Disney princesses come from different races, even different species, if you count mermaids.
But one California couple believes that heroes or heroines with special needs are underrepresented, and so they’re petitioning Walt Disney Studios to create a Disney princess with Down Syndrome.
Keston Ott-Dahl and her wife Andrea are mothers to 15-month old Delaney. The couple keeps a blog DelaneySkye.com which chronicles the experiences of raising a child with Down Syndrome and offers a place for other parents to leave personal stories.
Otto-Dahl calls herself a huge Disney fan and admits that her daughter is “mesmerized” by princesses. But she wants the company to create a new character that special needs children can look up to, reports the Orlando Sentinel.
“I would love for Disney to make in their animated films … heroes, princes and princesses of all abilities so people like Delaney will feel included and more people with have compassion,” Otto-Dahl told the Sentinel.
Disney has featured characters with limited abilities like Nemo with his smaller fin, Quasimodo of The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
The petition commends Disney for great storytelling, but Otto-Dahl says there’s a lack of characters that represent disabled people:
“Disney does a great job of depicting right from wrong. It has long providing wonderful moral lessons that teach our children to be good people — but sadly, the company comes up short in one critical area. Its movies have almost no representation of disabled people, those often bullied and looked down upon by their fellow children. What wonderful lessons of diversity, compassion, and acceptance Disney could teach our kids if they promoted disabled characters as heroes and heroines in their beloved movies!”
October is Down Syndrome Awareness Month. The petition was posted earlier this month and to date has garnered over 42,000 of its 45,000 goal. According to the National Down Syndrome Society, one in every 691 babies is born with the chromosomal condition and over 400,000 individuals are living with Down Syndrome in the U.S.
While I'm sure the idea comes with good intentions, this is just a bad idea all around.
There is no way a special needs hero/heroine would not end up being offensive. Don't touch this with a 10,000 foot pole Disney!
I'd be fine if they had a physically disabled princess if they could create the story organically enough that it didn't feel....in poor taste. I don't believe they can do that with a princess with a severe mental disability.
From a business standpoint, I just can't see it making any money, either.
I like the sentiment, but I agree, this is a REALLY hot issue. It's like releasing Joe, the butch lesbian princess, or Sam, the in transition princess. It's coming from the right place, but I think it just would send the wrong message and offend A LOT of people. I think most people who take care of/know someone with special needs will find this really insensitive, that special needs is just a joke.
Bottom line: don't go there, Disney. Stick to messing with Star Wars.
The better solution would be to make a reoccurring character on a show like Doc McStuffins or Sophia the 1st that has downs syndrome and gets regular screen time.
As a full fledged Disney princess, it's simply a trainwreck of an idea in about 8 different ways.
Disney princesses come from different races, even different species, if you count mermaids.
But one California couple believes that heroes or heroines with special needs are underrepresented, and so they’re petitioning Walt Disney Studios to create a Disney princess with Down Syndrome.
Keston Ott-Dahl and her wife Andrea are mothers to 15-month old Delaney. The couple keeps a blog DelaneySkye.com which chronicles the experiences of raising a child with Down Syndrome and offers a place for other parents to leave personal stories.
Otto-Dahl calls herself a huge Disney fan and admits that her daughter is “mesmerized” by princesses. But she wants the company to create a new character that special needs children can look up to, reports the Orlando Sentinel.
“I would love for Disney to make in their animated films … heroes, princes and princesses of all abilities so people like Delaney will feel included and more people with have compassion,” Otto-Dahl told the Sentinel.
Disney has featured characters with limited abilities like Nemo with his smaller fin, Quasimodo of The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
The petition commends Disney for great storytelling, but Otto-Dahl says there’s a lack of characters that represent disabled people:
“Disney does a great job of depicting right from wrong. It has long providing wonderful moral lessons that teach our children to be good people — but sadly, the company comes up short in one critical area. Its movies have almost no representation of disabled people, those often bullied and looked down upon by their fellow children. What wonderful lessons of diversity, compassion, and acceptance Disney could teach our kids if they promoted disabled characters as heroes and heroines in their beloved movies!”
October is Down Syndrome Awareness Month. The petition was posted earlier this month and to date has garnered over 42,000 of its 45,000 goal. According to the National Down Syndrome Society, one in every 691 babies is born with the chromosomal condition and over 400,000 individuals are living with Down Syndrome in the U.S.
Wait, I thought October was Breast Cancer Awareness.
Also....Why? How would she be a hero? What would be do? If they have special needs......I give up, im going to go ponder if mermaids are humans or not
cincydooley wrote: The better solution would be to make a reoccurring character on a show like Doc McStuffins or Sophia the 1st that has downs syndrome and gets regular screen time.
As a full fledged Disney princess, it's simply a trainwreck of an idea in about 8 different ways.
I suppose it isn't Disney, but Pixar gave us a hero with severely limited capabilites with WALL-E. Admittedly, he was an insane robot, who's limited brain capacity had been warped by hundreds of years of improvised maintenance and a steady diet of musical theater, but I think the results would be similar on screen.
I'm also having a very hard time imagining a fully realized Downs syndrome princess. We'd be far more likely to get a Princess missing a limb or being on the heavy side before Disney took that plunge.
I'd be fine if they had a physically disabled princess if they could create the story organically enough that it didn't feel....in poor taste. I don't believe they can do that with a princess with a severe mental disability.
From a business standpoint, I just can't see it making any money, either.
I agree.
Pyeatt wrote:
Disney princesses come from different races, even different species, if you count mermaids.
But one California couple believes that heroes or heroines with special needs are underrepresented, and so they’re petitioning Walt Disney Studios to create a Disney princess with Down Syndrome.
Keston Ott-Dahl and her wife Andrea are mothers to 15-month old Delaney. The couple keeps a blog DelaneySkye.com which chronicles the experiences of raising a child with Down Syndrome and offers a place for other parents to leave personal stories.
Otto-Dahl calls herself a huge Disney fan and admits that her daughter is “mesmerized” by princesses. But she wants the company to create a new character that special needs children can look up to, reports the Orlando Sentinel.
“I would love for Disney to make in their animated films … heroes, princes and princesses of all abilities so people like Delaney will feel included and more people with have compassion,” Otto-Dahl told the Sentinel.
Disney has featured characters with limited abilities like Nemo with his smaller fin, Quasimodo of The Hunchback of Notre Dame.
The petition commends Disney for great storytelling, but Otto-Dahl says there’s a lack of characters that represent disabled people:
“Disney does a great job of depicting right from wrong. It has long providing wonderful moral lessons that teach our children to be good people — but sadly, the company comes up short in one critical area. Its movies have almost no representation of disabled people, those often bullied and looked down upon by their fellow children. What wonderful lessons of diversity, compassion, and acceptance Disney could teach our kids if they promoted disabled characters as heroes and heroines in their beloved movies!”
October is Down Syndrome Awareness Month. The petition was posted earlier this month and to date has garnered over 42,000 of its 45,000 goal. According to the National Down Syndrome Society, one in every 691 babies is born with the chromosomal condition and over 400,000 individuals are living with Down Syndrome in the U.S.
What we really need is a Disney character who gets to choose the preferred pronouns we use to speak to that individual with. Oh, and a character with headmates.
Actually I could see a marketable concept, but not with Down Syndrome.
Put princess in a wheelchair and she becomes a superhero type. Some thing like that or someone blind. just don't make this a story about them becoming "whole," maybe coming to terms with themselves. This could be a hit.
Frazzled wrote: Actually I could see a marketable concept, but not with Down Syndrome.
Put princess in a wheelchair and she becomes a superhero type. Some thing like that or someone blind. just don't make this a story about them becoming "whole," maybe coming to terms with themselves. This could be a hit.
Quick someone give me money!
Got to have a level of disability where they can sing - There needs to be a catchy song.
Full disclosure - my youngest daughter is autistic, and I just can't see how this would end well at all for Disney.
As previously noted, it would be more beneficial to have special needs individuals appear on screen as major characters with a decent amount of screen time.
