Disney Princesses

Game Development Writing and Content
21

I think that a lot of people is quick to make a shallow judgment about Disney princesses, and they wouldn’t hesitate to say that they fall into a very submissive and sexist archetype. However, I disagree with this opinion as I find that it’s mostly an stereotypical idea that is rarely supported by the content and messages of the movies.

I imagine that most of the conexions that people make with the characters and the “submissive damsel” archetype comes from the marketing that forms the Disney Princesses brand. You know, things like dolls, costumes and other merchandising. Those things are usually divorced from the actual stories and messages of the movies, and treat the characters more like the classic barbie doll, so its easier to associate disney princesses with restrictive gender roles, problematic depictions of idealized beauty… and all that stuff.

Anyway, this thread is probably about the movies and with them, I don’t really have too many problems. I personally really love Disney’s take on Beauty and the Beast,

I don’t like the original fairy tale, which is just a story about Beauty having to learn to see the supposed beauty in something superficially ugly, and has been interpreted as a metaphor for arranged marriages. But I really love the way it was treated in the Disney film, especially how the characters are portrayed.

Belle was an interesting character and a good role model. She was kind and able to see the good in those around her, but she also had her limits and knew when she had to stand up for herself. She was adventurous and had a wish for freedom, she didn’t fit in entirely but she was able to do her own thing outside from people expectations.

The story deviates from the original fairytale by putting focus on the character arc of the Beast, so he was the one who needed to learn a lesson instead of Belle. She wasn’t the one who tried to change him, but instead he was the one that decided to change, and Belle only got interested in him after that. It’s really beautiful how he only saw her as a mean to an end at the start, but eventually learnt to see the humanity in her and learnt to put the needs of her above his own wishes, and by giving up on trying to use her to become human again, he found his own humanity and he learned how to love.

This is presented in contrast to Gaston, who also saw Belle as a mean to an end and since he was never able to see her as nothing more he was the real monster. The twisted thing thing is that he could literally have any woman he wanted, but he only pursued the one that turned him down, not because he was really interested in her, in fact he despised her interests and ideals, but because he considered her a prize.

I know that the movie has become the target of lazy jokes about the stockholm syndrome, but this is missing the point completely. Beauty and the beast is a story about redemption, forgiveness and kindness, and how this can go unrecognized by a society which values more shallow ideas about the nature of love, happiness and beauty.

I see your point but I’m inclined to disagree again. That would make more sense of the beast had a golden heart form the start, like the original fairytale. In this version, however, he is turned into a monster by his own selfishness and unkindness, his beastly appearance is more a externalization of his inner ugliness, and by changing his ways he regains his internal and external humanity.

In fact I would argue that being accepted by society is not a theme in the movie, this movie has a very cynical view of society. You can see this in the character of Belle, who isn’t entirely valued in her own town, and only the beast starts to recognize her as her own individual with her own desires and needs. Not to mention how the movie shows how Gaston’s charismatic persona and the othering of the beast can be used as a tool for manipulation and can lead to dehumanization and violence.

12 Likes
22

The movie does have a cynical view of society but I don’t think that prevents “societal acceptance” from being a theme. Rather, I think the theme is about the unfairness of the standards society uses when accepting people. Gaston is accepted despite his internal monsterhood, and it’s scary and terrible. The beast might not start out as a good person, but part of Belle’s character is that she herself is someone able to see the humanity in others, regardless of what society would think. The beast didn’t spontaneously change, he became a good person when given the opportunity to, something Belle does that no one else would have. I don’t think the movie is trying to say that societal acceptance is the only thing to strive for, I think it’s a message to society in general to learn to be more accepting of others, and to not blindly follow whoever is popular.

8 Likes
23

Funny, then, that the Beast isn’t accepted by the townspeople (who aren’t punished for their crimes, unlike Gaston, as if he had them under some evil spell instead of just talking them into murdering a sentient being) and the narrative until he’s suddenly hot. We’re not accepting the Beast “as he is”, he has to be “cured” of his alienating features, ugliness and differences.

