Are Disney Movies Bad for Children?

[Nailed to the Perch]

May I be direct with you for a moment?

Actually, screw the asking, I'll do it anyways.

When I was a little kid, someone in my extended family gave my brother and I a VHS copy of Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs. We loved that movie, we watched it quite often. If I had a VHS player today, I'd still be playing it. The VHS copy is currently sitting in front of me on my dresser, still in its original packaging.

I checked out a large anthology of fairy tales by the Brother's Grimm from the public library. I perused that every single day for a week, and then I went back and reread them again. Some of my favorite stories from that one include their version of Cinderella and Sleeping Beauty.

I love Shakespeare. Some of the most enjoyable plays that I've read yet was The Merchant of Venice, Hamlet, and The Taming of the Shrew.

As a feminist, I am also aware that they are problematic. But I am aware of their problematic-ness, and I acknowledge it.

Just because we see problems doesn't mean we want to ban it. I would want kids to read Shakespeare, read fairy tales, watch Disney movies, etc. It's part of our culture. But I want to teach them that this are all just archetypes, that there are other options out there, and that they need not be a princess/prince Charming to find happiness.

That's it. Teach them.

I will say that feminism in general could really do some more to make that position clearer, honestly. The actual point of "teach them" was only brought up in the last couple of pages of this entire thread, where before that only the problematic nature of the works were discussed

Really now?

I made this post on page 2 of this thread:

Oh, most Disney movies are fucking awful when you actually think about them. The Little Mermaid suggests that true love means abandoning your family and home and giving up everything that makes you yourself in order to impress a dude. Beauty and the Beast is the story of how a woman fell in love with a dude who literally kidnapped her and held her captive. I still love them both - I just love them in an adult, nuanced way that involves recognizing that they're deeply flawed.

I think it's fine to show Disney movies to kids, but I think a good parent would accompany them with talks about the ways in which the stories are and aren't good examples for real life. Kids are smarter than people give them credit for - if it's explained to them, they can understand just fine how they can simultaneously admire Ariel for saving Eric's life but think she was foolish to sacrifice her voice for him.

Here's Indi on page 4:

Disney tropes in general are HORRIBLE.

Nevertheless, I'm okay with kids watching these movies, as long as they're being taught that this is problematic and why.

Quite a lot of people have consistently expressed the position that it's important to look at the media we consume with a critical eye, and to talk to kids about problematic elements of it, but that it's perfectly possible to acknowledge that something is flawed while still enjoying it. I'm sorry you haven't paid attention to that argument until the last couple of pages, but it's a bit ridiculous to argue that the problem is that we just weren't being clear enough that it's fine to show Disney movies to kids, but a good parent would accompany them with talks about the ways in which the stories are and aren't good examples for real life when we said things like "it's fine to show Disney movies to kids, but I think a good parent would accompany them with talks about the ways in which the stories are and aren't good examples for real life."

[America Resurgent]

Oh, most Disney movies are fucking awful when you actually think about them. The Little Mermaid suggests that true love means abandoning your family and home and giving up everything that makes you yourself in order to impress a dude. Beauty and the Beast is the story of how a woman fell in love with a dude who literally kidnapped her and held her captive. I still love them both - I just love them in an adult, nuanced way that involves recognizing that they're deeply flawed.

I think it's fine to show Disney movies to kids, but I think a good parent would accompany them with talks about the ways in which the stories are and aren't good examples for real life. Kids are smarter than people give them credit for - if it's explained to them, they can understand just fine how they can simultaneously admire Ariel for saving Eric's life but think she was foolish to sacrifice her voice for him.

[+Indi's post]

Hm! Guess I vas wrong about this thread.

*shrugs*

I could find the other places I've seen it talked about and point to instances where people derided, indeed, all media ever for being too sexist and explaining that they wanted that media reduced, if y'want.

[The Legion of War]

I'm seeing a lot of "Disney was racist" and what not. While that may be true in some cases, I wonder... can the Hunchback of Notre Dame fall under this category?

The ugly guy was the hero and the "normal" guy was a twisted monster at heart. The dark skinned girl is also a hero.

Is there something I'm missing or is this movie actually alright?

[The Rich Port]

I'm seeing a lot of "Disney was racist" and what not. While that may be true in some cases, I wonder... can the Hunchback of Notre Dame fall under this category?

The ugly guy was the hero and the "normal" guy was a twisted monster at heart. The dark skinned girl is also a hero.

Is there something I'm missing or is this movie actually alright?

