Do Disney Movies Really Empower Young Girls?

[Giovenith]

snip

So yet again, because Disney doesn't hold your particular values and they're successful, therefore they're plotting some nefarious scheme to actively pull people to "Western ideals" and shouldn't be allowed to possess the success they have?

Everything you've said so far has pretty much boiled down to that. I hate to tell you this, but expanding sales internationally is how modern day business from all over the world currently functions, it's not some exclusive 'Made in America' invasion. The fact that you don't understand this demonstrates a severe lack of understanding in how international marketing works. Disney couldn't care less what any of it's customers do in their own private lives and behaviors or what they personally believe, their goal, like every other country with businesses that have expanded internationally, is to offer their product and collect the payment from anyone who makes the choice to buy it. What people may or may not choose to do with things they are presented with is their own business, it is not the obligation of the company to cater to your personal opinions and views.

[Naushantiya]

[nation][/nation]

The Fact as I have told everybody in the last posts is that Disney controls a fair share in this market through Acquisitions and Aggressive marketing, it's acquisition of UTV hungama has made sure that there is no Indigenous Cartoon Channel left. Your right Disney's goal is not Social good but profit, which is why socially malevolent channels like Disney ought to be banned. Now the point here is that Disney is not only operating in L' America but in around 40 countries around the globe exporting primarily American culture, and the American way of life, other companies cannot compete with Disney, not because they have better content but because Disney has access to vast resources. You would be right only they are exporting their shit to all other countries, We need to put restrictions on these foreign companies, If they are not doing anything good for society, it would be better to make cable television cheaper by delisting this silly channel.

They are even loosing market share to Turner corporation with their show Chootha Bheem on Pogo Channel, which actually deals with simple issues like honesty, humility,respect and others. I still think that American companies that deal in the media should not engage in this cultural dumping. Cable television is generally a tool for education, A 2007 study of cable coming to rural India showed that it led to "significant decreases in the reported acceptability of domestic violence towards women and son preference, as well as increases in women's autonomy and decreases in fertility." It also "found suggestive evidence that exposure to cable increases school enrollment for younger children, perhaps through increased participation of women in household decision-making
Source :
http://www.nber.org/papers/w13305.pdf



Now I don't what your thinking but the constant bombardment of American Shows, American views and American Beliefs and American Culture does amount to propaganda, We need to protect our own animation Industry, Our own culture an the minds of our Children from this consumerism. Here is another source, which nobody bothered to rebutt actually states what Disney is doing in their country and what it holds for ours

Casino capitalism may be getting a bad rap in the mainstream media, but the values that nourish it are alive and well in the world of Disney.[1] As reported recently in a front-page article in The New York Times, Disney is in the forefront of finding ways to capitalize on the $50 billion dollars spent worldwide by young boys between the ages of 6 and 14.[2] As part of such efforts, Disney has enlisted the help of educators, anthropologists and a former researcher with "a background in the casino industry" to not only study all aspects of the culture and intimate lives of young boys, but to do so in a way that allows Disney to produce "emotional hooks" that lure young boys into the wonderful world of corporate Disney in order to turn them into enthusiastic consumers.[3]

http://truth-out.org/archive/component/ ... -innocence

I think that television is a medium to educate,inform the masses and create and stir up debate, which it does but Western channels in general do not. I would want rigid and socially corrupt channels like Disney out of Indian soil.

What Disney shows is not propaganda, it's entertainment, I could easily say that show of yours you mentioned earlier is eastern propaganda and That "Casino Capitalism" you described is what we call marketing techniques. But if you want to cling to your backwards and xenophobic beliefs that's fine.

Only thing is that it is primarily meant for Indian markets and is financed by the turner corporation, an American based rival of Disney which owns Cartoon Network and Pogo

Disney does not develop indigenous content and it's content is primarily Dumped in India and other countries.

Now you need to prove why my views are backwards and xenophobic

[Giovenith]

Disney does not develop indigenous content

Explain why they should.

