]

Spoiler: offtopic theology • show

Problem is pantheism doesn't come with a nice little doorstopper of a book that you can read for presumably "clear rules" and bonk other people over the head with... nothing is clear when the way to communicate with your chosen deity is debatable

Spoiler: but ... • show

... that doesn't keep any pantheist from writing one, does it? It's not like the advent of the original texts of the Bible, much less its overall composition and translations, have not been the subject of debate, to put it mildly.

It's however difficult to build clear rules for a religion when the "great transcendental being" comprises everyone and everything around you

... including all their individual opinions, you mean, since those have to somehow enter and find representation in the thoughts of the overall entity? I'm tempted to point at my aside about "hopefully coherent" here ...

[esedege]

I thought this too, but then again I'm a straight cis woman so as hard as I try I'm probably very much tone deaf when it comes to jabs at trans people. Whether or not Minna meant it as such it obviously reads as such by many people who have already been hurt by that kind of thing way too many times.

As Pessi says, catbirds, this is also a possibility I have to consider, and it could even that Minna covered both aspects at the same time intentionally. I said that because of the 'father/mother' part, and would have agreed with you in a heartbeat if 'man/woman' were used, but I won't argue about it.

Looks to me like the discussion in the comments of page 409 has died down by now, if only for technical reasons(*). Or is that just my browser (fiery vulpine riding a penguin) acting up?

For me (a compass in a Californian coastal region :'D ) it's gone from 2219 to 2240 comments during my sleep, if I'm not mistaken. I haven't tried to expand it tho, as it's gone to the wrong places (i.e., zealot atheists vs zealot believers, personal attacks…).

Their sexuality is generally unknown.  These pages give very little canon clue about that, and Minna has stated that it's a comic about friendship.  She has also stated that she's not fussed about fans' ships of her character, we're free to imagine what we like.  (And we do, if the tags in AO3 and other media are any clue.)  Similarly, none of her characters seem to have a sense of themselves outside the binary; that's been for the fandom to bestow on them.  (See above) 

I agree we tend to project our preferences upon the characters we read about and learn to care, primarily to flesh them out and make us feel they are akin to us; the contrary happens for those characters we despise, as we probably don't want to have anything to do with them. But those are her characters, and SSSS is her story, so she's free to kill them all first thing in the new chapter by an extraterrestrial UFO if so she desires, and end SSSS there and then. But then her work would lack consistency and narrative intention and roundness.

That's in fact what happens in LP. There, as someone (edit: it was Rowan) stated here pages ago, we're informed the Bible is important, but we're never told why.

* What is the point of reading the bible? Why is it important to any of them? How does it inform their behavior or actions? I'm not seeing a connection between the reading and the importance.

You could swap it for The Little Prince, or a massively played video game, or any other thing capable of being tampered with at a distance. But she relegates the Bible so much it is in fact what's called a McGuffin, a simple kicker for the plot to happen. That's why I say it all falls flat. She could have shown us what she sees as its intrinsic value, and make it work with to the rest of the plot. However, by making it a McGuffin, it stands out as something worth defending by the Christian bunny, but without values attached for us to adhere/consider. So we flesh that Bible out with whatever we associate it with. And there are lots of people that, like me, do not have any positive value to link to it.

She presents Christianity as persecuted, which is not new for me (+1 in tiresomeness) and a blatant lie where I live (read if you so wish the spoiler in my previous post reply). I'm not saying it's not persecuted anywhere in the world because we as a species can be utterly pieces of bull… droppings, and I'm not all-knowing. But there's nothing about that where she lives nor where I do nor in the main places the language LP is written in is used, so if she wanted to make a point about China (as some defenders claim) she should have make it clear –with a couple of signals in Chinese at the starting splash page I could have taken all that differently–. But then there's the afterword, linking it to some obscure almighty group of people that want to shepherd us, starting with that vaccine pass. And she's oblivious to the irony this last sentence can be applied by many to the Bible she's defending, even more so, as I said above, because she left the Bible 'impersonation' completely hollow for us to fill.