Their website is..... off-puttingly self congratulatory.....
It smacks of me me me. which this petition seems to be about.
Yeah....I found it really bothersome. The "media" section with all the articles that talks about them really turned me off.
Like I said before, I think its a great idea to have these characters represented in kids shows (and honestly, I'm surprised it isn't already happening more often), but I think it's very hard to make them lead characters due to the limitations in what you can do.
Obviously, we have some really great examples from TV shows like Glee (Downs), Breaking Bad(Cerebral Palsy), and Parenthood(autism).
Making one a full fledged Disney Princess would just be really, really, prohibitively hard to do.
Full disclosure - my youngest daughter is autistic, and I just can't see how this would end well at all for Disney.
As previously noted, it would be more beneficial to have special needs individuals appear on screen as major characters with a decent amount of screen time.
But other than that...
Works for me. although I'm getting into the concept of a batgirl type good girl for the next Despicable Me/Mega Mind....
Of course who did Book of Life. The main heroine is...well dead...through most of it.
My first thought is; I like Timmy and Jimmy in South Park. Episodes centered on them do stand out in my mind. Yet, I can't help but feel that the reason Timmy and Jimmy work is that they're recurring characters. Would anyone really want to watch a show about either of them?
It sounds kind of harsh, but I think the reality is that no one really wants to watch something about someone with sever disabilities (at least of the nature in the OP). The only thing I can think of where this worked is Forest Gump, but then we've got every movie Adam Sandler has ever been in completely washing that movie out.
We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
Yeah, as far as ethnicity goes, Disney is actually doing pretty well (white, black, Arabian, Polynesian now too and others). Certainly better than any other animation studio I can think of.
As far as the "special needs Princess" idea goes, I'll defer to my usual thoughts on this kind of thing. It would be GREAT if it happens, but at the same time it has to happen with a writer who can make a good story with it, not just take a stock story and shoehorn the special needs stuff into it. It comes down to the ability of the writer to first make a good, enriching story that includes the character. Forcing it does not do that.
Ok, if they get this we also need
Unwed single mother with 2 kid princess
multiple personality princess
Sexual assault victim princess
Because everyone needs representation in a fantasy world
I wonder why some people feel that any company "must" do this or that or that they should feel obliged to do so. With what right do those people demand something like this?
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ok, if they get this we also need
Unwed single mother with 2 kid princess
multiple personality princess
Sexual assault victim princess
Because everyone needs representation in a fantasy world
Furry Princess
Otherkin Princess
Princess with a Feminist Tumblr
hotsauceman1 wrote: Ok, if they get this we also need
Unwed single mother with 2 kid princess
multiple personality princess
Sexual assault victim princess
Because everyone needs representation in a fantasy world
Furry Princess
Otherkin Princess
Princess with a Feminist Tumblr
Sigvatr wrote: With what right do those people demand something like this?
Free speech.
Don't misunderstand me. People can ask for all they want. The problem is that some people think that anyone "must" do something. They don't. It's a company and they decide what they do and they are free to do whatever they want unless they break the law. Anything else is suppression of free speech.
Sigvatr wrote: With what right do those people demand something like this?
Free speech.
Don't misunderstand me. People can ask for all they want. The problem is that some people think that anyone "must" do something. They don't. It's a company and they decide what they do and they are free to do whatever they want unless they break the law. Anything else is suppression of free speech.
I demand that you stop telling other people they can't demand things.
Oh dear. It appears now you have no choice but to submit to my demand oh wait that's not how it works.
1, no one is demanding anything. 2, even if they were, so what? Demand away, Disney can ignore a demand just as much as it can ignore a polite request.
Sigvatr wrote: With what right do those people demand something like this?
Free speech.
Don't misunderstand me. People can ask for all they want. The problem is that some people think that anyone "must" do something. They don't. It's a company and they decide what they do and they are free to do whatever they want unless they break the law. Anything else is suppression of free speech.
Disney is a company interested in making money.
If a group wants a special princess they can let Disney know that there is an interest. If they do it publicly then other people that want the same thing can also let Disney know. Then Disney can look at those groups and decide of the interest is big enough.
I don't think it's as much a "Disney 'must' do this" and more of a "hey Disney, we would spend our money on you if you did it".
curran12 wrote: Rather surprised that you are so down on this, HSM, I would have thought this falls in line with what you're for.
That said, let's be honest, most Disney princesses are sexual assault victims (I mean Belle is pretty much under constant harassment from Gaston).
Because, it is a horrible idea.
First is the idea that they need representation, or that any group needs it. You don't need a movie to tell your daughter she is special and a princess, you can.
Second, I just found out professional Cynic is an actual job
Sigvatr wrote: With what right do those people demand something like this?
Free speech.
Don't misunderstand me. People can ask for all they want. The problem is that some people think that anyone "must" do something. They don't. It's a company and they decide what they do and they are free to do whatever they want unless they break the law. Anything else is suppression of free speech.
Disney is a company interested in making money.
If a group wants a special princess they can let Disney know that there is an interest. If they do it publicly then other people that want the same thing can also let Disney know. Then Disney can look at those groups and decide of the interest is big enough.
I don't think it's as much a "Disney 'must' do this" and more of a "hey Disney, we would spend our money on you if you did it".
45000 is peanuts. Disney makes movies that appeal to the whole world, nor just one subset
I didn't say that it is enough to result in a movie, just that there is a difference between saying "they must make a movie" and " here is a group of x who would spend money if you did".
Disney has not shied away from 'special' characters before, and have not been shy to highlight discriminatory attitudes.
A clib from Dumbo as egvidence
So it could be done.
However, it shouldn't.
What the petitioners are missing is how a Downs syndrome sufferer would not make a good Disney princess, and it has little to do with thier ailment, its because Disney has happy endings as a general rule, and it would be a bad business decision to break the feel good factor. Do you want depresd kiddies leaving a Disney film, will it be a good show at the ever feel good Disneyworld/land? Certainly not. Now Disney can handle serious themese but not under its usual Disney idiom, which being a Disney princess is a firm cut in.
So the alternative is to give Downs syndrome princess a happy ending. This is worse. What happy ending would you want, she gets miraculously cured? There are alternatives to this, but all are unpalettable, she could have her disabilities overlooked to the point of non reality and get voted prom queen, having a special needs edge to a common theme in Disney teen movies, but that has so many social undertones as to be meaningless, perhaps even derogatory. I cant see how you would be able to invlude a Disney ending without either missing the point of living with diosability or being naueeatingly patronising about it. Consequently this project should be left on the to do list until after Doomsday.
I don't think it's as much a "Disney 'must' do this" and more of a "hey Disney, we would spend our money on you if you did it".
And that's what it ultimately boils down to.
And, with that in mind, the numbers simply don't add up.
Let's use the US Census Estimate of 400,000 total people with it in the US. Statistics seems to indicate (they don't appear very clear) that it's about a 60-40 ratio of males to females, so lets assume 160,000 total females of all ages with downs syndrome in the US.
I'm just not sure that demographic and their families is enough to support a Disney Princess with Tri21 when the last Disney movie (Frozen) cost $150MM to make. Lets bump the number back up to 500,000, to include family and others that might be interested in the movie, and each person would have to spend around $300 just for the movie to break even.
Granted, my math here is all 100% hypothetical, but I just don't think the market is there for it as star, which is is why it makes a ton more sense to have a character like that on a show like Sophia.
Automatically Appended Next Post: Though, I admit I absolutely abhor the idea that Disney would do so to pander to what appears to be a very "look at us" couple.
Which is why the "add a character to an existing show" would probably be the most likely answer.
The money part was really just an answer to the "how dare people demand that they 'must' do something" which I think was a wrong statement. I was just saying that letting them know that you would spend money on it if they did was perfectly reasonable, just as it is perfectly reasonable for Disney to look at those numbers to decide if it's worth it.
d-usa wrote: Which is why the "add a character to an existing show" would probably be the most likely answer.