5 Likes
24

He’s accepted by Belle as he is, who’s the moral arbiter of the story and the one kids watching are supposed to learn to aspire to. We the audience aren’t supposed to relate to society in that movie, because society in the movie sucks and are demonstrably terrible people, and we the audience definitely learned to accept the beast as a beast before he’s changed back into a human

I mean, I don’t really have an argument for him needing to look “normal” at the end other than “well it’s the curse from the fairy tale,” which I know isn’t terribly compelling. But I do genuinely think the message of the film was to open minds and hearts to the types of people that they might otherwise have been closed off to

5 Likes
25

I mean, he wasn’t just an ugly guy that got turned into a beautiful guy at the end, he was a human that got turned into a beast and wanted to be human again… It’s not precisely a good metaphor for being accepted “as he is” when he wasn’t like that in the first place. That message would fit better with something like the Hunchback of Notre Dame or Shrek, who find acceptance despite their appearance.

Don’t get me wrong, I don’t want to be dismissive of the idea that the story can contain some problematic elements, but I don’t find this is one in particular something that most people would see conveyed by the content of the film in any meaningful way.

Also, I think that @HomingPidgeon found a more nuanced explanation of the message of acceptance, thanks for that. I’m more in line with what that idea, but you were able to recognize and express it better.

7 Likes
26

I would say you are right, when the beast were born as a beast, but he once was a man, but got transformed against his will to look the way he was inside. I think the ugly becomes pretty when he gets nice is just because people in the 90ies believed that children could easier see pretty people as good or even that only that way the smaller ones would understand it…

27

I really don’t disagree with you, but I do think it’s fair to take issue with that element. There are absolutely people who weren’t always one way but should still be accepted as they are. As a very easy comparison, someone who becomes disfigured shouldn’t have to be “fixed” to be welcome in society

3 Likes
28

The belle movie I was forced by nuns to see as a kid. Was about a naive stupid girl forced into submission to Gascon so she has to sell herself to another male that turned out to be a nice guy. But She still is stupid naive and submissive to my eyes. If she were as she should tell the beast about going to say Gaston regards. And more importantly more show herself nd less makeup and behave like a cleaning slave there are servants.

I hate that character so much. Probably the fact nuns presented her as the perfect wife that she her man as he really is and how she remained pure and simple until marriage, that show the real nature of her husband.

Part of my hatred of Disney is that were massively use in catechism to the indoctrination of patriarchal views into kids. I suffered those sessions 12 years explaining what a Christian woman should be and how I am not a Christian woman. It also was used to demonized gays as Nuns said Scar and Jaffar were jew gays.
No, I am not even kidding. Using even racism about how their face was created and such.

So my view of Disney’s movies is not objective and is about old movies I saw as kid. I suppose today is not so bad as i saw the red head brave scotch princess and it was okay.

3 Likes
29

Possibly the only thing Disney treats worse than “simple” gays. :unamused:

2 Likes
30

Not really the point, but still feel like it’s worth pointing out that Scar was never gay. He didn’t display as traditionally manly traits as Mufasa, but I really don’t see it when people accuse him of being a flamboyant stereotypical homosexual. His character also went through about half a dozen changes to end up how it is, one of the biggest being that he wasn’t a lion and actually a Baboon, originally.

The older plotlines of the Lion King had intended for him to have an interest in Nala and wanting her to rule the kingdom with him…but Disney didn’t feel a story about a sexual predator targeting young girls was a good move and I can’t really fault them for that.

Also, little known fact, Scar was actually supposed to kill Simba in the originally script and both of them were meant to end up burning to death. Disney didn’t really feel like this ending would have worked well for young viewers.

So, he does come off a little bit as not showing much interest in women but it’s only because the story would have been a lot more twisted if they left it so he did.

1 Like
31

I don’t think he is gay and I don’t really care he is awesome. It is how the nun tried to sell him.

That is danger these movies had that they are used to sell kids really nasty things. Also, Walt Disney was a well know racist himself

1 Like
32

He was always a lion, albeit not one related to Simba.

Except it’s in the Broadway musical.