[Caribica]

[nation][/nation]
What Disney shows is not propaganda, it's entertainment, I could easily say that show of yours you mentioned earlier is eastern propaganda and That "Casino Capitalism" you described is what we call marketing techniques. But if you want to cling to your backwards and xenophobic beliefs that's fine.

Only thing is that it is primarily meant for Indian markets and is financed by the turner corporation, an American based rival of Disney which owns Cartoon Network and Pogo

Disney does not develop indigenous content and it's content is primarily Dumped in India and other countries.

Now you need to prove why my views are backwards and xenophobic

"I think that television is a medium to educate,inform the masses and create and stir up debate, which it does but Western channels in general do not. I would want rigid and socially corrupt channels like Disney out of Indian soil."
"Our own culture an the minds of our Children from this consumerism"

[Caribica]

[nation][/nation]
What Disney shows is not propaganda, it's entertainment, I could easily say that show of yours you mentioned earlier is eastern propaganda and That "Casino Capitalism" you described is what we call marketing techniques. But if you want to cling to your backwards and xenophobic beliefs that's fine.

Only thing is that it is primarily meant for Indian markets and is financed by the turner corporation, an American based rival of Disney which owns Cartoon Network and Pogo

Disney does not develop indigenous content and it's content is primarily Dumped in India and other countries.

Now you need to prove why my views are backwards and xenophobic

Who cares if Disney is exposing you to American culture? What is so evil about it and why are you afraid it will "poison" your childrens minds if your culture is present in all aspects of your lives? I've read up on India and I know about how Hinduism is basically the state religion. Your nation is probably one of the least likely in the world to be culture shocked by America.

[Naushantiya]

snip

So yet again, because Disney doesn't hold your particular values and they're successful, therefore they're plotting some nefarious scheme to actively pull people to "Western ideals" and shouldn't be allowed to possess the success they have?

Everything you've said so far has pretty much boiled down to that. I hate to tell you this, but expanding sales internationally is how modern day business from all over the world currently functions, it's not some exclusive 'Made in America' invasion. The fact that you don't understand this demonstrates a severe lack of understanding in how international marketing works. Disney couldn't care less what any of it's customers do in their own private lives and behaviors or what they personally believe, their goal, like every other country with businesses that have expanded internationally, is to offer their product and collect the payment from anyone who makes the choice to buy it. What people may or may not choose to do with things they are presented with is their own business, it is not the obligation of the company to cater to your personal opinions and views.

I think your getting my argument wrong for the last time I shall clear my argument. Disney controls majority of the channels, they might not be as successful as you think as they have lost their spot to pogo( turner corporation) but that being said they still do control most of the channels. They bombard Indian television sets with Western or Westernized programmes leaving not a single Indian animation does have the same effect, you should not villainize or simplify another person's argument in such a way. The effect it has is definitely westernization of the Kiddie media. Children still end up growing up listening to western narratives leaving nothing Indian on the television set for them. The effects are definitely the same, I have not used the word nefarious scheme, I think you should reread my arguments twice.

It is not my personal view, I still prefer the Doordarshan days and, I am definitely seeing the effects it has been having on Children. It is sad that children will learn about Hannah Montana before they learn about Gandhi. This is a debate site and we all are giving our personal views here, in my personal view disney should be either banned or make their programming socially relevant like the turner corporation has done and thus enjoyed it's new spot with Chotha Bheem

[Luminesa]

With a few exceptions mainly 90 % of it is set in Europe and depicts European culture, The point is not of historical accuracy but of always portraying and almost constantly the cultural views and perceptions of one part of the world over another

Again: Being set in Europe is not the same thing as "educating" about "European heritage."

Disney's goal is not to education, let alone education about culture. While the movies might have cultural attitudes that are mainly found in the West, that is because they are a Western company primarily catering to the West. Any values they might have is a result of the people who work there being, surprise surprise, brought up with and used to those ideas, not out of some declared mission of, "Gather round kids and learn about your heritage!" They don't have a cultural agenda any more than Studio Gibli has a cultural agenda when it depicts fisherman towns or has characters taking off their shoes in-doors.