The money part was really just an answer to the "how dare people demand that they 'must' do something" which I think was a wrong statement. I was just saying that letting them know that you would spend money on it if they did was perfectly reasonable, just as it is perfectly reasonable for Disney to look at those numbers to decide if it's worth it.
Oh, I'm obviously right with you.
I think sometimes SJWs can't see the forest through the trees with their causes.
There are good ideas, and then there's pragmatism driven by cost-benefit analyses. People often either forget about the latter, or simply don't care. Thing is, in the real world that latter piece is pretty damn important.
Population statistics are kind of irrelevant. How much money did Forest Gump make again?
I think Orlanth highlights the real issues. That there's 0 way for Disney to win with this kind of film. It just doesn't fly in the world of mainstream children's films (that also appeal to adults).
Additionally, it just occured to me that GIngers/Redheads are the 2nd most represented Disney Princess group!
How crazy is that!
Spoiler:
Snow White - Brunette
Aurora - Brunette
Cinderella - Blonde
Ariel - Redhead
Belle - Brunette
Jasmine - Arabian/Middle Eastern Dark Hair
Pocahontas - Native American Dark Hair
Mulan - Asian Dark Hair
Tiana - Black Dark Hair
Rapunzel - Blonde that BECOMES a Brunette
Merida - Redhead
Anna - Redhead
Elsa - Blonde
LordofHats wrote: We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
isn't princess sofia latino? I know she half counts because of no movie. Although she is an official disney princess.
I think Orlanth highlights the real issues. That there's 0 way for Disney to win with this kind of film. It just doesn't fly in the world of mainstream children's films (that also appeal to adults).
Which is probably another reason to go with the "character in a show" route instead of a Disney Princess route. There wouldn't be a need for a movie-style happy ending or grand accomplishment. A show character can showcase the happiness that any child can have, how the character is able to adapt and still have fun with friends, how the friends and family accept them, etc etc etc.
It's just easier to work a special needs character into a show and runs a lot less risk of becoming an offensive stereotype of special needs children.
I also agree that if any branch of Disney 'could' pull a movie off it would be Pixar.
Additionally, Forrest, in the film, is a far cry from someone having Tri21.
Yeah, but the Op isn't asking for someone with Tri21. Just a Princess with a disability. The idea that no one but people with disabilities would be interested in watching a movie about someone with a disability is obviously silly. Forest Gump made a fortune as a book and a movie, and come on, that's not just because of Tom Hanks.
isn't princess sofia latino? I know she half counts because of no movie. Although she is an official disney princess.
This Sophia?
There was a lot of outrage because it appears that the initial statement was that Sophia was a Latina character, which resulted in people calling her a "whitewashed" Latina.
Disney since clarified (or reversed or covered their rears, I'll let you decide) and said that even though all Disney princesses are not based on real people Sophia represents a mixed-race character, with her mother having a Latin influence and her father having a white influence.
Whatever the story, I think that a mixed-race character probably represents more of the reality of the population in 2014 than any single-ethnic character.
There was a lot of outrage because it appears that the initial statement was that Sophia was a Latina character, which resulted in people calling her a "whitewashed" Latina.
Disney since clarified (or reversed or covered their rears, I'll let you decide) and said that even though all Disney princesses are not based on real people Sophia represents a mixed-race character, with her mother having a Latin influence and her father having a white influence.
Whatever the story, I think that a mixed-race character probably represents more of the reality of the population in 2014 than any single-ethnic character.
So she's a Russel Wilson is what you're saying
I actually didn't know that was an issue.
And I actually think there's a pretty large difference between adults wanting to see a movie with a low IQ adult as its star (who just happens to be Tom Hanks) that's intended for adults vs. parents wanting to take their kids to see a kids movie where someone with a disability is the lead.
isn't princess sofia latino? I know she half counts because of no movie. Although she is an official disney princess.
This Sophia?
There was a lot of outrage because it appears that the initial statement was that Sophia was a Latina character, which resulted in people calling her a "whitewashed" Latina.
Disney since clarified (or reversed or covered their rears, I'll let you decide) and said that even though all Disney princesses are not based on real people Sophia represents a mixed-race character, with her mother having a Latin influence and her father having a white influence.
Whatever the story, I think that a mixed-race character probably represents more of the reality of the population in 2014 than any single-ethnic character.
yeah I only ever saw the initial announcement/beginnings of the character. So to my knowledge she was still 100% latina
I mean, and if they really think Heroes with disabilities are underrepresented, they've apparently not seen How to Train Your Dragon, one of the most popular animated movies of the past 5 years, or its sequel.
cincydooley wrote: Additionally, it just occured to me that GIngers/Redheads are the 2nd most represented Disney Princess group!
You gotta give the dads in this world a motivation to watch the movies
There is literally no tanned and blonde Disney Princess. It's probably purposeful to distance them from Barbie...but man, when I realized this I was sort of shocked.
And the closest one, Rapunzel, is happier when her hair is Dark!
The real question here should be, "What does Disney have against blondes?!?"
I don't think it's as much a "Disney 'must' do this" and more of a "hey Disney, we would spend our money on you if you did it".
Precisely. Badmouthing a company when it doesn't comply to anything, however, is extremely common and just misplaced. People are free to voice their concerns, but some people feel like others are entitled to do something because of PC or anything - and that's just stupid to a vast degree.
cincydooley wrote: Additionally, it just occured to me that GIngers/Redheads are the 2nd most represented Disney Princess group!
You gotta give the dads in this world a motivation to watch the movies
There is literally no tanned and blonde Disney Princess. It's probably purposeful to distance them from Barbie...but man, when I realized this I was sort of shocked.
And the closest one, Rapunzel, is happier when her hair is Dark!
The real question here should be, "What does Disney have against blondes?!?"
A pale skin makes a woman appear younger and innocent, thus fits a princess. Pocahontas, for example, is more of an ebony and not a classical princess.
cincydooley wrote: I mean, and if they really think Heroes with disabilities are underrepresented, they've apparently not seen How to Train Your Dragon, one of the most popular animated movies of the past 5 years, or its sequel.
There's always Charles Xavier as well. The man's wheelchair-bound, after all.
There is really no "proper" way to say no without coming off as an ass by giving an explanation...so I'm just gonna say no. This can only end badly. I hope Disney doesn't do this, it's a lawsuit waiting to happen.
cincydooley wrote: I mean, and if they really think Heroes with disabilities are underrepresented, they've apparently not seen How to Train Your Dragon, one of the most popular animated movies of the past 5 years, or its sequel.
There's always Charles Xavier as well. The man's wheelchair-bound, after all.
I don't think wheelchair-bound with superhuman powers counts as disabled
cincydooley wrote: I mean, and if they really think Heroes with disabilities are underrepresented, they've apparently not seen How to Train Your Dragon, one of the most popular animated movies of the past 5 years, or its sequel.
There's always Charles Xavier as well. The man's wheelchair-bound, after all.
I don't think wheelchair-bound with superhuman powers counts as disabled
in which case "ordinary" people with superpowers oughtn't count either, since they're not ordinary at all.
If they are talking about special needs because of stuff like "Down Syndrome", no, Disney shouldn't touch it at all. I think that even a movie made with the best intentions and with the biggest care in the world would work.
If we are talking physical, we already have some characters. Like it was mentioned, Charles Xavier is one, but the dude I mostly remember that's in a wheelchair and still kicking ass:
hotsauceman1 wrote: I think they want mental disabilities. The kind that are difficult to overcome
Because physical disabilities are so easy to overcome, right?
I'm not so sure you think about what you post sometimes....
Automatically Appended Next Post:
TheDraconicLord wrote: If they are talking about special needs because of stuff like "Down Syndrome",
1. No need for the quotations; it's an actual thing named after an actual physician, not a slang name for it. But if you're uncomfortable with that, you can just call it Tri21. Many people do.
