controversial reading!

I am going to try something different this time.  There is a book I've always liked, but to admit I like it would be opening up a can of worms as tall as the Empire State building. This book has always had a reputation for being controversial.  It was used by people to hurt others, although that was never the writer's intention. The original intent of the story was to entertain, nothing more. 
So I am going to blog about this book. But I am going to blog about this book in a completely gender neutral, white washed way.  If you can figure out what book I am talking about, more power to you! But to be honest, I am more interested in seeing how many different responses I get to the clues I give out.
Here are a few clues, and a bit of background on the book.
It is a children's book, written in the 1800s. Since then it has been published, mocked, satirized and remade many times. In 1932 a famous American writer and activist called the book "hurtful" to certain children. In Japan, it has become very controversial not just for the obvious reason, but for piracy as well. It has been rewritten, renamed, re released and re illustrated in both positive and negative ways.

It was written by a military spouse for the entertainment of the military offspring while stationed on a foreign base.  The story itself is about a child who is accosted by a series of endangered mammals indigenous to the area. The child, in an effort to protect itself, bargains for its ability to continue on this particular plain of existence. In each case the child's offers are acceptable to the particular endangered mammal and it's allowed to exist. Eventually the child is denied all of its possessions by the endangered mammals, so continues to its domicile in a state of distress. Each of the endangered mammals, who now possess the child's goods is convinced through intense egocentricity that he has achieved a state of perfection. Eventually, all of the endangered mammals meet up which leads to a confrontation. The child, hearing the confrontation, believes the endangered mammals are after it, The child hides where it is able to see the confrontation. The confrontation is at first only vocal, but eventually each endangered mammal attacks the other. Each latches onto an opponent's appendage, and commence to encircle a woody perennial at a high rate of velocity until they have liquefied into a large puddle of ghee. The child then collects its possessions, and along with the ghee returns to its domicile where it resides with two guardians.  One of the guardians prepares food high in carbohydrates using the ghee for the family unit to consume. Each of the members of the family unite partake of the carbohydrate sustenance which bears a striking resemblance to the coloration of the endangered mammals. One guardian eats many, the other eats more but the child consumes the most.

Pretentious politically correct writing aside, the reason why I liked the book is very simple. The hero of the story faces scary things, but rather than running finds a way to not only survive, but thrive.  The child is very clever. The child not only survives a life threatening confrontation, but manages to come out on top.  To me it teaches the young reader to think through a problem. The original pictures were redone a multiple number of times, but when the book was originally illustrated there were no overtones of any kind. The illustrator just drew what was common to the area. The story itself is a great story about a clever child, no political/racial/sexual overtones are contained within the words. It was just meant to entertain. It is only ignorant people who take a simple child's story and turns it into a hotbed of controversy.
Let me know if  you figure out which book I'm talking about.  As I said from the start I'll be more interested in the wrong answers than I will be in the right.