Sunday funnies 11-28-10: The demise of Disney princess cartoon movies
Today I depart from bringing you the typical fare of Sunday political cartoons to discuss the demise of a different sort of cartoon, the Disney animated fairy tale.
Disney announced this week it will produce no more “princess movies” beyond Tangled, its retooled version of Rapunzel, which was released November 24.
Feminism and the sexualization of children have taken their toll. According to the Los Angeles Times:
Among girls, princesses and the romanticized ideal they represent – revolving around finding the man of your dreams – have a limited shelf life. With the advent of “tween” TV, the tiara-wearing ideal of femininity has been supplanted by new adolescent role models such as the Disney Channel’s Selena Gomez and Nickelodeon’s Miranda Cosgrove.
“By the time they’re 5 or 6, they’re not interested in being princesses,” said Dafna Lemish, chairwoman of the radio and TV department at Southern Illinois University and an expert in the role of media in children’s lives. “They’re interested in being hot, in being cool. Clearly, they see this is what society values.”
I, too, am uneasy about a storyline that has the handsome prince rescuing the beautiful princess or damsel in distress. In reality there are so many ways this storyline can become unhealthy and go bad.
On the other hand, as the book Captivating points out, this dream fills the hearts of most honest, normal women. Otherwise, the storyline in so many variations would not have maintained such high popularity through the generations.
And most honest, normal men have an innate desire to be knights in shining armor, as the companion book Wild at Heart describes.
This is the way we’re built, and in a sinless world the strengths and limitations of men and women would synergize one another in perfect harmony. It is only together that male and female comprise the image of God.
But because the world is filled with sin, these yearnings of our hearts are meant to draw us to the one and only Knight in Shining Armor, both as our rescuer and role model.
If only Disney would make that movie*.
*In a way, DreamWorks already has. In 1998 it released The Prince of Egypt, about Moses saving the Israelites from the Egyptians; Moses was an archetype of Jesus.

Much feminist ado about nothing here. I agree with all of your thoughts on this, Jill. I add a few of my own.
My girls are 7 and 9, and all of this princess stuff is a staple in our home right now. Princess movies, princess dress-up costumes, princess books… It is the coin of the realm because we don’t allow them any other media access, such as the tween crap with the emphasis on being “hot”.
The girls, innocently enough, see being a princess as associated with being beautiful. Rather than adopt the feminist pathos, Regina and I embrace that and use it as the starting point of many conversations about true beauty, about true nobility which resides below the surface appearance. It is a great conversation starter about true nobility and authentic womanhood, all in the simple terms that they can grasp at this age.
It’s interesting to note that women in 1960 earned 35% of college degrees in the US, and by 2004 saw that number rise to 58%; all this in the same time period that feminists have claimed that such Disney princess stories have held girls down. Here is an excellent article, loaded with links on the subject:
http://researchnews.osu.edu/archive/womcolge.htm
The truth is that our daughters have been doing steadily better:
“Women earned 60% of the master’s degrees and 50.4% of the doctorates in the 2008-09 academic year overall. That was the first year that women earned the majority of the doctoral degrees, according to the Council of Graduate Schools, which conducts an annual survey of graduate school enrollments.”
http://www.computerworld.com/s/article/9185538/Lead_by_women_in_graduate_degrees_doesn_t_extend_to_IT
As for the business of waiting to be rescued by a stalwart prince, that fades as we gently empower our daughters with education and growth-inducing experiences. The same for our sons.
Too many Prince Charmings turn out to be latent frogs, and too many hot princesses turn out to be latent hags. We do well to leave the childhood stories alone and focus on giving our children mothers and fathers who work daily at their own character formation, who are solid examples to our children. The rest takes care of itself.
The problem ain’t Snow White. It’s us.
Captivating and Wild at Heart!!
Two of my fave books!!
Oh for heaven’s sake, PC strikes again. As a child I loved these stories, in fact I still love fairy tales. I enjoyed the stories of the Middle Ages about maidens and knights, and one of my favorite memories is scrounging through my great aunt’s basement and finding story and fairy tale books. My daughter was captivated by “The Little Mermaid”. She has nonetheless turned into a well adjusted adult. With all the porn and perversion out there we worry about “princess movies”? Being hot and cool at age 6? What a sad commentary on our society. I was still enjoying “princess movies” at that age and my favorite comic book hero in childhood was Wonder Woman. I wasn’t traumatized by the fact that WW ran around briefly attired with a figure any woman would kill for but rather was fascinated that she was… well….Wonder Woman who could beat the bad guys.