It has been also said here this change she's shown us has been brewing for a long time, and I agree, but I wasn't able to recognise it in time. I distinctly remember that the line about illegal refugees arriving to Spain (A1, p14) being the spark for the rash didn't set well with me*. How can you be an 'illegal' refugee? You can either cross the border illegally (which makes you an illegal immigrant) or ask for refuge in another country (which makes you a 'legal' refugee), at least in Spanish terminology. So I decided she may just have been unfortunate with her English wording and kept on, ignoring that flag. I haven't discovered the comic by the time the Emil incident happened, and I surely don't want to dig around now what she thinks of BLM.

* And it carries with it a lot of narrative problems we have to overlook for it to work. Being more virulent in hot climates, shouldn't the rash have ravaged at least the equatorial part of Africa? No in-universe word on that, nor about any other place in the world? So Spain is the door for doom to enter Europe, which is an isolate region apart from that, via 'illegal refugees?' (This is not a complaint for what's presented as much as it is a complaint about how it's presented.)

Moving forward, if she continues with SSSS (I wouldn't be surprised if otherwise), it's stated to be on April the 19th. I wonder what her gain is with all this:

• LP is not for sale as of today, nor is any LP merchandise.
• Next chapter is kinda far away in the future by Internet standards, so I don't think most of her new *Ahem* fanbase is gonna be around by then. It could have stayed if the backlash was still ongoing, but it has kinda died out. I don't think there's been enough 'damsel-in-distress' time for her to capitalise on it in the long term.
• There are long-time followers that have probably abandoned SSSS and Minna's work altogether, and some of us are doubting if it isn't the only correct way for us to proceed.

Edited to add credit to Rowan.

[Tarnagh]

Spoiler: but ... • show

... that doesn't keep any pantheist from writing one, does it?

With tongue firmly in cheek, I would like to direct you to the Star Wars movies.

[thorny]

One of the things that made so many people fall in love with these SSSS characters was that they do not conform to the gender norms.  Most newbies misgender them, in fact.  Sigrun is the military leader (as are both her parents, and her great-grandma was a crack shot with a rifle), Mikkel does the household chores, Tuuri was the mechanic as well as the scholar.  The men of Reynir's line are bestowed with a gift usually only for women. The Swedish military guards on the dangerous train run are of mixed gender, as are the Sentinels of Saimaa in Finland.  The Icelandic sea captain had a suspiciously good-looking male crew, all wearing the product of her busy knitting needles.
Their body types were also atypical - rangy Sigrun (the fandom went bananas the first time anyone could see that she even *had* boobs, about 5 chapters in), *ahem* solid Mikkel, androgynous Reynir, short Emil and his magical long pageboy, tiny 'twig' Lalli, even shorter dumpling Tuuri with cropped hair, round-faced Onni (although now more gaunt, allowing the cheekbones to show through). 

Their sexuality is generally unknown.  These pages give very little canon clue about that, and Minna has stated that it's a comic about friendship.

[ . . . ] the fact that her heroines are not busty or flirtatious nor her heroes muscular and posing

[jumps up and down shouting Yes! Yes! Yes!]

What brought me into this comic in the first place, and is to a large extent what's kept me here (well, besides the Cats) is this depiction of a group of people of at least two genders working and travelling together on a project with no sign whatsoever either that their genders matter, or that they or anyone else in the society thinks this is at all unusual.

That is how much of my life has actually worked -- with the exception of that last bit; I'm always aware of the ways in which this actual society thinks that is Weird.

And then in addition, none of the characters are drawn with those stereotypically and exaggerated Very Male and Very Female bodies that almost all other comics choose. (I mean, I love Girl Genius, and to a large extent they meet that first test, but the bodies ay yi yi! They lampshade it some, but nevertheless.) Minna's human characters are, or at least have been, drawn shaped the way people are actually shaped.