It's not Disney's job to be traveling around the world being the teacher on civilizations, it's their job to tell stories and entertain the people of their target audience in whatever way they can. That's what they're going to do. So no, it's not some "fault" or flaw of theirs' for not doing any stories based on ideas that few of their employees or target audience have ever heard of. They do "Western" things because that's what they know and are familiar with as people, not because they're trying to reign others in and educate them on cultural conformity.

Disney is most certainly a propoganda device, It tries to bring the stories, folktales, and ideas of the West. It tries to bring about a culture of Perverted Western consumerism. I just found something you might find interesting. Disney is in the forefront of finding ways to capitalize on the $50 billion dollars spent worldwide by young boys between the ages of 6 and 14

Here you go

As part of such efforts, Disney has enlisted the help of educators, anthropologists and a former researcher with "a background in the casino industry" to not only study all aspects of the culture and intimate lives of young boys, but to do so in a way that allows Disney to produce "emotional hooks" that lure young boys into the wonderful world of corporate Disney in order to turn them into enthusiastic consumers.

http://truth-out.org/archive/component/ ... -innocence



Now the most watched show by Kid's in India is Chota Bheem, Chota bheem is a moral story in which the protagonist tries to instill the values of honesty,humility and humbleness, it is the most watched cartoon and one of the first in it's kind. Now this is aired by the rival of Disney named the Turner corporation, although it is produced independently. When every other Indian channel regardless of the target audience is switching to socially relevant shows, Disney still wants to fulfill it's agenda of Westernization. Disney programmes are archiac and are extremely violent in nature, I think it is the fundamental duty of every channel to air content that is relevant, Disney will loose it's share soon, if it doesn't change it's ways.

Oh no! A company not originating from your country or culture not sharing the same views and values as your country or culture? Sweet merciful Neptune!!

The fact that people from your country are buying their products and movies is not evidence that they are actively trying to indoctrinate everyone there to "Western" culture. Is the fact that I chose to buy an English dubbed DVD of "Sailor Moon," an anime which depicts girls as Shinto priestesses and being allowed to marry at 16, mean that the Toei Animation company is trying to brainwash me into Eastern culture?

By the power of the moon, I shall punish thee!

Kidding, Sailor Mars is my favorite.

I watch anime all the time, doesn't mean I'm going to impulsively join an Eastern religion or live in a Japanese-style house (though that would admittedly be awesome.)

[Giovenith]

So yet again, because Disney doesn't hold your particular values and they're successful, therefore they're plotting some nefarious scheme to actively pull people to "Western ideals" and shouldn't be allowed to possess the success they have?

Everything you've said so far has pretty much boiled down to that. I hate to tell you this, but expanding sales internationally is how modern day business from all over the world currently functions, it's not some exclusive 'Made in America' invasion. The fact that you don't understand this demonstrates a severe lack of understanding in how international marketing works. Disney couldn't care less what any of it's customers do in their own private lives and behaviors or what they personally believe, their goal, like every other country with businesses that have expanded internationally, is to offer their product and collect the payment from anyone who makes the choice to buy it. What people may or may not choose to do with things they are presented with is their own business, it is not the obligation of the company to cater to your personal opinions and views.

I think your getting my argument wrong for the last time I shall clear my argument. Disney controls majority of the channels, they might not be as successful as you think as they have lost their spot to pogo( turner corporation) but that being said they still do control most of the channels. They bombard Indian television sets with Western or Westernized programmes leaving not a single Indian animation does have the same effect, you should not villainize or simplify another person's argument in such a way. The effect it has is definitely westernization of the Kiddie media. Children still end up growing up listening to western narratives leaving nothing Indian on the television set for them. The effects are definitely the same, I have not used the word nefarious scheme, I think you should reread my arguments twice.