I love the movie Dr.Zhivago because of the love story between Zhivago and Lara. Yeah, yeah I know it was an adulterous affair.
Hi Gerard,
I would have to say our fantasies disappear as we grow older, more mature, and wiser in the ways of life. They are great fun as children and should be a cherised part of childhood. There will always be those who can’t seperate fantasy from reality, that see every man or woman as their fantasy come true, or dream of a castle in the clouds.
Women were steadily progressing and I maintain that while the women’s movement did some good, women would have succeeded without it. When were the women’s colleges built? Where and when did Dr.Virginia Apgar go to medical school school? Where and when did Dr.Joyce Brothers get her Ph.d? Where did Louisa May Alcott, Mary Shelley, Margaret Mitchell, and Harriet Beecher Stowe learn to read and write?
I couldn’t understand why Ward Cleaver always wore a suit and spounted words of wisdom while my father sat in his dirty work clothes, drank beer, and cursed and reviled his family. Hey its life. Live,learn and figure it out as you go.
Mary,
Brilliant observation on women’s progress and the perspective on the feminist movement. You’re right about cherishing the fantasies of childhood. The bulk of us do just fine as we mature.
It’s sad because some women hate the princess thing a lot. I think it’s natural for little girls to identify with princesses but when we grow up sometimes our childish tastes embarrass us. It’s too bad feminists have a bigger issue with princesses than with porn.
A princess can become a queen and that’s cool.
Hi Gerard,
Thank you for your kind words. But how could I be sooooooo remiss as to not mention the great PL leader Dr. Mildred Jefferson, who was the first black woman to graduate from Harvard Medical School in 1951? A thousand lashes with a wet noodle.
I was never into princesses. I was, however, into Mulan (who is technically not a princess, but apparently Disney has no other word for “female lead character.”)
Mary, make it 500, and I’ll take the other 500 for missing that one too! ;-)
The princesses in the fairy tales weren’t just damsels in distress. They were always beautiful on the outside and the inside, which is what all women should strive for. They were never being brought down by society but by some evil force from which they didn’t need rescued but they needed help to defeat, and they always lent a hand in that defeat. Isn’t that how marriages should be? I see no problem with the message the fairy tales bring. Feminism doesn’t like them because it shows that women do have weaknesses and do need someone to fill in those weaknesses, along with doing the same for that other person. There is a reason men and women are different, so that they can become perfect matches. Too bad for Disney they have forgotten these things because another creative company will fill in the gap that they leave and leave them in the dust.
I think that it’s possible to be okay with princesses and simultaneously not really be a huge fan of Disney princesses. Disney Princesses are a marketing machine, loaded with emotional and cultural values and geared explicitly towards advertising to children (which I disagree with on principle). I see a world of difference between a little girl playing dress-up in some old skirts and scarves, and making up an imaginary world, and being “a princess;” and a little girl buying a Belle costume and Belle pajamas and being “Belle.” I don’t just have this problem with Disney, but the Disney Princesses are a pretty strong faction of the kinds of children’s toys and movies that I have a problem with.
I guess I see a difference between princess play, of the imaginative dress-up sort, and The Princesses, this trademarked and promoted clique of Barbie-doll figures that you too! can look like if Mom just shells out enough money. I am not surprised that Disney is finding that younger and younger girls are outgrowing the Princesses – that’s what they’ve been instigating all along, ironically via their own Princess characters and marketing.
Well there goes another staple of wholesome fun for kids. Even my boys liked those movies – usually because there was a prince with a sword. What do we really think is going to take their place? Selena Gomez plays a lazy, stupid girl on that Disney show. Is that who I want my daughters to look up to? No. My husband banned the Disney Channel long before we got rid of cable.
They are going to see where their bread and butter – in terms of movies – comes from. I give it three years tops. What are they going to do, have Lightning McQueen taking pictures with all the girls at DisneyWorld?
Well I went to see Tangled and it is one of the best Disney movies I’ve seen. The “prince” in fact, is NOT interested at all in rescuing Rapunzel. He is a typical modern-day schlep of a young man. He’s interested in his own life and no one else. However, Rapunzel is no wilting flower either. She is a take charge girl who decided she HAS to see what the lanterns are all about on her birthday. It is a difficult decision because she is torn between being an obedient daughter and doing what she so desperately wants – to be a grown up making her own decisions in life.
But the man in this movie comes around and in the end there is a happily ever after. He becomes a “knight in shining armor” in part due to Rapunzel’s influence on him. She is the classic young woman of virtue and beauty. My girls aged 18, 16 and 13 loved it. The movie didn’t follow the fairytale exactly but used a few nuances that older viewers would have picked up on to replace those variations from the original story. And the horse, Maximus was actually the star of this film.