Well, if I might chime in, is there any particular reason why Disney couldn't hammer a cheesy "ugly guys can get hot girls too" message in instead of copping out and including a relatively attractive cardboard cut out that had no reason to be in the movie in the first place?

But I guess that's not racist. That doesn't mean other movies aren't racist.

And that Gypsy lady was barely a heroine.

Hunchback was a decent movie, but in no way solid.

[The Legion of War]

I'm seeing a lot of "Disney was racist" and what not. While that may be true in some cases, I wonder... can the Hunchback of Notre Dame fall under this category?

The ugly guy was the hero and the "normal" guy was a twisted monster at heart. The dark skinned girl is also a hero.

Is there something I'm missing or is this movie actually alright?

Well, if I might chime in, is there any particular reason why Disney couldn't hammer a cheesy "ugly guys can get hot girls too" message in instead of copping out and including a relatively attractive cardboard cut out that had no reason to be in the movie in the first place?

But I guess that's not racist. That doesn't mean other movies aren't racist.

And that Gypsy lady was barely a heroine.

Hunchback was a decent movie, but in no way solid.

Well at least the dark skinned girl wasn't evil, and yes I agree that the white knight guy had no real purpose in the movie.

And obviously just because one movie isn't racist doesn't mean that applied to all of them. Nowhere did I even imply that was the case. I was specifically talking about the Hunchback of Notre Dame.

[The Rich Port]

Well, if I might chime in, is there any particular reason why Disney couldn't hammer a cheesy "ugly guys can get hot girls too" message in instead of copping out and including a relatively attractive cardboard cut out that had no reason to be in the movie in the first place?

But I guess that's not racist. That doesn't mean other movies aren't racist.

And that Gypsy lady was barely a heroine.

Hunchback was a decent movie, but in no way solid.

Well at least the dark skinned girl wasn't evil, and yes I agree that the white knight guy had no real purpose in the movie.

And obviously just because one movie isn't racist doesn't mean that applied to all of them. Nowhere did I even imply that was the case. I was specifically talking about the Hunchback of Notre Dame.

That's not a very high bar. Actually, I don't remember there being many dark-skinned evil villainesses in Disney. Dark-skinned villains, yes.

So... What WERE you implying?

I say Hunchback is sort of racist because it fucks Quasimodo over.

[The Legion of War]

Well at least the dark skinned girl wasn't evil, and yes I agree that the white knight guy had no real purpose in the movie.

And obviously just because one movie isn't racist doesn't mean that applied to all of them. Nowhere did I even imply that was the case. I was specifically talking about the Hunchback of Notre Dame.

That's not a very high bar. Actually, I don't remember there being many dark-skinned evil villainesses in Disney. Dark-skinned villains, yes.

So... What WERE you implying?

I say Hunchback is sort of racist because it fucks Quasimodo over.

I didn't imply anything. I merely asked if, compared to other Disney movies, is the Hunchback not so racist.

Yeah, or has other qualities that bring it down like Quasimodo not getting the girl because he's ugly, but I don't find that racist.

Discriminatory, I suppose because it implies ugly people and beautiful people can't be together. But racist? I don't think so.

[The Rich Port]

That's not a very high bar. Actually, I don't remember there being many dark-skinned evil villainesses in Disney. Dark-skinned villains, yes.

So... What WERE you implying?

I say Hunchback is sort of racist because it fucks Quasimodo over.

I didn't imply anything. I merely asked if, compared to other Disney movies, is the Hunchback not so racist.

Yeah, or has other qualities that bring it down like Quasimodo not getting the girl because he's ugly, but I don't find that racist.

Discriminatory, I suppose because it implies ugly people and beautiful people can't be together. But racist? I don't think so.

Semantics.

Discriminatory.

That's what I meant.

These last couple of posts of clarification are now pointless.

Let's talk about an actually good Disney movie.

[Ksclve]

In Russia, Disney should be outlawed

it's gay propaganda

[America Resurgent]

That's not a very high bar. Actually, I don't remember there being many dark-skinned evil villainesses in Disney. Dark-skinned villains, yes.

So... What WERE you implying?

I say Hunchback is sort of racist because it fucks Quasimodo over.

I'm sorry, but equating fucking quasimodo over with racism is ridiculous. At the very least the fact that Quasimodo is the protagonist of that film should make that apparent.

The reason why Quasimodo didn't get the girl, and this cardboard cutout fellow did, isn'tt due to some latent racist tendencies but instead to make Quasimodo look better in comparison to the other fellow as he gave far more of himself for her than this other guy. (From what I remember)

[Maurepas]

That's not a very high bar. Actually, I don't remember there being many dark-skinned evil villainesses in Disney. Dark-skinned villains, yes.