It is not my personal view, I still prefer the Doordarshan days and, I am definitely seeing the effects it has been having on Children. It is sad that children will learn about Hannah Montana before they learn about Gandhi. This is a debate site and we all are giving our personal views here, in my personal view disney should be either banned or make their programming socially relevant like the turner corporation has done and thus enjoyed it's new spot with Chotha Bheem

You are continuing to fail to realize that enforcing the cultures of other countries is not their job. They make Western things because they originate from a Western country, and they outport their products to non-Western countries because that's quite literally what every other country's major companies do too--that's how modern business works. They're not sitting around in their Head Quarters somewhere rubbing their hands together and snickering about soon all will come to the breast of Mother America. They make their product according to how they know from their own experience, they offer it to others, and they take the money when it comes. They don't give a damn about whether or not the culture it's being sold to agrees with their own sensibilities, and they're not going to put in the effort to adjust themselves to standards they are unfamiliar with so long as they continue to see that they're getting income from staying just the way they are. You could stay the way you are, you could not, Disney does not care, and they are not obligated to.

Enforcing the ideas of your culture in your children is your job, not their's. And believe it or not, here in the real world, culture is a constantly change aspect of all societies no matter what their location on this Earth or what the influence. Even if Disney was wiped off the face of the planet or relegated to only being in the US, more likely than not, you would still be seeing the changes you complain about--change in ideas and values is inevitable, for better or for worse, no matter what Jr. is watching on the telly. Especially in this time of mass international communication and exchange of ideas. If you'll stop pinning all your disgruntlements on a cartoon company, perhaps you'll see that throughout history shaking your fist and talking about how "this new fangled nonsense be corrupting the youth!" has never done a thing to stand in the way of time.

[The Flame Dawn]

Overall, Disney's movies aren't really empowering to girls with the only exception, in my opinion, being Brave.

Also, just to point out, the majority of these movies were animated versions of fairy-tales from times when women had little to no rights.
Majority meaning early Disney, when most of the movies came out.

[Luminesa]

I agree. Anna is cool, and I love Anna. She's spunky, sweet, and lovable. I loved her, in the movie. But she doesn't get the same exposure, per say, that Elsa gets. I mean, Elsa has the movie's theme song, and she's the first character most people think of, from the movie. We see Idina Menzel all the time, we never see Anna's actress, who didn't do a bad job herself. Not to mention I am sick and tired of hearing "Let It Go", the most pointless Disney movie song ever written.

My problem with Elsa herself is how Disney tried to make her this "progressive", "positive" character, when she really is an awfully underdeveloped and scattered character.

Do you know why she seems scattered? Because she's just found out that it's no longer possible for her to fit herself within (her perception of) the social expectations she's held to. A lot of social liberals have felt that way at some point in their lives, which is why we identify with her.

Elsa is actually the primary antagonist of the movie, and antagonists are often the most popular characters. Scar, Malefescent, etc. Despite our empathy for her, she is the cause of the problems that Anna needs to overcome.

I don't know where you're coming from saying that Elsa is underdeveloped. Her character arc is almost all development, and we see her come to terms with a new perception of who she is onscreen.

You see, I see nothing wrong with having a character who doesn't want to be what society wants her to be.
I have nothing against the road Disney wanted to take with her. A character who feels isolated, who feels scared and insecure, and she is trying to find herself, there's nothing wrong with that. As a writer, I love writing about characters who are trying to find themselves. My problem is that when Disney tried to do this with Elsa, it faltered. Elsa had her big song about self-empowerment, and then she really didn't do much. Sure, she fought the people who were out to kill her (out of fear), and then she continued to shut everyone out. She never really became bold, she never really discovered who she was, she never really embraced her faults and her differences to try and be that strong character that she's advertised as. And actually, she was meant to be the villain in the beginning, but they switched her so Hans would be the villain. So yeah, she's actually supposed to be one of the heroes, but a very weak one.