If she's converted to something that goes in for rigid gender roles, my guess is that most of this is going to go away in her future work. If the something is also prudish, characters probably won't become drawn in sexualized fashion; but they may well be both drawn and plotted so that their gender Matters. And it was so nice to read something in which it doesn't.

But those are her characters, and SSSS is her story, so she's free to kill them all first thing in the new chapter by an extraterrestrial UFO if so she desires, and end SSSS there and then. But then her work would lack consistency and narrative intention and roundness.

Exactly true. She's free to do that, both in practice as being in control of the story, and in morals as being the creator of the story. But it would be terrible artistry.

Just as she's free to turn all her female characters into Homemakers and all her male characters into Heads of Household if she wants. But that's not going to produce anything that I'm going to want to read. (Yes, I'm aware that there are some who prefer to read that sort of thing.)

  in LP. There, as someone (edit: it was Rowan) stated here pages ago, we're informed the Bible is important, but we're never told why.

[ . . . ] She could have shown us what she sees as its intrinsic value, and make it work with to the rest of the plot. However, by making it a McGuffin, it stands out as something worth defending by the Christian bunny, but without values attached for us to adhere/consider. So we flesh that Bible out with whatever we associate it with.

Maybe it's my own associations coming in, but I think she tells us pretty clearly what the value attached to it is that she wants us to consider. It's 'there is only One True Way and anybody who doesn't take it is Doomed'.

(I don't think that's anywhere near the only message that can be taken from the Bible, and I know that not everyone who follows the Bible even finds that message in it. But it appears to be the message that Minna has taken.)

I distinctly remember that the line about illegal refugees arriving to Spain (A1, p14) being the spark for the rash didn't set well with me

I managed to gloss over that one partly because it was one throwaway line, and partly because as that was shown as part of people's massive confusion in those last couple of weeks of the old world, it wasn't even clear to me whether that was what was actually supposed to have happened, or whether she was depicting people who had no idea what was going on some of whom were blaming it on refugees without evidence.

I was more bothered by the racist-joke incident (seems a bit unfair to blame it on Emil, who himself would only have been horrendously but justifiably ignorant); but I was hoping that that was just ignorance on Minna's part combined with easily hurt feelings possibly due at least in part to her being a fairly young person who might not have been hit with that sort of pushback before. It's becoming clearer and clearer that instead of thinking it over given time and opening up she's just doubling down harder into insularity.

[JoB]

(Is it just me, or has the "THE GOSPEL - for when you come to need it" been added to the last panel after the fact?)

(Edit: Ayup, it's absent in another browser tab I have still open, though the text-only title had already been replaced with the dark-blue title image there.)

[catbirds]

If she's converted to something that goes in for rigid gender roles, my guess is that most of this is going to go away in her future work. If the something is also prudish, characters probably won't become drawn in sexualized fashion; but they may well be both drawn and plotted so that their gender Matters. And it was so nice to read something in which it doesn't.

What's worth pointing out, I think, is that the three main characters of the bunny comic are pretty much parodies of current stereotypes for women. The overly bubbly internet influencer, the "christian homemaker," and I guess the elementary school teacher (in my time in elementary school, I only knew of three permanent male teachers) all fit into those pesky gender roles. Their families (except the influencer) all have a similarly traditional structure, and it seemed like escaping society was partially for the purpose of maintaining those roles as a mother/wife, to maintain the family structure they had. At least for the Christian homemaker and the elementary school teacher, anyway.

To me, it's not so much a matter of whether or not they actually end up breaking out of those roles. It's more that the author chose to assign them to these characters. There isn't any criticism of these roles, either. Sure, Violet doesn't fit exactly with "traditional feminine disposition," but she still goes through a phase that a lot of girls (including myself) go through at some point. I think she still ends up wearing makeup or something? I can't remember, and I've skimmed the comic enough that I'm not too keen on going back to check. As for the husband of the homemaker (peony?), I find it totally unrealistic to have him be a detached salaryman one day and a caring husband the next (at least that's the impression I got). It's still quite… interesting that Minna has decided to include the bible and gender roles in her comic about little bunnies or something.