Here’s something you may not know: before the Code was created in Hollywood many gay actors were around. Now, suddenly, depictions of gay and effeminate characters as positive were banned, so all the gay actors went in to make the most that they could out of playing camp villains. It’s this that influences modern villains today: the evil “crossdresser” in Boxtrolls, the camp and possessive villains of Scar and Jaffar and Tamatoa, Iago and LeFou, Ursula being based off a drag queen…

Just Google “queercoding villains”. It’s obvious once you see it.

6 Likes
33

Huh. I see. You know…I’d say Gaston strikes me as more gay than any of them and his whole thing is about trying to sleep with a woman who isn’t into him. He comes off as a more a camp villain than Scar or Jafar ever do.

1 Like
34

You don’t want to know what Nuns said about Ursula. Or strangely enough about the Snow White stepmother as a lesbian.

I really think that they project too much of their prejudices as I don’t see anything lesbian into Stepmother. I like her character a lot but I don’t see her as lusting for Snow White. But some lecture people get from Disney’s movies is bizarre at best.

And the 30s 40s are pure racism.

3 Likes
35

Well the 40’s was home to Disney’s greatest “hit”: “Song of the South”, or perhaps more aptly named happiness in slavery (and Jim Crow). :roll_eyes:

3 Likes
36

On a related note, can we say that Judge Follo is the most socially complex villain Disney has created and is probably the most interesting thing in Hunchback?

“I am a major racist and hypocritical jerk who cannot handle the fact I am attracted to the person I should hate and feel so personally condemned that I want to kill her to stop me feeling this way!”

2 Likes
37

Oh, mood. Hellfire always was terrifying to me once I grew older because it represents the very real threat that women and feminine nb people (especially women of colour and gay or trans women) understand: that there is always a risk, in turning down a man’s advances that he will kill you for it.

Where I lived there was a little high school nearby that one of my friends went to. About a week or so before their school prom was due a young woman in the same class as my friend was stabbed multiple times by a student she barely knew because she turned him down when he asked her to prom. She wasn’t close with this man, they hadn’t talked much, he was a model student, and yet he grabbed her and stabbed her up the road from the school.

I think a lot on the shootings done by younger men who write in their notes that they are killing because they feel unattractive to or rejected by women, like the École Polytech shooting or Elliot Rodger. That’s real. Evil mermaids? Not real. Frollo? Real.

11 Likes
38

Tell me is common or was in Latino hispanic culture there is this excuse they say “La mate porque era mia” “Antes muerta a que me diga que no” there are several movies that record that and queer have it worse even.

I think Disney should record that reality and make a difference about These real princesses that suffered that and recovery. And less pink make up brainless figures defending patriarfhy

39

It’s also the fact that in the UK I still think people have an internal distrust of Gypsies and travellers. I don’t know what group would be the equivalent in the USA (I would assume Mexicans but I might be wrong) but it’s very easy when Gypsies are around and something gets stolen for your mind to instantly assume the worst. Hunchback managed to tap into that Us vs Them zeitgeist better than some later Disney movies I think.

40

Well, I’m not so sure about Disney Princessess, but Popeye feels like a story that played the trope of the woman who needed to be saved by the brutish enemy in a pretty straight way. If we’re looking at other movies, I’m pretty sure there are plenty of Bond films that would fit the bill, especially the older ones, where, even if a woman is an enemy spy or agent, there’s often a scene where she ends up captured or in trouble and has to be saved by 007 (I’m thinking more in the lines of “From Russia with Love”, but I think Judi Dench in Skyfall would also fit).

The original post talked about how the “damsel in distress” trope is often used to be subverted, and I agree with that. I think a movie like The Searchers might look like a pretty steady take on the story, but then it becomes pretty easy to realize, by the end that Ethan Edwards is a man who has revenge and hatred for Natives that runs so deep inside him that he can’t consider Debbie as a person. Even if he brings her home, I think the film still plays a bit of an inversion of the trope, where the nominal hero is shown to be ruthless when it comes to getting what he wants, and the princess isn’t in need of rescuing

I agree. I grew up with Beauty and the Beast, and I still enjoy it quite a bit, but the fact that Belle’s acceptance of the Beast doesn’t carry any negative consequences because he just turns into a prince a couple of minutes later is something that doesn’t ring as good to me as it did when I was younger.

1 Like