So... What WERE you implying?

I say Hunchback is sort of racist because it fucks Quasimodo over.

I'm sorry, but equating fucking quasimodo over with racism is ridiculous. At the very least the fact that Quasimodo is the protagonist of that film should make that apparent.

The reason why Quasimodo didn't get the girl, and this cardboard cutout fellow did, isn'tt due to some latent racist tendencies but instead to make Quasimodo look better in comparison to the other fellow as he gave far more of himself for her than this other guy. (From what I remember)

Maybe, I'm personally not a fan of Hunchback just from a narrative perspective. It builds a whole movie around this message that it's okay to be different, but then blows it entirely at the end, because obviously if you're ugly you still can't get the girl.

[Nazis in Space]

I'm sorry, but equating fucking quasimodo over with racism is ridiculous. At the very least the fact that Quasimodo is the protagonist of that film should make that apparent.

The reason why Quasimodo didn't get the girl, and this cardboard cutout fellow did, isn'tt due to some latent racist tendencies but instead to make Quasimodo look better in comparison to the other fellow as he gave far more of himself for her than this other guy. (From what I remember)

Maybe, I'm personally not a fan of Hunchback just from a narrative perspective. It builds a whole movie around this message that it's okay to be different, but then blows it entirely at the end, because obviously if you're ugly you still can't get the girl.

A harsh but important lesson preparing the children for the real, adult world.

[Ryccia]

I am not 100% sure this belongs in General rather than Arts and Fiction but as the intent here is to focus the discussion on the influence of the films on society rather than the films themselves I'm putting it here.

I was watching a bunch of Disney movies with my sister yesterday and I do not think they are a good influence on children, especially girls. The movies are full of racist and sexist messages.
The classic Disney princesses are all dangerously underweight. Many are passive and helpless and even those who do have some control over their own lives are still ultimately reliant on the prince to save them. Most marry in their teens.
On top of this there is a pattern in the appearances of the characters. Protagonists of both genders are beautiful, supporting characters are strange looking and villains are ugly or monstrous. This clearly sends the wrong message about appearance. Villains are always darker in colour than the heroes as well. Even on the rare occasion heroes are not white they are always lighter skinned than the villains.
One exception I noted was Beauty and the Beast which had only the problem of the underweight princess. I also am overlooking the 21st century films as they do not have the same influence as the older ones in popular culture.
I would not take issue with any of this if these were movies for adults, but as Disney movies are not only aimed at young children but are usually the first movies children see it is important to be aware of the lessons they are teaching.

What does everybody else think? Are Disney movies a bad influence on children? Do the characters make good role models?

EDIT: I would like to retract my claim about Beauty and the Beast not being harmful in light of some well reasoned responses. I still think it is better than most but clearly there are problems I missed.
EDIT 2: I would like to make clear that this isn't a call for censorship or banning Disney or anything like that. If you think it is please read the OP again.

No they aren´t.

[America Resurgent]

Maybe, I'm personally not a fan of Hunchback just from a narrative perspective. It builds a whole movie around this message that it's okay to be different, but then blows it entirely at the end, because obviously if you're ugly you still can't get the girl.

If you equate "people don't accept you for being different" in a movie with "it's not okay to be different", then the movie is problematic from a whole lot more angles. I mean, before the damned girl came into it, Quasimodo literally has to flee from church to church to escape persecution. Society is pretty unforgiving towards his differences, even from the beginning of the movie.

So pretty clearly, that isn't the message the movie is conveying, but that's fine because the narrative it builds is actually better: "The people who are outcasts, whom people think of as bad or inferior, are in fact better people than their persecutors." Quasimodo suffers endlessly, yet he doesn't take it out on other people to nearly the same extent that they take out their base instincts on him. He protects his unrequited love despite the fact that she would choose another man in a heartbeat, something that other man can't boast.

Which is pretty pro-ugly guy, I have to say.

[The Puritan Empire]

Disney cartoons (Hannah-Barbera, and many others) seem to teach many falsehoods about reality, and therefore are detrimental to children. Here are a few examples;
*Heroes an heroins are all good looking members of their sex/species, while the villains are all at least weird looking if not outright ugly. In RL most villains are in fact average to goodlooking.
*Animals are given anthropomorphic traits, behaviours, and drives that are alien to all but humans. Ive seen a five yrld trying to reason with an angry dog (Good thing it was behind a fence!)
*And oh ya, the unrealistic violence (Endemic to tv in general, not just cartoons); Im allright with violence, but nobody is going to walk away from an anvil dropped on them!