Again, compare to classic Disney Princesses such as Mulan and Jasmine, who both struggled with insecurities and with a society that they didn't agree with. What made them superior to Elsa was that they truly conquered themselves, and then they went out and made the world around them better, in some way. There wasn't just the one song and bam, nothing. No, Mulan discovered she was capable of good, and so she went out and did it by fighting to save her country. Jasmine didn't save Agrabah, but she did see past social status and wealth and loved Aladdin no matter what. In the meantime, she saw the beauty in herself, and that's what caused her to be a self-respecting and likeable character, who knew what she wanted and could hold her own as a good supporting hero, behind Aladdin and the Genie.

You see where I'm getting at?

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

You see, I see nothing wrong with having a character who doesn't want to be what society wants her to be.
I have nothing against the road Disney wanted to take with her. A character who feels isolated, who feels scared and insecure, and she is trying to find herself, there's nothing wrong with that. As a writer, I love writing about characters who are trying to find themselves. My problem is that when Disney tried to do this with Elsa, it faltered. Elsa had her big song about self-empowerment, and then she really didn't do much. Sure, she fought the people who were out to kill her (out of fear), and then she continued to shut everyone out. She never really became bold, she never really discovered who she was, she never really embraced her faults and her differences to try and be that strong character that she's advertised as. And actually, she was meant to be the villain in the beginning, but they switched her so Hans would be the villain. So yeah, she's actually supposed to be one of the heroes, but a very weak one.

Again, compare to classic Disney Princesses such as Mulan and Jasmine, who both struggled with insecurities and with a society that they didn't agree with. What made them superior to Elsa was that they truly conquered themselves, and then they went out and made the world around them better, in some way. There wasn't just the one song and bam, nothing. No, Mulan discovered she was capable of good, and so she went out and did it by fighting to save her country. Jasmine didn't save Agrabah, but she did see past social status and wealth and loved Aladdin no matter what. In the meantime, she saw the beauty in herself, and that's what caused her to be a self-respecting and likeable character, who knew what she wanted and could hold her own as a good supporting hero, behind Aladdin and the Genie.

You see where I'm getting at?

I think so, but I feel like you're hyper-focused on the song as the single turning point in her character.

Elsa is still the antagonist, and the story is only resolved in the end when she realizes how much what she's doing is hurting everyone around her and driving the fear and hatred she's running from. It's only when she thinks that she's killed Anna (first when Hans lies to her, and then when Anna is frozen solid) that it gets through to her that what she's doing is wrong, and that the love of the people who care about her is stronger than the hate and the fear.

She doesn't become bold and self-empowered and learn to see past her role in society in many scenes over the course of the movie because that's what Anna does. Anna is the protagonist. Elsa is the antagonist, who only sees the error of her ways at the climax.

[Naushantiya]

I think your getting my argument wrong for the last time I shall clear my argument. Disney controls majority of the channels, they might not be as successful as you think as they have lost their spot to pogo( turner corporation) but that being said they still do control most of the channels. They bombard Indian television sets with Western or Westernized programmes leaving not a single Indian animation does have the same effect, you should not villainize or simplify another person's argument in such a way. The effect it has is definitely westernization of the Kiddie media. Children still end up growing up listening to western narratives leaving nothing Indian on the television set for them. The effects are definitely the same, I have not used the word nefarious scheme, I think you should reread my arguments twice.