We went to see the Princess and Frog which quite frankly was horrible. The two lead characters were frogs for most of the movie – who truly wants to watch a movie about frogs! And the creepy voodoo aspect of the entire movie was scary and disgusting. It was the bomb it rightly deserved to be.
I agree with Alexandra.
About feminism… does anyone listen to Dr. Laura on the radio? She has a fantastic perspective on feminism (as well as abortion and many other issues)!
I do not have a problem with the disney movies themselves. If you think back to the actual movie, Cinderella, for example, has great character and morals. She loved her father, she was kind to animals, optimistic, and as a contrast to her evil step-family, she was caring. Nothing that little girls should not look up to. I think the problem is that Disney commercialized her too much. In the movie she is poor and in rags for most of the film, but now they only show her in a princess gown. The Cinderella story has been around for centuries because it illustrated morality so well, as well as the theme of reward after unjust suffering. Now however, thanks to all the princess products Disney has put out, girls associate Cinderella with sparkly things and vanity, values that really belong to the ugly stepsisters, not Cinderella.
I must depart from the general consensus… I’m almost 40 years old and I have not yet abandoned the fantastical desire to be a princess, nor has my heart lost its pitter-patter, excited longing for my Knight in armor. I refuse to surrender the innocence of those pure dreams, and the nobility they inspire. My husband (my real-life Knight) and I gladly encourage our princesses to revel in all such things and to hold onto their fairytale dreams. I want them to be able to imagine that men can be knights, men can be noble, daring, brave, sacrificial and honorable. Soon enough, they will discover that many men today are cowardly scoundrels. But I want them to have in their minds the image of fair ladies and gallant knights.
Then we can cherish those ideals and help them aspire to live them in real life, and never settle for a scoundrel.
This announcement from Disney makes me sad because it means that modern, man-hating “feminism” has killed and buried yet another treasure of real value — the dream of knights, fair ladies, valor, courage, purity and forever love between men and women.
This is one of the dumbest ideas Disney has ever had.
I was in preschool when The Little Mermaid was released and in kindergarten for Beauty and the Beast. To tell you the truth, I didn’t particularly care that the princesses were beautiful. I liked the stories and the songs and the characters. Belle has been my favorite Disney princess since 1991 because we both love to read.
I do agree that Disney princesses have gotten more commercialized. I was both Ariel and Belle for Halloween, and I guarantee you that the Belle costume my mom made me was ten times better than any of the ones you could buy in a store. (She made me the gold ball dress, plus the blue cape, a barrette with handmade fabric roses made from the same material as the dress, and a magic mirror made with cardboard and a folder cover of Belle and the Beast. To give the commerical side its due, my costume also had Mrs. Potts earrings and a charm bracelet with Mrs. Potts, Cogsworth, and Lumiere on it.) There are way too many gimmicky princess products. I saw Belle and the Beast dolls in Target a couple of weeks ago, and they weren’t nearly as well-made as mine from the 1990s.
I don’t even see Ariel and Belle as being focused on finding a prince, really. They both want to have more adventerous lives and meet a prince along the way. Same goes for Jasmine. Snow White has the whole “someday my prince will come” thing, but the concept of a Disney princess has clearly moved on since then. Also, Sleeping Beauty has got to be one of the most visually gorgeous movies Disney has ever made.
ARGH, this just makes me irritated! Nothing has messed up the legacy of my childhood this much since the American Girl company stopped making Samantha. Don’t even get me started on that one.
This probably won’t be the most popular comment on this thread, but personally, I was always irritated that the Disney lead female always starts out with a problem which is inevitably solved by marrying Prince Charming.
And personally, I think the Disney Princesses have, in recent years, contributed to the entitled pain-in-the-rear attitude of women these days. Although I don’t think it’s a result of the movies so much as a result of the products that are sold nowadays under the “Disney Princess” headline.
Mary Rose,
Yes, but often the prince too has a difficulty that is only resolved by marrying the princess, a fact consistently overlooked by the feminists. In Beauty and the Beast, it was the Beast who was in distress, cursed to look on the outside as he did on the inside until he learned to love. In that story, it was Belle who actually rescued him.
In many other stories, the prince must overcome his fears of facing evil and death in order to come to the rescue. That too is lost on the feminists. It is the concept of sacrificial love, and the reason why the moral of such stories is that only the brave deserve the fair. Our sons could use a healthy dose of that today.