2. They are specifically talking about Tri21 here; it says so in the 2nd sentence of the article.
Is everyone commenting actually reading the article? Because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
TheDraconicLord wrote: If they are talking about special needs because of stuff like "Down Syndrome",
1. No need for the quotations; it's an actual thing named after an actual physician, not a slang name for it. But if you're uncomfortable with that, you can just call it Tri21. Many people do.
2. They are specifically talking about Tri21 here; it says so in the 2nd sentence of the article.
Is everyone commenting actually reading the article? Because I feel like I'm taking crazy pills.
No, no, you are not on crazy pills, it's there alright, I'm just blind it seems
Sigvatr wrote: There aren't ordinary people with super powers...as you said...cannot both be ordinary and habe super powers.
In which case no one is overrepresented, and there's no problem to solve! Cookies for everyone!
You kinda lost me D:
If people want a "special needs" Superhero to increase diversity, presumably the idea is that there's a too big proportion of "normal" people representing Superheroes. If Xavier doesn't count as a disabled Superhero because he's "too powereful" or somesuch, I would posit that there's by default no such thing as a disabled Superhero, which seems like a downer (no pun intended).
What other challenge would this ''princess'' need to overcome other than bullying and derogatory language. Which means highly offensive scenes portraying that.
A thing to note is that it would result in a very dumb and petty villain to serve as the counter since the strengths of the villainous character tends to be an antithesis of the hero. So you'd have a mentally handicapped hero to be thwarted by a villain of average capacity and intelligence, sounds like an epic tale to me.
Full disclosure - my youngest daughter is autistic, and I just can't see how this would end well at all for Disney.
I've seen a blog/article online by a "regular movie goer" in which the author congratulated Marvel for a job well done on Guardians of the Galaxy. See, his brother is much the same as your daughter, Autistic. Now, apparently this guy went with his younger brother who instantly fell in love with Drax, and this kid completely identified with the character, as this boys' manifestation of Autism is much the same as Drax's characterization.
Beyond that, I agree with you, and others in thnking/not seeing how certain disabilities can/would work on screen without screaming tokenism, or a fairly offensive portrayal.
Sigvatr wrote: There aren't ordinary people with super powers...as you said...cannot both be ordinary and habe super powers.
In which case no one is overrepresented, and there's no problem to solve! Cookies for everyone!
You kinda lost me D:
If people want a "special needs" Superhero to increase diversity, presumably the idea is that there's a too big proportion of "normal" people representing Superheroes. If Xavier doesn't count as a disabled Superhero because he's "too powereful" or somesuch, I would posit that there's by default no such thing as a disabled Superhero, which seems like a downer (no pun intended).
Precisely. Badmouthing a company when it doesn't comply to anything, however, is extremely common and just misplaced. People are free to voice their concerns, but some people feel like others are entitled to do something because of PC or anything - and that's just stupid to a vast degree.
Where are people badmouthing Disney here? All I see is a petition asking Disney to make a special needs Princess.
What other challenge would this ''princess'' need to overcome other than bullying and derogatory language. Which means highly offensive scenes portraying that.
This is my favorite argument so far. Just because you cannot think of something for a story does not mean a company whose business is to make movies for children, cannot. This is incredibly ridiculous.
stanman wrote: A thing to note is that it would result in a very dumb and petty villain to serve as the counter since the strengths of the villainous character tends to be an antithesis of the hero. So you'd have a mentally handicapped hero to be thwarted by a villain of average capacity and intelligence, sounds like an epic tale to me.
Or maybe the Supervillain underestimates the Hero and is defeated by their own bigotry? Again, just because you cannot think of a story does not mean Disney cannot. They get paid to do this kind of thing!
I think it would be totally possible. It would just take a little creativity, something sadly lacking in this thread.
I mean, just off the top of my head: It could be a story about a young girl with special needs who feels outcast from her peers and escapes into a fantasy world in which she becomes a princess, and who, in the process, learns to love herself and recognise her value. Or something.
That literally took the time it took to type that. C'mon, people.
LordofHats wrote: We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
You forget Dora the Explorer. Although she's technically an "Undocumented Princess" who happened to swim across a river and climb over a fence into the magic kingdom.
She typically isn't in the princess line up pictures as they always forget to send picture-day notices to house keeping.
LordofHats wrote: We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
You forget Dora the Explorer. Although she's technically an "Undocumented Princess" who happened to swim across a river and climb over a fence into the magic kingdom.
LordofHats wrote: We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
You forget Dora the Explorer. Although she's technically an "Undocumented Princess" who happened to swim across a river and climb over a fence into the magic kingdom.
Congratulations on being a racist!
Cmon bro, she's brown skinned and speaks Spanish, so she is obviously Mexican, and if she is Mexican, she obviously is an illegal immigrant. Super simple stuff really.
LordofHats wrote: We could actually probably give Disney some credit on that front. Yes most of the princess' are white, but there's at least 1 of each major ethnic group save Latino also present in the group.
You forget Dora the Explorer. Although she's technically an "Undocumented Princess" who happened to swim across a river and climb over a fence into the magic kingdom.
On a serious note undocumented immigrant doesn't exclusively mean mexican, it means anyone who's here illegally, so anyone assuming "Undocumented = Mexican" they're the one being racist. There's plenty of undocumented South Americans, Chinese, Russians, Polish, Cubans here so it spans all sorts of races.
Albatross wrote:
Cmon bro, she's brown skinned and speaks Spanish, so she is obviously Mexican, and if she is Mexican, she obviously is an illegal immigrant. Super simple stuff really.
Exactly, Disney the "Magic Kingdom" is in Southern California, which only adds to the fun of poking at the stupidity of America stereotypes.
You have no idea how many jokes with "down" I gotta stop myself from posting right naow.
To be fair, there isn't much to be discussed on the matter and what is, has been. A woman loves her child, sees what her child likes and wants to further empower her child.
It's an understandable yet extremely short-sighted view, though, as it's solely based on emotions and therefore doesn't have a place in economics.
I'm pretty sure it wasn't emotion that made a lot of people buy the re-release of the 1990's X-wing and Tie Fighter PC games. I know I purchased them for the graphics!
hotsauceman1 wrote: I think they want mental disabilities. The kind that are difficult to overcome
Because physical disabilities are so easy to overcome, right?
I'm not so sure you think about what you post sometimes....
.
Ok, let me put it another way. Physical abilities limit only what you can do with your own body. Much that can be overcome by Technology or device. Dwarfs can still drive cars with special modifications. Amputees can still walk and be mobile with crutches, You can even play basketball in a wheelchair. And we are coming close to creating prostetics that can repair physical disabilitie
Now, Mental difficulties are very difficult to overcome in comparison, like down syndrome, that can never be cured. Or Autism(Although some Autism can get mitigated). They are built into genes and Im not sure you can remove them in a fashion, not for some time
lets get this straight, someone thinks that having a down syndrome princess sing songs in a Disney movie is a good idea?
I catch a bus with a down syndrome guy that does front of bus Karioke (japanese bloody singing ,however you spell it) and i can tell you it's hilarious, absolutely hilarious. Seeing everybody trying not to piss themselves laughing is hilarious - he must know this makes everyone laugh as he does his karioke complete with hand movements- i'm not sure if he realises how quite off key he is ,but he also tunes his radio station to the same one as on the bus so we can know exactly what he is supposed to be singing.
It's a great end to a day at work. I always come off that bus with a big smile for that guy, he's a born entertainer, but I'm not sure it's a good idea for a Disney movie
d-usa wrote: I'm pretty sure it wasn't emotion that made a lot of people buy the re-release of the 1990's X-wing and Tie Fighter PC games. I know I purchased them for the graphics!
Can you go onlinein this game???
My contribution to the thread:
-Disney can pull if off.
I catch a bus with a down syndrome guy that does front of bus Karioke (japanese bloody singing ,however you spell it) and i can tell you it's hilarious, absolutely hilarious. Seeing everybody trying not to piss themselves laughing is hilarious - he must know this makes everyone laugh as he does his karioke complete with hand movements- i'm not sure if he realises how quite off key he is ,but he also tunes his radio station to the same one as on the bus so we can know exactly what he is supposed to be singing.