It is not my personal view, I still prefer the Doordarshan days and, I am definitely seeing the effects it has been having on Children. It is sad that children will learn about Hannah Montana before they learn about Gandhi. This is a debate site and we all are giving our personal views here, in my personal view disney should be either banned or make their programming socially relevant like the turner corporation has done and thus enjoyed it's new spot with Chotha Bheem

You are continuing to fail to realize that enforcing the cultures of other countries is not their job. They make Western things because they originate from a Western country, and they outport their products to non-Western countries because that's quite literally what every other country's major companies do too--that's how modern business works. They're not sitting around in their Head Quarters somewhere rubbing their hands together and snickering about soon all will come to the breast of Mother America. They make their product according to how they know from their own experience, they offer it to others, and they take the money when it comes. They don't give a damn about whether or not the culture it's being sold to agrees with their own sensibilities, and they're not going to put in the effort to adjust themselves to standards they are unfamiliar with so long as they continue to see that they're getting income from staying just the way they are. You could stay the way you are, you could not, Disney does not care, and they are not obligated to.

Enforcing the ideas of your culture in your children is your job, not their's. And believe it or not, here in the real world, culture is a constantly change aspect of all societies no matter what their location on this Earth or what the influence. Even if Disney was wiped off the face of the planet or relegated to only being in the US, more likely than not, you would still be seeing the changes you complain about--change in ideas and values is inevitable, for better or for worse, no matter what Jr. is watching on the telly. Especially in this time of mass international communication and exchange of ideas. If you'll stop pinning all your disgruntlements on a cartoon company, perhaps you'll see that throughout history shaking your fist and talking about how "this new fangled nonsense be corrupting the youth!" has never done a thing to stand in the way of time.

My job would be to watch and make sure that if I ever have children they don't fall prey to disney. What your'e failing to understand is the implications of their high handed American centric programming on other countries. I am talking about how children would grow up watching things exported from America and not know a thing about their own country. Disney and others have wiped out any chance of having a strong homegrown animation industry. They definitely need to be curtailed, I think the G.O.I can have some programming restriction on them, it is the best way to get Disney and others to conform. I am not claiming an organized conspiracy by the mickey mouse loving executive of disney but actually talking about the ramifications of this westernization of Kiddie Tv. The fact is that millions of children would grow up and not watch a single cartoon that is not made/originated/produced by the West.

It is our job, it is the G.O.I's job, it is job of our society in general. Disney is not part of our society, they are outsiders controlling a segment in our teles. What your trying to imply is that American influence would eventually creep in, which is fine as long as it is not shoved down children's throats because they never had a choice and it would take them some time until they finally can. They cannot choose right now they don't even have that choice. Disney never was, never is and shall never will be the face of change . When Hum Log started in the 1980's it was a show meant to promote family planning, it soon became an entertainment programme but retained it's essential edutainment agenda. In other segments Socially relevant programming is resurging with shows like Satya Meva Jayate, Balika Vadhu, Utharam , Na aan es des laado, being aired an reaching millions of households in rural and urban India and actually sparking off debate and change in society. Too Bad, Corporations like Disney control the kiddie media and Children will never benefit the tele any time soon...

[Luminesa]

You see, I see nothing wrong with having a character who doesn't want to be what society wants her to be.
I have nothing against the road Disney wanted to take with her. A character who feels isolated, who feels scared and insecure, and she is trying to find herself, there's nothing wrong with that. As a writer, I love writing about characters who are trying to find themselves. My problem is that when Disney tried to do this with Elsa, it faltered. Elsa had her big song about self-empowerment, and then she really didn't do much. Sure, she fought the people who were out to kill her (out of fear), and then she continued to shut everyone out. She never really became bold, she never really discovered who she was, she never really embraced her faults and her differences to try and be that strong character that she's advertised as. And actually, she was meant to be the villain in the beginning, but they switched her so Hans would be the villain. So yeah, she's actually supposed to be one of the heroes, but a very weak one.

Again, compare to classic Disney Princesses such as Mulan and Jasmine, who both struggled with insecurities and with a society that they didn't agree with. What made them superior to Elsa was that they truly conquered themselves, and then they went out and made the world around them better, in some way. There wasn't just the one song and bam, nothing. No, Mulan discovered she was capable of good, and so she went out and did it by fighting to save her country. Jasmine didn't save Agrabah, but she did see past social status and wealth and loved Aladdin no matter what. In the meantime, she saw the beauty in herself, and that's what caused her to be a self-respecting and likeable character, who knew what she wanted and could hold her own as a good supporting hero, behind Aladdin and the Genie.