Um, I’m sorry, but if my kid would have to choose between Disney Princesses and Bratz dolls, the princesses would win every time.
I agree with what Alexandra said – that Disney in a way has brought this upon themselves. They’ve been marketing to younger and younger audiences programs like those of the Disney Channel. Programs which we will not allow in our home.
It saddens me greatly to see young girls trying to emulate the Demi Lovatos, Selena Gomezes, and Miley Cyruses of the world. I hate to see them losing their innocence and loss of interest in pink princesses so early. :( They get sucked in and then what do these real-life young female idols do? They gyrate on stage, they cavort with boyfriends in tabloids – and our kids see ALL of it.
I hope to God they (whoever they are) never stop making the American Girl movies.
Gerard, I agree. Great insight, thanks.
“… in a sinless world the strengths and limitations of men and women would synergize one another in perfect harmony.”
The world is getting more sinful as this is less and less so. This makes me think “feminism” is not the answer. Feminism seeks to abolish The Grail Myth (chivalry) in gender dynamics.
Evolution? . . . Sounds like devolution.
I always grew up wanting to be a princess because they were all strong women.
Cinderella walked on broken glass and never gave up hope.
Sleeping beauty let a whole lifetime pass and never gave up on her future.
Belle learned selfless love by falling in love with a hideous beast.
Jasmine looked past money and gold and fell in love with a kind brave boy.
Snow white almost lost her heart to a knife.
Pocahontas stood up for what was right even when it went against the norm.
Mulan risked her life to save her family and country.
Tiana never ever gave up on her dreams no matter how hard she had to work.
It was all about blood, sweat, and tears because life and love means facing your biggest fears.
People focus to much on the word “princess” and less on the woman as a whole. Not one disney princess was afraid of going against the norm, doing what was right and going for her goals. not one was a lazy prissy princess that expected everything handed to her. they were all strong women.
Angel: “The ‘prince’ in fact, is NOT interested at all in rescuing Rapunzel. He is a typical modern-day schlep of a young man. He’s interested in his own life and no one else.”
In other words, he’s acting like a……………princess. What young women are revered for in these movies, young men are reviled for.
“We went to see the Princess and Frog which quite frankly was horrible. The two lead characters were frogs for most of the movie – who truly wants to watch a movie about frogs!”
Frogs > People. I thought the movie did pretty well, box-office-wise.
MaryRose: “And personally, I think the Disney Princesses have, in recent years, contributed to the entitled pain-in-the-rear attitude of women these days. Although I don’t think it’s a result of the movies so much as a result of the products that are sold nowadays under the ‘Disney Princess’ headline.”
Nailed it.
If a woman were to say, “I just want to find somebody who treats me like a princess!” I’d ask if she were also willing to treat the guy ilke a prince. If I got an incredulous, “get real!” response, I’d say, “Uh-HUH!” and walk away.
Gerard,
Beauty and the Beast always *was* my favorite XD
It is true that many of the princes had problems to face with their princesses. My irritation in particular is mostly on such princesses as Arielle and Jasmine. Arielle is a defiant teen who gets her way in the end, Jasmine is pretty much entirely dependent on the whims of the men in her life (although this is more true to her setting, nothing else about the story is!). And the new movie, The Frog Princess, really crosses the line for me, since despite all of her perseverance and hard work, Tiana’s dreams cannot be fulfilled until she gets her prince!
Belle, Sleeping Beauty, Cinderella, Snow White, Mulan, and Pocahontas all portray storylines that I can support more freely.
And I’m all about the strong male influences in movies with female leads (ie, Beast, Captain Li Shang, Prince Phillip…) I’ll admit I grind my teeth over Pocahontas a bit because I know a little about the real John Smith’s reputation.
I’m very much with Jill re: The Prince of Egypt though. Love that one!
To me growing up, these were only cartoons to be enjoyed, not analyzed and criticized for their “message” or social value. Good grief who do we analyze next, Donald and Daisy Duck? Is Daisy Duck an independent woman? What does she truly represent? Is there something sexually suggestive about Donald Duck not wearing pants? Yes I know ducks don’t wear pants but Donald Duck is no ordinary duck, he wears a shirt so there is something sexually suggestive about him not wearing pants. Do you suppose he wants to have sex with Daisy Duck? Well she is a girl duck and ducks will be ducks.
Did my fascination with Wonder Woman really indicate my suppressed lesbianism?
Did I ever see WW kiss a man? Did her sexually suggestive outfit warp my mind?