I know of a number of shows and stories that do make great critiques of the horrors of gender roles, and the bunny comic is about the farthest you can get from them.

I'm not sure if Minna's conversion has anything to do with it though, but I guess it's a well-known thing that people get dressed in their "sunday best" to go to church, and those often involve dresses? (can you tell I have never been to mass/church ever in my life? Yeah.)

I think that it's less about inclusivity and more about her own preferences.  She "had an idea for the character that became Sigrun" - and all the concept art shows her looking competent and androgynous.  A keen consumer of video games and various comics in her younger days, the fact that her heroines are not busty or flirtatious nor her heroes muscular and posing has got to be deliberate. 

Or at least, it was.  The extra art of a feminine-looking Sigrun sitting in her flowery sundress eating ice cream alongside Mikkel, while the Reynir and Emil played beach soccer was a nice change, but I can see it as a harbinger of the more feminine Sigrun of Adv. 2.  The City of Hunger characterisations may also have been a tip-off - Onni had pretty darn buffed arms for a blimmin' cyborg, and Reynir cut his hair short.  (At least Emil wasn't taller.)

I remember seeing her draw the drawings you've pointed out here. Back then, I thought it was about something along the lines of Sigrun and Mikkel taking on parental roles for the crew, so sitting back while they had fun. I guess I should have known that it seemed too much like Sigrun was fitting into a "motherly" role.

If I recall correctly, back in aRTD, there were a number of women who did not behave in traditionally "feminine" ways and were never depicted as such, and maybe even some of the men? Her art has been inching towards the other end of the sliding scale ever since. It was a gradual change, but compared to the bunny comic…

[thorny]

What's worth pointing out, I think, is that the three main characters of the bunny comic are pretty much parodies of current stereotypes for women. The overly bubbly internet influencer, the "christian homemaker," and I guess the elementary school teacher (in my time in elementary school, I only knew of three permanent male teachers) all fit into those pesky gender roles.
[ . . . ]
 As for the husband of the homemaker (peony?), I find it totally unrealistic to have him be a detached salaryman one day and a caring husband the next (at least that's the impression I got).
[ . . . ]
I know of a number of shows and stories that do make great critiques of the horrors of gender roles, and the bunny comic is about the farthest you can get from them.

Yeah, I also noticed that all the main characters seem to have stereotypical gender roles.

It's not, for me, that any one of them does; any individual may actually fit in those roles, and it would make no more sense to say that women can't be homemakers or giggly shopping influencers than to say that men can't be or that women can't be mechanics. But when all the characters who are shown to any extent are like that --

I actually found that part of the husband's behavior entirely realistic, given the assumption of gender roles which "Lovely People" does appear to make: that was basically what men were supposed to do, go out and be the breadwinners but also be caring about their families when they were home, though they probably wouldn't be home much and wouldn't be making the dinner or changing the diapers. What I found unrealistic was that apparently the wife was so religious that access to her preferred version of the Bible was essential to her, but the husband had never paid any attention at all to this before and had to read it on the way home from work because he had no idea what was in it.

[ETA: though that would seem to fit with the impression I get of some proselytising Christians, that they think the only reason people aren't Christians is that we've somehow managed to never have been exposed to Christianity (laughable, for nearly anybody in the USA and Europe and large parts of the rest of the world), and that if we'd just stand still while they tell us about it then of course we'd convert. Maybe they'd also think that a loving husband could live with a religious wife for years and not have any idea what she was on about.]

And yes, there's plenty of stuff that makes great critiques of the horrors of gender roles. But there isn't very much that just portrays a society without them, in a fashion that takes this as a matter of course. That's what pulled me into SSSS.