[America Resurgent]

A harsh but important lesson preparing the children for the real, adult world.

Well, to some extent.

If you want to go full-on realistic, the gargoyles Quasimodo hangs out with would have be getting into street crime and in fact committing violence against the normal humans as a result of their poor treatment, which in turn caused the regular people to hate and marginalize them more, which in turn caused them to become more violent, and poor Quasimodo is caught up in this mess of conflict where his desire for the girl and for acceptance among regular humankind drives a wedge between he and his gargoyle friends.

And then the humans capture him, but the gargoyles attack the place in which he was captured and kill him anyway. The end.

[Frenequesta]

If Disney Movies are bad for children, then so were the fairy tales/novels they are based off of.

Add a couple of other entertainment outlets to the list and then we'll talk.

[The Rich Port]

Maybe, I'm personally not a fan of Hunchback just from a narrative perspective. It builds a whole movie around this message that it's okay to be different, but then blows it entirely at the end, because obviously if you're ugly you still can't get the girl.

A harsh but important lesson preparing the children for the real, adult world.

... Which is bullshit because "ugly" people get into relationships with "attractive" people all the time.

[The Legion of War]

Maybe, I'm personally not a fan of Hunchback just from a narrative perspective. It builds a whole movie around this message that it's okay to be different, but then blows it entirely at the end, because obviously if you're ugly you still can't get the girl.

If you equate "people don't accept you for being different" in a movie with "it's not okay to be different", then the movie is problematic from a whole lot more angles. I mean, before the damned girl came into it, Quasimodo literally has to flee from church to church to escape persecution. Society is pretty unforgiving towards his differences, even from the beginning of the movie.

So pretty clearly, that isn't the message the movie is conveying, but that's fine because the narrative it builds is actually better: "The people who are outcasts, whom people think of as bad or inferior, are in fact better people than their persecutors." Quasimodo suffers endlessly, yet he doesn't take it out on other people to nearly the same extent that they take out their base instincts on him. He protects his unrequited love despite the fact that she would choose another man in a heartbeat, something that other man can't boast.

Which is pretty pro-ugly guy, I have to say.

In a lots of ways, yes it does say volumes about Quasimodo.

But no matter what he does for Esmeralda, she chose the more handsome guy who was Frollo's right hand man for half the movie. In the end Quasimodo doesn't get what he wants, or at least partially.

He DOES become accepted by the general public, but he doesn't get the girl.

Which may or may not send out the message that if you're ugly, attractive people won't want to be with you. Which could be detrimental to the self esteem of children. Then again, children probably don't look into it that far. I know I didn't.

But I wonder if it's in there subconsciously, somewhere. Not sure.

[Ifreann]

I'm seeing a lot of "Disney was racist" and what not. While that may be true in some cases, I wonder... can the Hunchback of Notre Dame fall under this category?

The ugly guy was the hero and the "normal" guy was a twisted monster at heart. The dark skinned girl is also a hero.

Is there something I'm missing or is this movie actually alright?

See this post for opinions on how Esmerelda was depicted in The Hunchback.

[America Resurgent]

In a lots of ways, yes it does say volumes about Quasimodo.

But no matter what he does for Esmeralda, she chose the more handsome guy who was Frollo's right hand man for half the movie. In the end Quasimodo doesn't get what he wants, or at least partially.

He DOES become accepted by the general public, but he doesn't get the girl.

Which may or may not send out the message that if you're ugly, attractive people won't want to be with you. Which could be detrimental to the self esteem of children. Then again, children probably don't look into it that far. I know I didn't.

But I wonder if it's in there subconsciously, somewhere. Not sure.

Okay, two things:

1. You have to look at it from both sides--the future attractive women watching that film will get the message that "Gee, Quasimodo may have been ugly, but my god he was the guy I'd have picked!". Which in turn causes them to want to be with the unattractive types more, which, because reality is an influence too, makes the unattractive guys feel more wanted.
2. Even just looking at it from the perspective of the males, Quasimodo didn't lose the girl because he lacked intrisic worth--he was dealt a bad hand, that's all--and as such the eventual rejections the ugly guys do get aren't as crushing to them. After all, as the Hunchback of Notre-dame type movies told them, they're actually awesome individuals beneath the surface.

[The Legion of War]

In a lots of ways, yes it does say volumes about Quasimodo.

But no matter what he does for Esmeralda, she chose the more handsome guy who was Frollo's right hand man for half the movie. In the end Quasimodo doesn't get what he wants, or at least partially.