“Oy gavolt” as my German grandmother always said as she slapped her head in exasperation. I have no clue what it means or if this is how its spelled.
Mary,
I respectfully disagree. Children are easily influenced and it is my opinion that we most certainly should be monitoring what they watch and considering the value of the messages they’re receiving.
Of course, I’m in the minority in that my sons watch very very little television/movies in general. What they do watch, we carefully consider in advance. My 2-year-old’s current favorite show is Yo Gabba Gabba, and he absolutely loves the movie Cars.
Hi Mary Rose,
We will have to agree to disagree. Throughout history children have been exposed to considerably worse like war, crime, slavery, sexual slavery, poverty, and various other hardships.
Children were used as laborers in the most appalling conditions in factories and mines, attended public executions, marched with their parents to war, and experienced famines, natural disasters, and epidemics.
Given this, I’m not inclined to worry about cartoons.
Mary,
It’s true that children have been & are exposed to worse. As a parent, however, I don’t feel that other evils in the world excuse me for not screening my children’s cartoons. Perhaps, as you seem to believe, I am too tightly strung. Regardless, I would rather be too cautious than too permitting.
Actually, feminists have been quite outspoken about the objectification and sexualization of women in the media. Two authors I’ve read in recent months: Catharine MacKinnon, a prominent figure in the anti-pornography movement. And Ariel Levy published a wonderful book on the subject in 2005, entitled “Female Chauvinist Pigs: Women and the Rise of Raunch Culture.” Levy argues that the media has essentially co-opted the feminist message, commodifying and further sexualizing it. Women like the Spice Girls dressing up in cheetah undies and claiming empowerment, but jettisoning the overt political commitment to women’s rights. Not good.
Feminists take issue with BOTH princesses (in the general sense) and porn. At their essence, both representations of women extoll the virtue of being…passive. And dependent. Princesses need prince charmings, and porn stars are paid to fit the ideal of female sexuality predetermined by their producers. And as far as Disney goes…there are certainly some good messages to be shared, but the goal is to sell stuff to kids. I think it’s a better idea just to turn off the television and send kids outside to play.
Hi Megan,
You bring up a point that is critical. Porn. On this we will definitely agree. But if memory serves me correct all Hugh Hefner had to do was schmooze up to some of these feminists and support their causes. I also have a serious issue with rap “music” that refers to women, particulary black women, by some of the most vile names imagininable and that glorify acts of degradation and violence against women.
However this is defended as “artistic expression” and “free speech”. But hey, let’s analyze cartoons. Certainly porn and violent degrading rap are just free expression that we must tolerate in our society. Cartoons and fantasy characters, now that’s a real threat!
Mary Rose,
By all means do whatever you feel is in the best interests of your children. But as I point out to Megan, I think there are more pressing concerns our society has than analyzing Disney cartoon princess characters, like porn and violent rap. BTW, there were cartoons I didn’t want my kids to watch either, as they were gross or violent.
Mary,
I’d like it if you’d qualify your arguments. WHO defends “violence against women” as artistic expression? There is a difference between depictions of sexuality, even the most air-brushed versions, and outright violence in the media. We can have a whole debate about whether even “innocent” soft-core porn encourages gender-based violence, but that’s a different subject. On the issue of media violence, feminists have been quite outspoken. If you’re interested in the responses of black women to misogyny and hip-hop, both Patricia Hill Collins and Kimberle Krenshaw have written a great deal about the subject. From Krenshaw’s “Black feminism and 2 Live Crew”: “Those of us who are concerned about the high rates of gender violence in our communities must be troubled by the possible connections between these images and tolerance for violence against women.”
Megan,
I didn’t suggest that feminists support violent rap, rather its been the “entertainment” industry who wail about artistic freedom and freedom of speech. I fully understand that sexuality is one thing, which for the most part I have no issue with, glorifying the degradation of women is quite another.
I think all this analyzing of Disney princesses and cartoon characters is navel gazing on the part of people with too much time on their hands.
IMO we have far more serious concerns about “music” that refers to women by some of the most vile names imaginable and that glorifies acts of degradation and violence against women. We don’t need to glorify Larry Flynt, who once had a Hustler cover picture of a woman in a meat grinder, as some champion of free speech. Gloria Steinem referred to him as “the Josef Goebbels in the war against women”, but that didn’t stop Hollywood from making a movie about him.
This is what should concern us, not Sleeping Beauty or The Little Mermaid.
Mary,
I agree with you. There is something to be said about free speech, which I don’t think should be restricted, but money-making schemes wrapped up in the cloak of free speech is another issue. “Navel gazing.” I love that phrase, wish I could remember to use it more often.
