Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Make more ethnically diverse princesses before going down that road...
Hell even a gay princess, because... I mean...No I'm not going near this...

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.

Disability or not the vast majority of girls will never be a Disney Princess so it's an equal opportunities kind of exclusion already...

Pixar would probably be the only studio capable of pulling it off.

Like anything though, lets not just write a story "just because". If somebody comes up with something great it will appear in time.

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?

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).

 Sigvatr wrote:
With what right do those people demand something like this?

Free speech.

I find it more jarring when people complain about some people complaining about something.

 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

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

 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

isn't Tiana a furry princess?

 LordofHats wrote:

 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.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Rainbow Dash wrote:

Princess with a Feminist Tumblr

Female Supremism - The Movie

 Sigvatr wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 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:

 LordofHats wrote:

 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


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 d-usa wrote:

 Sigvatr wrote:

 LordofHats wrote:

 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.

 d-usa wrote:


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.

 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).

Harassment maybe. Assault I don't think so.

 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).

It's a good idea, but they'res alot of things that Disney would have to get perfect in a movie.

Additionally, it just occured to me that GIngers/Redheads are the 2nd most represented Disney Princess group!

How crazy is that!

 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.

 LordofHats wrote:
Population statistics are kind of irrelevant. How much money did Forest Gump make again?

No, they aren't. They're not perfect, but they're a good way of estimating initial interest.

Forrest Gump is a terrible example, because it's go so many other things going for it. Tom Hanks, for one.

Additionally, Forrest, in the film, is a far cry from someone having Tri21.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 soundwave591 wrote:


isn't princess sofia latino? I know she half counts because of no movie. Although she is an official disney princess.

This Sophia?

 LordofHats wrote:


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.

 cincydooley wrote:


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.

 cincydooley wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:


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.

 d-usa wrote:


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.

I could be totally wrong, but I don't think I am.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 LordofHats wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:


Additionally, Forrest, in the film, is a far cry from someone having Tri21.

Yeah, but the Op isn't asking for someone with Tri21.

Um, yes they are. It's literally in the 2nd sentence of the article.

 d-usa wrote:

 cincydooley wrote:

 soundwave591 wrote:


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