To be fair, Karaoke is hard for everyone, Im sure the only reason it exists is a joke on drunk people.
And to face crippling fears f being infront of people.
the shrouded lord wrote: how the hell would a downes syndrome Disney princess work? autistic would be.... slightly, easier. maybe. but it's going to offend someone.
I think their was strong evidence to suggest Ariel the mermaid was on the autistic spectrum.
And Downs Syndrome people arn't just flailing messes - here is a blog I read that gives some flavour of what is like for a young adult with downs syndrome - http://sarahely8989.blogspot.co.uk/
I think Disney could make this work - maybe they could make in non-explicit like the ice princess LGBT thing.
I think it's a great idea. I'm not sure how it should be handled however. Do you simply have a princess with additional support needs in a standard Disney plot and let the issue speak for itself? Or doc you have an acceptance story, where she is shunned or ignored but is the best at something and saves the day, proving she was right all along? Either way her love interest (I'm assuming there's one as it's a Disney film) should not have any learning difficulties or disabilities.
I think it's totally possible to do this, just as How to Train Your Dragon has a character who is handicapped - his disability is a pretty minor part of the story.
If I had a girl with 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disney princesses.
If I had a girl without 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disny princesses.
Our forebears fought a war to eliminate princesses from society...monarchy and aristocracy are disgusting ideas that belong in the garbage heap of history.
(And yes, I realize I am being a curmudgeon here )
jasper76 wrote: If I had a girl with 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disney princesses.
If I had a girl without 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disny princesses.
Our forebears fought a war to eliminate princesses from society...monarchy and aristocracy are disgusting ideas that belong in the garbage heap of history.
I will absolutely be exposing my daughter to Disney Princesses. We already watch Frozen and Rapunzel with her.
But then again, I'm also buying my daughter pink clothing. I know, I'm a terrible person for gender assigning my child.
Don't bypass the language filter like this please. Reds8n
Automatically Appended Next Post:
Ouze wrote: I think it's totally possible to do this, just as How to Train Your Dragon has a character who is handicapped - his disability is a pretty minor part of the story.
As has been rehashed about 14 times in the thread already, the specific ask of the petition is for a Disney Princess with Tri21/Down Syndrome.
It's an awful idea for a multitude of reasons, the least of which is that any "best at something that no one else is" is an unfair and unrealistic expectation/standard to set for someone with Tri21.
I was kinda sort joking about the Disney princesses.
However, part of me does indeed believe that Disney sugarcoats the pernicious nature of aristocracy for young children, and they have to unlearn what they learned as children when they grow up...which in most cases I assume is no big deal.
My main beef with Disney is actually the art. Disney movies do indeed inform a growing childs sense of what the (unrealistic) ideal body image of a male or female should be, and also teaches frequently that overweight or ugly people are inherently evil, which I think can lead to self esteem issues. That is the main reason I personally would not choose to show a young child Disney movies, at least where they depict humans. But I don't have kids, so my opinion isnt worth much here!
My main beef with Disney is actually the art. Disney movies do indeed inform a growing childs sense of what the (unrealistic) ideal body image of a male or female should be, and also teaches frequently that overweight or ugly people are inherently evil, which I think can lead to self esteem issues. That is the main reason I personally would not choose to show a young child Disney movies, at least where they depict humans. But I don't have kids, so my opinion isnt worth much here!
I guess it's good news that Disney's job is to tell stories and not parent children then, eh?
You don't agree with something you kids sees in a movie? Be a fething parent and parent. Talk to them about it.
Sheltering them from stuff creates more problems than it solves.
My main beef with Disney is actually the art. Disney movies do indeed inform a growing childs sense of what the (unrealistic) ideal body image of a male or female should be, and also teaches frequently that overweight or ugly people are inherently evil, which I think can lead to self esteem issues. That is the main reason I personally would not choose to show a young child Disney movies, at least where they depict humans. But I don't have kids, so my opinion isnt worth much here!
I guess it's good news that Disney's job is to tell stories and not parent children then, eh?
So you don't think children absorb and take to heart images they see in movies???
jasper76 wrote: If I had a girl with 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disney princesses.
If I had a girl without 'special needs', I would not expose her to Disny princesses.
Our forebears fought a war to eliminate princesses from society...monarchy and aristocracy are disgusting ideas that belong in the garbage heap of history.
I will absolutely be exposing my daughter to Disney Princesses. We already watch Frozen and Rapunzel with her.
But then again, I'm also buying my daughter pink clothing. I know, I'm a terrible person for gender assigning my child.
As a father of a daughter, and a rather jock-like father at that... I've tried and TRIED to get her away from pink, and princesses and all manner of girly things, and tried to get her to play with bugs and dirt and trucks, etc.... It doesn't really work. It's a good day if I can get her to play in the dirt/mud in a pink "princess dress"
And it's ridiculous what becomes "princess" clothing. Grey sweater with purple stars? "it's my princess sweater" Tye dye shirt with an American flag on it? "Princess flag shirt"
@cincey: OK, so if a parent needs to tell a child "Ursula isnt bad just because she's overweight, so don't believe that all overweight people are evil" and "hardly anyone alive will end up looking like Ariel, so don't be worried when you grow up if you're not perfect in every way", at some point I'd think you'd have to ask yourself whether those movies are worth showing to the children in the first place. There are plenty of other kids movies, good ones too, that don't reinforce these stereotypes.
jasper76 wrote: OK, so if a parent needs to tell a child "Ursula isnt bad just because she's overweight, so don't believe that all overweight people are evil" and "hardly anyone alive will end up looking like Ariel, so don't be worried when you grow up if you're not perfect in every way", at some point I'd think you'd have to ask yourself whether those movies are worth showing to the children in the first place. There are plenty of other kids movies, good ones too, that don't reinforce these stereotypes.
If that's what you're taking away from those movies you're missing huge swathes of the point.
It's hard not to take those points from those movies. They're in just about every Disney movie that depicts human women (at least that I've seen, maybe things have changed).
Good people are beautiful and have perfect figures.
Bad people are fat and ugly.
I'm not saying Disney invented these stereotypes, but they reinforce them. Conditioning is a real thing.
(Anyway I am coming across as being more exercised about Disney than I am in real life. I don't have kids, I generally don't consume Disney cartoon entertainment)
And it's ridiculous what becomes "princess" clothing. Grey sweater with purple stars? "it's my princess sweater" Tye dye shirt with an American flag on it? "Princess flag shirt"
I can't wait.
Although I know for certain that Clone Wars / Rebels will definitely be on our Daddy/Daughter watch list.
jasper76 wrote: It's hard not to take those points from those movies. They're in just about every Disney movie that depicts human women (at least that I've seen, maybe things have changed).
Good people are beautiful and have perfect figures.
Bad people are fat and ugly.
I'm not saying Disney invented these stereotypes, but they reinforce them. Conditioning is a real thing.
I'm not saying you're wrong, but you clearly haven't seen enough Disney movies.
I looked these up as you're correct, I haven't seen most of them, and I agree that with the exception of Jafar, which is a pretty clear Arab stereotype, there's nothing particulary wrong with the image of these villains.
I looked these up as you're correct, I haven't seen most of them, and I agree that with the exception of Jafar, which is a pretty clear Arab stereotype, there's nothing particulary wrong with the image of these villains.
Not to mention a chubby father is present in a number of Disney movies.
Or a chubby good sidekick.
I mean, have you actually ever seen a Disney movie, or did you just read an angry article about Disney princesses on the web?
Regardless, it all comes down to making sure you parent your effin kid and talk to them about the media they're consuming.
I'm just going to bash my head against a brick wall now.
California, everyone.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
jasper76 wrote: I'm not talking about the point of the movie. I'm talking about how it depicts fat kids.
I don't like the way Schindler's List depicts Nazis. They should be treated just like everyone else!
i don't like how *Movie* depicts *Demographic*! They should be treated just like everyone else!
Right. Adults and young adults are sophisticated enough to get that point.