Mary,
Of course there are bigger humanitarian works to be done than to focus on Disney Princesses. That said, I think it would be foolish of us to discount the influence that television and movies has on our young children. I absolutely believe that the shows and movies to which we subject impressionable children has a substantial effect on the maturity/attitude/behavior/tone of that generation.
I know plenty of actively pro-life parents who also screen their children’s programming. I don’t see how one need be ambivalent to what movies and shows their children watch in order for them to be effective and caring humanitarians. The two are not mutually exclusive.
Of course, this reflects the approach I take. I understand that your approach is a different one. However, since you asked about her, I do believe that Wonder Woman was a contributing factor in some ways to the increased sexualization of our culture. And the increased sexualization of our culture is directly linked to: -pornography -spousal abuse -degredation of women -abortion and many more. Naturally, I am not saying that Wonder Woman is responsible for all of these. I am only saying that they are all part and parcel of a larger picture.
Naturally I don’t believe that it is my responsibility or right to tell you what cartoon themes your children should watch. That is the responsibility of the individual parent. I was expressing a personal opinion about the message being sent, and I agreed in many ways with Gerard’s points (as I often do).
The way I see it – there is nothing wrong with a good old classic fairytale. Sure we might fantasize about knights and princesses when we’re children, but nevertheless we eventually grow up and see the world for what it is. The princesses in the Disney movies are maybe too ‘perfect’ in their appearance (narrow waist, perfect breasts, beautiful hair,etc, where I would like the message to be “you don’t have to be perfect to be beautiful”), but I think I’d let that slip, as otherwise those fairytales don’t do much harm. However, there are other cartoons (NOT Disney ones) that in my opinion are much more suitable for children (talking mainly about foreign productions, russian, lithuanian, etc). Since we’re expecting our first one next summer, my New Year resolution is to make a good DVD collection of fairytales and cartoons that I think would teach our child strong values at the same time being fun to watch.
The main problem I have with modern cartoons, movies and children/teen programs is NOT the princesses, it’s the violence and sexualisation of children. There are A LOT of cartoons and movies that are simply NOT SUITABLE for children (even though they’re supposedly claimed to be “for children”) and I won’t let my child watch them. I don’t think good old fairytales will be on that list, even the Disney ones.
Hi Mary Rose,
Actually my commentary about what children have endured was more of a general commentary and not specifically directed at you. It was also directed at this “concern” for Disney princess movies which has been going on for some time, this is nothing new. I listened to it 20+ years ago as my children grew up and I thought ”concern” and debate over the redeeming social value of “The Little Mermaid” and “Pocahontas” was as stupid then as I do now.
Certainly you have every right to act in your children’s best interests as you see fit. As I pointed out there were cartoons I didn’t let my children watch for the same reasons you point out, violence and sexualization of children and characters. Also just plain crassness. The Disney and Saturday morning cartoons I grew up with were different. BTW my children are all grown and very inclined academically, so cartoons are not an issue for me anymore.
Its all in the perspective. Personally, as I pointed out to Megan, I have far more concerns with violent rap and pictures of women in meatgrinders than I do the Disney princesses, again a general statement. As for Wonder Woman I don’t believe she anymore increased the sexualization of women then a very sexy Superman in very tight pants increased the sexualization of men. As a child these were comic superheros and that’s all they were to me. I had no concept of “sexualization”. Actually I was more interested in flying like Wonder Woman could than I was in looking like her!
Hi Vita,
Your 6:05am post pretty well sums it up.
Mary Rose,
I should also specify that what I was referring as “cartoons” was the Disney princess and Disney cartoons. I should have been more specific about that.
In fact, my mother told me there was “concern” over Donald Duck not having pants, that wasn’t just me being facetious. As a child I never took particular note of that fact, I just liked the cartoon.
As my children were growing TV became more explicit and required monitoring, even cartoons. I cancelled HBO because of the violence, crassness, and gore. I told the clerk that was not my idea of entertainment. Unfortunately screening wasn’t always easy since you didn’t know what would appear on family programming. My kids seem to have done OK. They’re not TV addicts and don’t even have cable in their apts. so I’m thankful for that! But there is the internet…… Like parents of old we will always have to be on the alert for one thing or another.
We went to see the Princess and Frog which quite frankly was horrible. The two lead characters were frogs for most of the movie – who truly wants to watch a movie about frogs! And the creepy voodoo aspect of the entire movie was scary and disgusting. It was the bomb it rightly deserved to be.
