New York Times columnist claims that "Pepe Le Pew added to rape culture," because that's what New York Times columnists do. Let's discuss this.
· Mar 7, 2021 ·

Pepe Le Pew: Sexual predator.

I would first like to address the elephant in the room: The offensive caricature of the insufferably amorous Frenchman incapable of taking no for an answer.

Sure, I may not be French but I've decided to annoint myself as the guardian of oppressed Frenchmen everywhere, standing in uninvited solidarity with them and eagerly anticipating the accolades that will soon be coming my way in appreciation for my stunning bravery in standing up for a people who have been marginalized for far too long.

You're welcome, Frenchmen.

As for Blow's charges they are, what's the word I'm looking for?


RW blogs are mad bc I said Pepe Le Pew added to rape culture.

What can I say? We have a soft spot for anthropomorphic Mephitidae.

I've also long had trouble understanding leftists' fascination with "rape culture" in part because there is no such thing.

There are rapists to be sure, but claiming there is a "rape culture" is like claiming there is a "robbery culture," or an "embezzlement culture."

Those aren't cultures. Those are crimes. Criminals commit them. People who are rapists are criminals and save for a few sociopaths they know they are criminals. They are not acting with the approval of some culture that accepts rape as being A-okay.

I'm a guy, a pretty old guy at that, and I've never come across anybody who thought that.

The notion of "rape culture" was fabricated by radical feminists as a kind of bludgeon to defame an entire gender and specifically to turn the compromised decision-making capacity of drunk fraternity brothers and equally drunk co-eds who later regret their poor life decisions into some larger condemnation of all men and of masculinity in general.

On to Blow's arguments, such as they are.

Let's see. 1. He grabs/kisses a girl/stranger, repeatedly, w/o consent and against her will.

The premise of the joke is that the Pepe confuses the cat for another skunk.

High jinks ensue.

And he's right, the cartoon skunk failed to secure formal consent from the cartoon cat. I'm working on being outraged about that.

2. She struggles mightily to get away from him, but he won't release her.

Pepe is a ridiculous character. His absurd and relentless behavior is the source of the comedy as anyone with a sense of humor would understand.

Oh, right.

Got books to sell, gotta maintain that well-practiced perpetually aggrieved mien.

3. He locks a door to prevent her from escaping.

Again, the lengths Pepe will go through, without any hint of interest on the part of the cat makes him the obvious butt of the joke. No one is rooting for Pepe to rape the cat, okay? That's not what is going on here. And if you think that's the point, you should probably be dialing a help hotline of some kind.

I mean right now.

This helped teach boys that "no" didn't really mean no, that it was a part of "the game", the starting line of a power struggle.

I watched these cartoons as a young boy and I would often parse the dialectic of power dichotomies that Pepe Le Pew represented within the framework of Hegelian idealism with my friends.

We also dug holes in the yard and hunted for bugs.

It taught overcoming a woman's strenuous, even physical objections, was normal, adorable, funny.

Right. That makes sense.

In opposite world.

The thing is, Pepe was a miserable failure. That was what was funny. If anything, the cartoon taught that being a jerk gets you physically abused (oh yes, the cat wasn't playing) and ultimately unsuccessful.

I mean, did he ever actually watch the cartoon?

They didn't even give the woman the ability to SPEAK.

What would these people do without caps lock?

No, they didn't, it was part of the premise, she was a cat, not a skunk. She didn't speak skunk, so she couldn't tell him.

Seriously, Blow, have you ever watched any cartoon all the way through?

The comments are worth a read, some are intentionally funny, some not so intentionally but just as humorous.

These are full-grown adults dissecting a cartoon with a discussion of "mitigating factors," "non-verbal cues," and the "inter species aspect."

"Inter species aspect?" That's the part where you make like you have your phone on vibrate and just got a very important call that can't possibly wait...

As for "enthusiastic consent?"

Yeah. Not going to touch that one.

LawyerChyk's response is serious which is hilarious in itself. The response is not, and even more hilarious.

Let me leave you with this.

This is David Chapelle, so MAJOR XXX LANGUAGE WARNING. The basic premise of this short bit is the way an adult views these cartoons vs. the way a child does.

When you bring an adult's eye to a cartoon, and all the baggage and damage and neuroses that come with it, you will come away with a perspective that bears no resemblance to how it is perceived by a child.

I really did regularly watch Pepe Le Pew as a child and yet somehow I did not become a serial rapist. I turned out as a well-adjusted adult who treats everyone with respect.

Likewise, my repeated viewing sessions of The Roadrunner did not lead me to adopt "dynamite culture" nor leave me with any desire to drop anvils on top of my opponents, push them off cliffs, nor set up hastily built brick walls on major highways.

Funny that.

Ultimately, Blow's take on Pepe Le Pew tells you nothing about the cartoon, or humanity, or masculinity, or fake rape culture nor does it provide any larger cultural message beyond the obviously ridiculous and silly slapstick fun.

However his take does tell you everything about Blow.


There are 99 comments on this article.

Ready to join the conversation? Start your free trial today.

Access comments and our fully-featured social platform, completely free of charge.

Sign up Now
App screenshot

You must signup or login to view or post comments on this article.