You see where I'm getting at?

I think so, but I feel like you're hyper-focused on the song as the single turning point in her character.

Elsa is still the antagonist, and the story is only resolved in the end when she realizes how much what she's doing is hurting everyone around her and driving the fear and hatred she's running from. It's only when she thinks that she's killed Anna (first when Hans lies to her, and then when Anna is frozen solid) that it gets through to her that what she's doing is wrong, and that the love of the people who care about her is stronger than the hate and the fear.

She doesn't become bold and self-empowered and learn to see past her role in society in many scenes over the course of the movie because that's what Anna does. Anna is the protagonist. Elsa is the antagonist, who only sees the error of her ways at the climax.

I dunno, it's just that it seems most people seem to tout that song as some sort of "We Are The Champions"-esque anthem of freedom and independence.

True, I agree she only sees what she's done when Anna sacrifices herself. I mean, I guess my main problem was that I felt the movie was rushed, in the attempt to turn Elsa into a hero, last-minute.

So I guess we both agree that Elsa should not be touted as the hero, but rather as a tragic villain.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

I dunno, it's just that it seems most people seem to tout that song as some sort of "We Are The Champions"-esque anthem of freedom and independence.

True, I agree she only sees what she's done when Anna sacrifices herself. I mean, I guess my main problem was that I felt the movie was rushed, in the attempt to turn Elsa into a hero, last-minute.

So I guess we both agree that Elsa should not be touted as the hero, but rather as a tragic villain.

I've kept with "antagonist" rather than "villain" because Elsa's actions are more 'careless' than evil.

"Let it Go" is much loved because it expresses a feeling that many relate to, not because the character singing it is completely virtuous. "I Just Can't Wait to be King" isn't one of Simba's prouder moments, but it's still a much loved song.

It is an anthem of freedom and independence, but that's not the end of Elsa's character arc. She spends the rest of the movie discovering why more than just freedom and independence matter to her.

[Charellia]

No, some of them simply take place in European countries or are based on stories from that area. Unless you legitimately think that England is full of dragons and Germany has dwarves, the educational value on "their" heritage is about 0. Saying Disney movies teach kids about European cultural heritage is like saying anime teaches kids about Japanese cultural heritage.

With a few exceptions mainly 90 % of it is set in Europe and depicts European culture, The point is not of historical accuracy but of always portraying and almost constantly the cultural views and perceptions of one part of the world over another

Out of curiosity, which western views and perceptions in Disney content do you find objectionable?

[Sun Wukong]

With a few exceptions mainly 90 % of it is set in Europe and depicts European culture, The point is not of historical accuracy but of always portraying and almost constantly the cultural views and perceptions of one part of the world over another

Out of curiosity, which western views and perceptions in Disney content do you find objectionable?

Dragons are not African American!




They're Italian.

[Tahar Joblis]

IMO, Disney movies themselves don't really have much of a role in empowering, or disempowering, young girls. Not within the culture they originate in, anyway. In other cultures? Well, it's an exportation of American cultural norms, and those cultural norms are seriously empowering compared to how girls are in, say, Yemen. But that's not really the films behind them; it's the fact that the films show that another way is out there. I'm not sure Disney films are even the most powerful in regards to exporting those norms, though.

Disney movies essentially reflect the cultural norms of their time and place. They don't create those norms; they don't even challenge those norms. Disney films that are at risk of being no longer timeless tend to be discontinued. Disney remains profoundly conservative with a small "c" - they work within established character norms. Frozen broke no new ground except in terms of "Well, now Disney's doing this, too."

There is something profoundly toxic about "princess culture." And yes, Disney is right in the middle of marketing that culture - but it doesn't really have very much to do with the stories of the Disney movies themselves. It can even be a bit out of character for the "princess" in question. (See the minor hoopla about the marketing of Brave's protagonist as a Disney Princess.)