I have to disagree with you. First of all, the movie wasn’t a “bomb.” It didn’t do as well as Disney would have liked in the U.S., but it did well overseas (particularly in Germany, for some reason), and has made about $350 million altogether.
The movie did have some dark elements, and it wasn’t for everyone. However, I LOVED it. My daughter and I went to see it and she asked me why i was sitting there with tears running down my face. I told her that when I was growing up, there were no black princesses, barely any black dolls. Remember I grew up in a very racist community where we were the only black people there. I always felt I was sooo ugly because I didn’t have fair skin and blue eyes and long blonde hair. I really hated looking in the mirror at myself. It wouldn’t have been so bad if my parents had been supportive. Yes, it was “just a movie,” but perhaps if I would have had something like this when I was growing up, life would have been just a bit more bearable for me.
phillymiss, thank you, thank you for your great post! After reading Jerry’s comments to NYC Council members regarding who is targeting who and now reading your post, we need to reflect on how movies and cartoons (not just Disney) affect all of our children.
I took a class several years back that talked about this issues of sexism (not just toward females but toward males as well) and racism in children’s movies and cartoons and the class pointed out many of them. I don’t think we should assume things like ”it’s just a movie” but we need to look at the larger picture.
The woman who taught the class was not some nazifeminist but rather a practicing Catholic and active prolifer. I do understand the differences between the genders but some movies cross the line.
My mom never let me watch Wonder Woman because of how she was portrayed. I was not allowed to watch Dukes of Hazzards or Bay Watch for the same reason.
I think I understand why we have little girls running around with skin tight clothing and shorty shorts that have the word “Princess” written across their backsides. Woman are more than what they look like and men are more than saviors.
(tried to respond to this thread earlier, but my iPod touch would not let me post a response) I am well beyond the marketing age for disney princesses, but my favorite is Belle. I was 12 when that movie came out and the merchandising we have today had not begun. My sister says I am like Belle cause I love to read. My dream came true when I went to a Princess lunch last year at Disney World and Belle was the hostess Princess. (And Disney Channel never used to have a character like Alex, they used to have GOOD programming. It has gone down hill in the last few years. Its not like it was in the 1980s anymore.) It was just a few years ago that all of my nieces LOVED the Disney princesses (well, my youngest niece wasn’t born yet) and now they might watch the movies, but that’s as far as they go. I’d rather a little girl dress like Belle or Snow White than Miley Cyrus. They can’t totally abandon fairy tales. When you think Disney, you almost always think Snow White and other fairy tales. The princess stories do have a way of saying to follow your dreams…..Cinderella escaped her step family, Belle found adventure, Snow White found love, Ariel discovered herself, etc.
Hi Liz,
That’s the point I have made all along here. These are fantasy characters, cartoons for heaven’s sake. Let’s stop with the navel gazing, PC, pscyhoanalysis, and psychobabble. Megan and I pointed out that there are ways women are reviled and degraded. such as porn and violent rap, that should really be addressed.
Let children enjoy the fantasies and stories. My daughter was fixated on The Little Mermaid. Its one of my fondest memories of her as a child. She didn’t develop an urge to grow a fishtail and has grown into a very well adjusted adult.
Quite frankly, I don’t agree that some degree of analysis equals navel gazing psychobabble. I think it’s incredibly inconsiderate to imply that a parent’s concern about the role models-even the fictional ones-in his/her child’s life is a waste of time.
I grew up with a great love of Disney movies. Additionally, my first purchase was a Samantha American Girl Doll for which I collected & returned cans & saved for over a year. My point is that I am not immune to a certain fondness for these happy childhood memories. I can, however, distance myself from my own nostalgia enough to recognize when a female lead sets a precedent which I don’t desire to encourage, or when a company’s hyper-consumerist practices make their influence undesirable in my children’s lives. Making that (oftentimes difficult) decision doesn’t make me a crazy. The snarky quips are beginning to become grating.
I agree Mary Rose. It’s a no brainer that porn and violent rap should be kept away from all children. The issue is are there some issues with movies and cartoons marketed to children? I see some issues and choose not to look the other way.
I don’t have a say about what my kids listen to/watch after the age of 18, but being aware of what they are watching/listening to and the messages they are being sent is my job until that time.
Mary Rose,
As I said before, there were cartoons I did not let my children watch so I agree there are definitely ones out there inapproriate for children. Yes parents have a responsiblity to determine what is unfit for their children to watch and have every right to act in what they consider their children’s best interests.