Young children are not (without guidance, and I think even with guidance they wouldn't understand the point). All they see are an ocean of fat people in a spaceship who are lazy, constantly feeding, and stupid, and its OK to laugh at them.
jasper76 wrote: Verviedi, you just made my point. You just compared overweight people to Nazis.
False. I was comparing a negatively portrayed demographic with another negatively portrayed demographic, to show how stupid the idea of everyone being treated equally in movies SPECIFICALLY TARGETED at an issue causing or being caused by said demographic.
jasper76 wrote: Right. Adults and young adults are sophisticated enough to get that point.
Young children are not (without guidance, and I think even with guidance they wouldn't understand the point). All they see are an ocean of fat people in a spaceship who are lazy, constantly feeding, and stupid, and its OK to laugh at them.
I'm going to go out on a limb and say you haven't actually every watched any movies with a 3-8 year old, would that be correct?
Young kids take very different things away from movies than adults, and do far less generalizing and stereotyping than older children. and if a parent was concerned about the depiction of futuristic animated fat people, then they should discuss it with their children.
jasper76 wrote: All I am saying is that these images inform a childs view of the world, and can lead to self esteem issues.
Self esteem is irrelevant.
I would rather have children earn their self esteem than have all the children who failed classes write good things about themselves and get an auto-A.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vasconcellos
jasper76 wrote: All I am saying is that these images inform a childs view of the world, and can lead to self esteem issues.
What I'm saying is that they don't nearly as much as you think, especially for the demographics these films are aimed at, and that it's a parent's job to interpret those images for their children and not allow the movie/media to parent their children.
jasper76 wrote: All I am saying is that these images inform a childs view of the world, and can lead to self esteem issues.
Self esteem is irrelevant.
I would rather have children earn their self esteem than have all the children who failed classes write good things about themselves and get an auto-A.
http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_Vasconcellos
So you don't think that if a young child is bombarded with images of fat people being gross, evil, lazy, and/or stupid (I admit these depictions may be changing), and then they develop a weight problem, they could think that they are gross, evil, lazy, and/or stupid ???
To the topic on hand:
As an avid Disney fan, I say go for it.
My daughters love Disney, much like I did when I was a child, and while the Princesses are probably their favorites, they enjoy just about every character that there is (both male and female). Case in point: my youngest, while excited to meet the Princesses, loves Mickey Mouse big time and she wouldn't let go of him when we met him at Disney World last Christmas, it was adorable. If Disney makes a character with special needs, it would work because they would make it work. Not to mention, they have always taken consideration of people with disabilities (as evident if you have visited a park before) so I know they could do it right.
jasper76 wrote: All I am saying is that these images inform a childs view of the world, and can lead to self esteem issues.
What I'm saying is that they don't nearly as much as you think, especially for the demographics these films are aimed at, and that it's a parent's job to interpret those images for their children and not allow the movie/media to parent their children.
I would add, if they do they tend to outgrow it. I don't know many 20yr Olds that think theyare princesses. Except themail girl across the hall.....
he he he. I am fat. and a teenager. you know, i go to school. with 'peers'. and I'm fat. you see where this is going right?
the purpose of parents is to prepare their children. ft people ARE treated differently, and perhaps should be. it has motivated me to lose weight. unfortunately, humanity sucks. we're terrible, terrible beings. skinny, attractive people WILL be treated differently to fat people. this IS reality. claiming that the whole "skinny people" thing builds unrealisitic expectations, it false. fat people WILL always be worse off than skinny people. just like short people will always be worse off than tall people. now, i need another wall to bash my head on, Jafar a stereotypical arab, damn.
But I bet you do know plenty of 20 year olds with weight isssues that have low self esteem because of their weight.
Automatically Appended Next Post:
the shrouded lord wrote: ft people ARE treated differently, and perhaps should be... skinny, attractive people WILL be treated differently to fat people. this IS reality.
This is only true of certain cultures, ours being one of them.
And it's ridiculous what becomes "princess" clothing. Grey sweater with purple stars? "it's my princess sweater" Tye dye shirt with an American flag on it? "Princess flag shirt"
I can't wait.
Although I know for certain that Clone Wars / Rebels will definitely be on our Daddy/Daughter watch list.
Ohh yeah... we already get down with Avengers and most of the Marvel films
I am serious in that I think movies that depict negative stereotypes about a certain body image, and positive stereotypes about unrealistic body images can be harmful to a childs self esteem.
I would not choose to show a hypothetical child of mine certain Disney movies because of this. There are plenty of other children movies out there.
I'm not judging people who do, I am simply attempting to expressing my opinion on the matter, and why I hold that opinion.
As I said before, this is all coming across that I am way more exercised about this than I really am. I don't have kids.
It's an understandable yet extremely short-sighted view, though, as it's solely based on emotions and therefore doesn't have a place in economics.
If you think emotion has no place in economics then you really don't understand economics.
Not sure if you got my point. Willfully or not.
Emotions are a weakness for one who strifes for success. Emotiones can be easily exploited and most often are in order to boost success.
When in control, emotiones are a weakness as long as they are irrational and don't serve an actual deeper purpose. An employee is dragging the team down? Kick his butt. He doesn't comply? Fire. Circumstances don't matter.
In this very case, the mother has no clue on how a movie studio works economically. She just sees her child. Good for her. Worthless for the company.
And it's ridiculous what becomes "princess" clothing. Grey sweater with purple stars? "it's my princess sweater" Tye dye shirt with an American flag on it? "Princess flag shirt"
I can't wait.
Although I know for certain that Clone Wars / Rebels will definitely be on our Daddy/Daughter watch list.
Ohh yeah... we already get down with Avengers and most of the Marvel films
Awesome. It's something my wife and I talked about quite a bit, in that we really do want to be cognizant of allowing her to see both sides of the spectrum and make her own choices (once she's able). Despite the fact that I guess I am a "jock," I'm also a huge geek, so she's going to get lots of different takes.
The other fortunate thing today is that there are simply tons more instances of "strong female characters doing non-stereotypically female things" in media, and being an athletic female today isn't even really considered being a "tomboy" anymore. Strangely, the critique about being an athletic female today is coming more from larger females.....it's odd!
Awesome. It's something my wife and I talked about quite a bit, in that we really do want to be cognizant of allowing her to see both sides of the spectrum and make her own choices (once she's able). Despite the fact that I guess I am a "jock," I'm also a huge geek, so she's going to get lots of different takes.
The other fortunate thing today is that there are simply tons more instances of "strong female characters doing non-stereotypically female things" in media, and being an athletic female today isn't even really considered being a "tomboy" anymore.
Same here cincy - and I dare say that my daughters have turned out pretty great so far!
Emotions are a weakness for one who strifes for success. Emotiones can be easily exploited and most often are in order to boost success.
Like anger at the system that drives people to change, passion that drives people to succeed, compassion that means people empathize and see a gap in the market? Emotions are what drives most companies to grow and succeed. Companies fail when they become dry machines designed to make more money.
If we're going to petition Disney with the goal to help girls have role models can we at least ask them to quit their matricidal rampage that they've been on since they first started making movies?
Prestor Jon wrote: If we're going to petition Disney with the goal to help girls have role models can we at least ask them to quit their matricidal rampage that they've been on since they first started making movies?
You know, I never thought about it, but man Walt must have had some mommy issues.
Prestor Jon wrote: If we're going to petition Disney with the goal to help girls have role models can we at least ask them to quit their matricidal rampage that they've been on since they first started making movies?
You know, I never thought about it, but man Walt must have had some mommy issues.
According to Wikipedia, Walt Disney's mother, Flora, died in 1938 by asphyxiation, and this "plagued her son Walt with grief for the rest of his life."
Automatically Appended Next Post: Whoa this is actually pretty whacked. His mom died due to fumes from a gas furnace in a house that Walt Disney had bought her only a month before
That would mess with most peoples' heads.