He DOES become accepted by the general public, but he doesn't get the girl.

Which may or may not send out the message that if you're ugly, attractive people won't want to be with you. Which could be detrimental to the self esteem of children. Then again, children probably don't look into it that far. I know I didn't.

But I wonder if it's in there subconsciously, somewhere. Not sure.

Okay, two things:

1. You have to look at it from both sides--the future attractive women watching that film will get the message that "Gee, Quasimodo may have been ugly, but my god he was the guy I'd have picked!". Which in turn causes them to want to be with the unattractive types more, which, because reality is an influence too, makes the unattractive guys feel more wanted.
2. Even just looking at it from the perspective of the males, Quasimodo didn't lose the girl because he lacked intrisic worth--he was dealt a bad hand, that's all--and as such the eventual rejections the ugly guys do get aren't as crushing to them. After all, as the Hunchback of Notre-dame type movies told them, they're actually awesome individuals beneath the surface.

1. Will they really? Esmeralda sets an example of a woman picking a guy who looks better but did nothing, over an ugly guy who did so much more for her. Future women may adopt this stance, choosing attractive males over ugly males who actually do things for them. There's always the possibility that they may not, and do as you said. It goes both ways, they can follow Esmeralda's example or not.

2. Quasimodo didn't get the girl because he's not as good looking as the other guy. He's awesome, no doubt, but the movie shows that no matter how awesome you are, if you're ugly you probably won't get the girl. Which may influence guys, and girls, to think that.

The movie depicts ugly people as being you know, people as well. But it does a poor job in portraying that they can be relationships just as much as handsome/beautiful people.

It goes both ways, depending on the individual who is watching it.

[The Legion of War]

I'm seeing a lot of "Disney was racist" and what not. While that may be true in some cases, I wonder... can the Hunchback of Notre Dame fall under this category?

The ugly guy was the hero and the "normal" guy was a twisted monster at heart. The dark skinned girl is also a hero.

Is there something I'm missing or is this movie actually alright?

See this post for opinions on how Esmerelda was depicted in The Hunchback.

This raises a good point, but it leaves me with a question.

Is Esmeralda dark skinned because she's meant to stereotype these people, or is she simply dark skinned because a lot of them were during the time period?

The stereotype against women, and her seductive nature, I can concede because I wasn't talking about sexism.

[Nationalist Eminral Republic]

Maybe, but if the children are influenced by Disney, you might rethink your parenting a little bit.

[Forsher]

held in ivory towers with no contact with the outside world until they turn 18,

Ah, I believe there's a fairy tale about this...

Answered. And again. And again.

Just a note, the Siamese Cats are, strictly speaking, the bad guys. Something would be amiss if they lacked attributes like those described by words like "sinister, cunning and manipulative". That is, of course, unless they are underlings, which they aren't. The former part of your argument, I feel, is much better.

Life gets very boring when the only villains look like you. And sound like you. And, in fact, may well be played by you...

With regards to Tarzan, ignoring the explorers (I dare say that at some point someone had the bright idea of not having any local porters or guides because of the undertones) all the characters are animals.

Why, OLD Disney movies are wonderful.

Seriously... what do you want the heroes to be, overweight african gay and ugly? Fuck this politically correctness, what's wrong with not-overwight non-Black straight and good-looking protagonist? How is that un-educative?

When their usage implies/suggests/blatantly shows that those who are different cannot exist.

I'd have commented on the previous post but it is really hard to tell the princesses (and even harder with the princes given that they are explored much less thoroughly) apart if you do not recognise the characters (I figured them out, I think, but I already knew what Snow White looked like because it is such an iconic image).

Homer Simpson isn't a children's character. Adults are not effected by media the same way children are.

I was giving an example, I guess that a more appropriate example from the article would be Peppa Pig's father which certain people in the article deem to be demeaning to men and giving boys a poor role model to look up to.

I had forgotten about that programme. I was introduced to it at a point in my life where I might have liked it had my younger cousins not have had it essentially prescribed to them.

Now, I haven't seen a lot of these films (I have, however, seen most of the ones with animals as the central to essentially only characters) so be sceptical when I wonder if Quasimodo didn't "get the girl" for character purposes? It's like with villains tending towards dark clothes, environments and personalities... sometimes there is a story driven point.

Dark = evil, light = good is some pretty basic (and perhaps overdone) symbolism. Grey is often used as an intermediate colour for a reason... The world isn't good people and death eaters... Must be something relevant to Disney here somewhere... oh yeah, Scar's lair isn't dark because he forgot to get electricity, it's because it helps makes him more evil.