Its my opinion that all this analyzing, psychoanalying, and concern over Disney princesses is nonsense and a waste of time, especially with porn and violent rap as rampant as it is. Fantasy characters and fairy tale princesses are not role models, they’re cartoon characters. After everything that children have endured and lived through since the becoming of time, Disney princesses seem pretty harmless. If people disagree with me I respect that.
No you don’t. If people disagree with you, you call them navel gazers.
No Mary Rose,
I expressed the opinion that people who waste their time on such nonsense as psychoanalyzing Disney cartoon princesses and Disney characters as Donald Duck, which actually happened, are navel gazers. Obviously they need to find more productive use for their time. Children have enjoyed these fantasy figures for generations and the world is not worse off for it. Maybe they should have a bigger issue with a movie made portraying a pornographer, who’s porn magazine cover displayed women in meat grinders, as some champion of free speech.
You’ve been consistently condescending. If it’s such a waste of time to analyze the cartoons that our children watch, wouldn’t it be more of a waste of time to argue about it? I believe that it’s important to analyze the message my child is receiving as I see fit. And while I’m sorry to see Disney princesses go, I can’t say that I love the entitled spoiled rotten attitude that their products encourage.
I think perhaps I was a little too irritated for my own good (as well as slightly distracted) when I wrote the last few posts. I apologize for my sharp responses. While I do feel a bit as though there is some unnecessary criticism of a legitimate concern going on, I also realize that my reaction may have become a bit too aggravated. My regrets.
Good Morning Mary Rose,
This was obviously a misunderstanding. If anything I agreed with you that certain cartoons are inappropriate and like you I also forbade my children from watching certain ones. I also agreed parents have a right to pick and choose as they see fit what their children watch. I especially disliked the crassness of many of the cartoons that were popular when my kids were growing up.
My issue is with people who obsess over the “messages” , “social commentary” ,and psychoanalysis of cartoon characters. They look for things that just aren’t there. I have no issue with the legitimate concerns of parents.
I apologize for any misunderstanding. Sometimes across the internet messages and points being made get very garbled. My regrets as well.
Mary: “Maybe they should have a bigger issue with a movie made portraying a pornographer, who’s porn magazine cover displayed women in meat grinders, as some champion of free speech.”
From what I see, Mary, Mary Rose and I and others do have a bigger issue with sexualizing children. But we’re also allowed to have an issue with girls growing up with a princess complex, and boys being thrust into the role of white knight whether they care to be or not. Just because littering is less serious than the Holocaust doesn’t mean we can’t criticize people who litter.
Hi bmmg39
Like you I have an issue with sexualizing children and as Mary Rose pointed out and I agree, parents have a responsiblity to be vigilant as to what their children watch. We definitely have women with princess complexes, we call them Divas, but I doubt it stems from watching ”Cindrella” or the “Little Mermaid”.
I can well remember when men were far more chivalrous and treated women with considerably more respect but I doubt that came from white knight stories but rather from societal expectations and upbringing. Also growing up, I remember boys being more involved with the rough and tumble of being boys, which usually meant girls were “yucky” than being pressured into being “white knights”. From observing my own son and his friends as they grew up I don’t think much has changed. I’m very proud of the fact though that my adult son treats women with a great deal of respect. My nephew who was a hellion, and I mean a hellion, has impeccable manners and class when associating with women. But either of them white knights? Not even close.
I would be far more concerned with gangs that are terrorizing a neighborhood than I would with residents who litter.
“I can well remember when men were far more chivalrous and treated women with considerably more respect but I doubt that came from white knight stories but rather from societal expectations and upbringing.”
If I am fortunate to be a parent someday, I will not be teaching my son(s) to be chivalrous. I will teach my son(s) AND daughter(s) to be courteous, which is a more gender-neutral concept. Whether you’re a boy or a girl (I’ll say), you should treat others with caring and respect, you should never hit anyone except in true cases of self-defense, and you should expect that others will show you the same kindness. Some parents (and I don’t mean anyone here) are really good about “teaching boys to respect girls” but drop the ball when the time to teach girls to reciprocate does.
Hi bmmg39,
Personally I think chivalry died a long time ago. Now we have rap “music” that glorifies violence against women and we glorify a pornographer as a champion of free speech. Young women are abandoned to lives of poverty and dependency to raise children alone. Frankly, I’ll take chivalry any day.
However I agree with you that respect and consideration should be mutual and children need to be taught this. I didn’t teach my son to be chivalrous, but he also understood that talking to and treating women like playthings or anything less than equal human beings is unacceptable. I couldn’t be prouder of how my daughters turned out as well.