Here's the full Wiklipedia section I'm referring to:
Flora died in 1938 in an accident that plagued her son Walt with grief for the rest of his life.[2] After the success of their film Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs, in 1938, Walt and Roy presented their parents with a new home in North Hollywood, near the Disney studios in Burbank, California. Less than a month after moving in, Flora complained to Walt and Roy of problems with the gas furnace in her new home. Studio repairmen were sent to the house, but the problem was not adequately fixed.[citation needed] Flora wrote a letter to her daughter Ruth describing the wonderful new home, but again complaining of the fumes from the furnace. A few days later, Flora died of asphyxiation caused by the fumes at age 70.[citation needed] She is entombed next to her husband in Glendale's Forest Lawn Memorial Park Cemetery.
To the topic on hand:
As an avid Disney fan, I say go for it.
My daughters love Disney, much like I did when I was a child, and while the Princesses are probably their favorites, they enjoy just about every character that there is (both male and female). Case in point: my youngest, while excited to meet the Princesses, loves Mickey Mouse big time and she wouldn't let go of him when we met him at Disney World last Christmas, it was adorable. If Disney makes a character with special needs, it would work because they would make it work. Not to mention, they have always taken consideration of people with disabilities (as evident if you have visited a park before) so I know they could do it right.
Wasnot there a big deal recently that they are no longer accommodating special needs kids like they used to.
jasper76 wrote: I am serious in that I think movies that depict negative stereotypes about a certain body image, and positive stereotypes about unrealistic body images can be harmful to a childs self esteem.
I would not choose to show a hypothetical child of mine certain Disney movies because of this. There are plenty of other children movies out there.
I'm not judging people who do, I am simply attempting to expressing my opinion on the matter, and why I hold that opinion.
As I said before, this is all coming across that I am way more exercised about this than I really am. I don't have kids.
I feel that your ignorance of Disney has already completely undermined your argument. But I feel the need to post this for you:
Let us see how many realistic, overweight villains there are! Holy crap, most of the chubby ones are anthropomorphic. You had better teach your child that Anthropomorphic people are not always evil! This needs to be taught by every parent!
But listen, in all seriousness. You are assuming that a child cannot learn right from wrong. Especially after the most important person in their life, their parent, has sat them down and told them right from wrong. You are just, wrong.
Awesome. It's something my wife and I talked about quite a bit, in that we really do want to be cognizant of allowing her to see both sides of the spectrum and make her own choices (once she's able). Despite the fact that I guess I am a "jock," I'm also a huge geek, so she's going to get lots of different takes.
The other fortunate thing today is that there are simply tons more instances of "strong female characters doing non-stereotypically female things" in media, and being an athletic female today isn't even really considered being a "tomboy" anymore.
Same here cincy - and I dare say that my daughters have turned out pretty great so far!
I know it was none of my business, but sometimes it annoys me how mom's will force their girls to be girly. My niece loved playing with my action figures and watch me play video games. She loved dinosaurs and trucks. But recently her mom forbid her from doing that. When I asked her why she said no guy wants to be with a tomboy.
The other fortunate thing today is that there are simply tons more instances of "strong female characters doing non-stereotypically female things" in media, and being an athletic female today isn't even really considered being a "tomboy" anymore. Strangely, the critique about being an athletic female today is coming more from larger females.....it's odd!
The "beauty" of that sort of situation today is... IF for some reason my daughter ends up gaining a ton of weight during puberty or something to where she ends up "fat" I know, from experience that there's still a place for her athletically in rugby. I can show her healthy things that don't require her to be a human mop (stick thin with a ton of hair). It's one thing that, any time I've recently gotten into conversations with a "larger" woman who is moaning about her weight and how tough it is to lose weight, I ALWAYS point her toward rugby, and have on several occasions pointed them to a specific team within the local area (usually, they are moaning because they have a desire to exercise, but have not seen a viable way to really do so that keeps them motivated when Im suggesting this... I don't suggest sports to the person who is complaining just to complain or who shows no desire to alter their life)
Also, you're right on movies. Brave is one of my personal favorites for my kids (even if they always say they dont like it when it first comes on) as there isn't much to do with body type, but rather gender based stereotypes and relational problems.
This is only true of certain cultures, ours being one of them.
Fortunately. Appraising an unhealthy lifestyle is bad.
However, sometimes wieght issues have nothing to do with lifestyle at all.
Automatically Appended Next Post: (P.S. I admit to all and sundry that my view of Disney villain portrayals was incorrect and based on ignorance. I guess I was superimposing the Urusla image on other movies I have not seen. I was wrong on this...sorry!)
This is only true of certain cultures, ours being one of them.
Fortunately. Appraising an unhealthy lifestyle is bad.
However, sometimes wieght issues have nothing to do with lifestyle at all.
I am so tired of this statement. The fraction of people with an actual disease is so incredibly, incredibly, incredibly tiny compared to the other cases that I don't even think about caring for those when talking about the topic at hand.
I am so tired of this statement. The fraction of people with an actual disease is so incredibly, incredibly, incredibly tiny compared to the other cases that I don't even think about caring for those when talking about the topic at hand.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it's a natural and healthy state of being. That's what the woman who couldn't fit into that airplane said before she took all those pictures of herself binge eating junk food to teach them a lesson, or something.
This is only true of certain cultures, ours being one of them.
Fortunately. Appraising an unhealthy lifestyle is bad.
However, sometimes wieght issues have nothing to do with lifestyle at all.
I am so tired of this statement. The fraction of people with an actual disease is so incredibly, incredibly, incredibly tiny compared to the other cases that I don't even think about caring for those when talking about the topic at hand.
Actually, I'm pretty sure it's a natural and healthy state of being. That's what the woman who couldn't fit into that airplane said before she took all those pictures of herself binge eating junk food to teach them a lesson, or something.
That airplane company was totally discriminating her by not offering a "super fat" seat size. DISCRIMINATIOOOOOOOOOON!
Like anger at the system that drives people to change, passion that drives people to succeed, compassion that means people empathize and see a gap in the market? Emotions are what drives most companies to grow and succeed. Companies fail when they become dry machines designed to make more money.
Dreadwinter wrote: Kinda working out like that "emotion has no place in economics" argument you had earlier.
To be fair, a company making a decision whether to go to market with a product is not doing so based on emotion... They get the consumer to buy their product based on emotion though, so I guess, in the end, everyone is right
Dreadwinter wrote: Kinda working out like that "emotion has no place in economics" argument you had earlier.
To be fair, a company making a decision whether to go to market with a product is not doing so based on emotion... They get the consumer to buy their product based on emotion though, so I guess, in the end, everyone is right
Precisely the point. A successful company doesn't make decisions based on "Hey, let's do something morally accepted by the rest of the society as good". They make decisions based on profit.
However, article after article after article on Google Scholar links obesity to genetics. I can't find one that does not, and I've been looking. I'll let you know if I come across one.
You said that the "The fraction of people with an actual disease is so incredibly, incredibly, incredibly tiny compared to the other cases"
What's good for the goose is good for the gander. Please show me the studies you have read that have led you to this conclusion. I'll be happy to read them over....I'd be interested to read them over, in fact.
This doesn't single out genetics (and do note it's 8 years old already). It mentions some genes that increase the risk of obesity by e.g. having an influence on feeling / getting hungry or sated. This makes it harder to stay in shape, but it still isn't singling out genetics. Proper nutrition, maybe extending to special nutrition plans along with physical exercise to counter-work genetic priming remains an effective way to counter.
The availability of abundant, energy-rich processed foods in the last few decades has, however, resulted in a sharp rise in the prevalence of obesity in westernized countries. Although it is the obesogenic environment that has resulted in this major healthcare problem, it is acting by revealing a sub-population with a pre-existing genetic predisposition to excess adiposity.
I'm not a very good reader, but it's almost like the article you linked as evidence otherwise says that while genetics can be a contributing factor, the fact you can't put the big mac down is what's actually causing the obesity.
Dreadwinter wrote: So wait, are you asking us to find an article that states that Genetics is 100% why people are obese? Because, that seems to be what you are asking.