[The DC Chapter]

So there's no popular media with extreme physical characteristics and mental traits belonging to male characters, as well as the constant reinforcement of males holding great positions of power, and these guys being the ones to get shit done and get ladies and be cool?

Because if so, then why the fuck do I have body image issues? Why do so many young guys hit the gym? Why do we stress at all?

Gee, I must have it all wrong.


Really typical argument. Only people regarded by society as female have problems with gender/sex roles.

No, they don't empower them. Some of them might have some sort of lesson to learn, but not all of them.

I certainly don't see how Pirates of the Caribbean can empower young girls.

[The New Sea Territory]

In The Little Mermaid, Ariel literally transforms herself and stops talking, all for Eric.

I don't think "shut up and change yourself for men" is a very empowering message for females.

[Alaizia]

And then comes Frozen with its "Girlpower" and LGBT air.

[The DC Chapter]

And then comes Frozen with its "Girlpower" and LGBT air.

LGBT?

Explain?

[Luminesa]

I dunno, it's just that it seems most people seem to tout that song as some sort of "We Are The Champions"-esque anthem of freedom and independence.

True, I agree she only sees what she's done when Anna sacrifices herself. I mean, I guess my main problem was that I felt the movie was rushed, in the attempt to turn Elsa into a hero, last-minute.

So I guess we both agree that Elsa should not be touted as the hero, but rather as a tragic villain.

I've kept with "antagonist" rather than "villain" because Elsa's actions are more 'careless' than evil.

"Let it Go" is much loved because it expresses a feeling that many relate to, not because the character singing it is completely virtuous. "I Just Can't Wait to be King" isn't one of Simba's prouder moments, but it's still a much loved song.

It is an anthem of freedom and independence, but that's not the end of Elsa's character arc. She spends the rest of the movie discovering why more than just freedom and independence matter to her.

"Careless" is a good word. I didn't even think of that one, interestingly enough! Thanks!

And I see why "Let It Go" might be appealing, but, again, I think back to Mulan's "Reflection", which was basically about the same thing. Of course, again, Elsa was an antagonist, versus Mulan who was an actual hero, but I guess Mulan's song was more effective, for me. It was powerful (Christina Aguilera is an amazing singer) and graceful, and it didn't come off as almost random. It was skillfully woven into the story, whereas the scene where Elsa sang "Let It Go" almost seemed...well, leaning toward random. I mean, don't get me wrong, randomness is my middle name (LOL), but I feel that I couldn't take the song seriously because of how it appeared in the story.

Though I feel building up the castle as she sang it was counter-effective. I'll try to use a similar example to maybe explain. I dunno if you're an anime fan, but have you ever seen Pokemon 3: The Movie?

[Tahar Joblis]

And then comes Frozen with its "Girlpower" and LGBT air.

"Girlpower," yes. Anti-male? A bit. Every single evil character in the film is male, every single female character is unambiguously good.

LGBT, not particularly. "It's OK to be born different" is a message that's considerably wider than even the larger GSM community. It could be viewed as allegorically pro-gay, but in an era where it's perfectly acceptable to have gay characters on screen, an interpretation as allegory is pretty tame stuff.

[Russels Orbiting Teapot]

LGBT?

Explain?

It's commonly asserted that Frozen, especially when it comes to the 'let it go' song, is based a lot on what it feels like for a gay person to be closeted, and then to finally come out.

[Charellia]

And then comes Frozen with its "Girlpower" and LGBT air.

"Girlpower," yes. Anti-male? A bit. Every single evil character in the film is male, every single female character is unambiguously good.

LGBT, not particularly. "It's OK to be born different" is a message that's considerably wider than even the larger GSM community. It could be viewed as allegorically pro-gay, but in an era where it's perfectly acceptable to have gay characters on screen, an interpretation as allegory is pretty tame stuff.

Elsa is unambiguously good?