Yep. Not 100%, that'd be unrealistic. Just high enough of a factor to make it nigh-impossible to counteract.
Like, you can't do much to influence your actual height.
Dreadwinter wrote: Kinda working out like that "emotion has no place in economics" argument you had earlier.
To be fair, a company making a decision whether to go to market with a product is not doing so based on emotion... They get the consumer to buy their product based on emotion though, so I guess, in the end, everyone is right
Precisely the point. A successful company doesn't make decisions based on "Hey, let's do something morally accepted by the rest of the society as good". They make decisions based on profit.
Decisions to purchase a product are based on emotion. Such transactions are the bedrock of economic systems, therefore emotion is central to commercial economies.
I get what Sigvatr is saying, actually. He's saying that genetics can certainly "prime" people to get fat, by making them enjoy certain unhealthy foods more or by having their body build up more fat per spare calorie than others (or somesuch).
However, both of those 'genetic' problems are still addressable by eating well, exercising a lot, and living a healthy lifestyle.
Sigvatr is saying that one can overcome 'genetic predisposition' and so to use "I have a genetic predisposition towards being fat!" as a defense is to blame the wrong cause.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I get what Sigvatr is saying, actually. He's saying that genetics can certainly "prime" people to get fat, by making them enjoy certain unhealthy foods more or by having their body build up more fat per spare calorie than others (or somesuch).
However, both of those 'genetic' problems are still addressable by eating well, exercising a lot, and living a healthy lifestyle.
Sigvatr is saying that one can overcome 'genetic predisposition' and so to use "I have a genetic predisposition towards being fat!" as a defense is to blame the wrong cause.
At the same time, diseases like Hyperhtyroidism and the like are fairly rare. I mean, not "you're only the 4th person in human history to be diagnosed with this rare disease" rare, but definitely not "you have syphilis" common.
the other thing is that if your devoted, you can lose 20 kilos in a few months with minimal exercise. all you do is only eat breakfast, work off ALL cards/caloies during late afternoon, and then only eat dinner. you will lose weight. It's wat I'm doing.
Unit1126PLL wrote: I get what Sigvatr is saying, actually. He's saying that genetics can certainly "prime" people to get fat, by making them enjoy certain unhealthy foods more or by having their body build up more fat per spare calorie than others (or somesuch).
However, both of those 'genetic' problems are still addressable by eating well, exercising a lot, and living a healthy lifestyle.
Sigvatr is saying that one can overcome 'genetic predisposition' and so to use "I have a genetic predisposition towards being fat!" as a defense is to blame the wrong cause.
At the same time, diseases like Hyperhtyroidism and the like are fairly rare. I mean, not "you're only the 4th person in human history to be diagnosed with this rare disease" rare, but definitely not "you have syphilis" common.
Agreed.
People have free will, they can control their diet and activity. Two people can follow the exact same diet and exercise regimen and still look very different because they're different people and that's determined by genetics. You can work extremely hard at being fit and never quite look like a fitness model because of genetics and conversely if you are obese, like 30+ pounds overweight, you might be predisposed to weight gain because of your genetics but genetics didn't magically make you that big overnight you played an active role in getting there.
People have free will, they can control their diet and activity. Two people can follow the exact same diet and exercise regimen and still look very different because they're different people and that's determined by genetics. You can work extremely hard at being fit and never quite look like a fitness model because of genetics and conversely if you are obese, like 30+ pounds overweight, you might be predisposed to weight gain because of your genetics but genetics didn't magically make you that big overnight you played an active role in getting there.
At the same time.... and this is getting wildly off topic, you can be deemed "obese" and still not really be fat/obese. There are a ton of people who, by virtue of what a scale says are "overweight" but are actually incredibly healthy/fit. Front row forwards in rugby, strongman competitors and the like all fall into this category.
Perhaps that is the princess disney needs to make... the "fat" yet strong as an ox athletic girl
the shrouded lord wrote: the other thing is that if your devoted, you can lose 20 kilos in a few months with minimal exercise. all you do is only eat breakfast, work off ALL cards/caloies during late afternoon, and then only eat dinner. you will lose weight. It's wat I'm doing.
You'd be better served exercising, but you're right.
While I do think we'll see a chubby Disney Princess before we see one with a mental disability, I'd prefer to see neither.
the shrouded lord wrote: the other thing is that if your devoted, you can lose 20 kilos in a few months with minimal exercise. all you do is only eat breakfast, work off ALL cards/caloies during late afternoon, and then only eat dinner. you will lose weight. It's wat I'm doing.
You'd be better served exercising, but you're right.
Though I do think we'll see a chubby Disney Princess before we see one with a mental disability.
you can also do it byourself replacing half your plate with a salad and drinking nothing but water for a month. Like me, I'm going to win that bet
you can also do it byourself replacing half your plate with a salad and drinking nothing but water for a month. Like me, I'm going to win that bet
You'd still be better served by exercising consistently, but yes, you can. And did I make a bet with you that I've forgotten about?
Well, I am exercising again. Apparently my gym discourages crutches. And no, it's with a buddy. Whoever looses their wait last has to buy a forge world knight for the guy that did
Well, I am exercising again. Apparently my gym discourages crutches. And no, it's with a buddy. Whoever looses their wait last has to buy a forge world knight for the guy that did
Cool. Accountability is one of the hardest things about it. Having a buddy, or a friendly wager like that, is great to help you stay on target.
gakky the gym won't let you in with crutches. There are so many things you can do, even on crutches, that don't get in the way of others. Lame.
I have to say, after reading her blog, the parents backing out when they found out about the baby with down syndrome kinda gakky. Leaving those two with a child they where not expecting and without the money
LordofHats wrote: My first thought is; I like Timmy and Jimmy in South Park. Episodes centered on them do stand out in my mind. Yet, I can't help but feel that the reason Timmy and Jimmy work is that they're recurring characters. Would anyone really want to watch a show about either of them?
It sounds kind of harsh, but I think the reality is that no one really wants to watch something about someone with sever disabilities (at least of the nature in the OP). The only thing I can think of where this worked is Forest Gump, but then we've got every movie Adam Sandler has ever been in completely washing that movie
Additionally, there will be that inevitable moment where the child asks "what's wrong with them?" I think this is too much of a hot topic. also we do not need a gay princess for similar reasons. I would also like to say that I don't hate disabled/gays, but I think these issues could be dealt with another way
Dreadwinter wrote: Kinda working out like that "emotion has no place in economics" argument you had earlier.
To be fair, a company making a decision whether to go to market with a product is not doing so based on emotion... They get the consumer to buy their product based on emotion though, so I guess, in the end, everyone is right
Precisely the point. A successful company doesn't make decisions based on "Hey, let's do something morally accepted by the rest of the society as good". They make decisions based on profit.
Decisions to purchase a product are based on emotion. Such transactions are the bedrock of economic systems, therefore emotion is central to commercial economies.
Emotion however is best hyped than left natural. Natural emotion has too many different directions, corporations want to harness emotion in clumps in order to obtain market control. Therefore 'brave' enterprises that have a moral compass attached may harm more shallow but profitable enterprises. The only reliable mass inroads into moral market are religion and sympathy. Disney made its name tapping into the second with a masterful and precise methodology for making just about anything cute, and uses cuteness as a tool to forges its own moral narrative, but it helps strongly that real issues are avoided and much is glossed over. Hence the repeated use of traditional fairy tales backed up in the modern age with politically correct yet safe tropes. Downs syndrome princess is exceptionally risky as downs syndrome is not cute, and cant be made cute by the normal methods used by Disney.
Well, I am exercising again. Apparently my gym discourages crutches. And no, it's with a buddy. Whoever looses their wait last has to buy a forge world knight for the guy that did
Cool. Accountability is one of the hardest things about it. Having a buddy, or a friendly wager like that, is great to help you stay on target.
gakky the gym won't let you in with crutches. There are so many things you can do, even on crutches, that don't get in the way of others. Lame.
.
I think it may have been Liability or something like that.
