In Which Rebekah Rants
So this is really random and is only brought up because of random articles I managed to find while looking for something else entirely, though Disney related. This also has absolutely nothing to do with anyone in particular and if anyone has put up any blog posts or anything vaguely resembling this topic anytime recently I DID NOT KNOW and this has NOTHING TO DO WITH THEM. Just to head that off. Lol.
Disney and Sexism is a very long and involved subject that you could take in any one of threethousand directions and argue several different ways. It's an old discussion and it will always continue to be a discussion.
I've never described myself as a feminist before. Now I do. Not from anyone's direction but growing up, in my head, my definition of "feminist" was one of two things depending on the context. When a reference to history, it was the term for women during the Womens' Rights movement. In reference to modern times it was something entirely different and referred to crazy, off the handle, man hating, angry women. No one told me that, but that was the impression that I grew up with as a kid. Now, of course, I know differently. The latter definition of "feminist" I had would be a self explanitory definition as it only really defines those types of people. Even calling them "Crazy Feminists" doesn't help the notion that there is something wrong with feminists.
A good friend of mine asked me if I was for equal rights, of anyone and everyone. I said "Yes, of course" and she said "Well, then, you're a feminist." And it really changed my view on the whole thing. I've never felt like I had to grow up and get married, even though I lived in a very crazy and at times orthodox "this is the norm" type of family, that was never once put into my head. I played with babydolls and barbies and again, never in my head. My parents never once told me that's what they expected and they never implied it and I never got it. When people asked what I wanted to be when I grew up, it was always a job. When I was little it was a teacher, then when I found out I actually had a passion about something it became an artist, then animator.
But I'd never really given a thought about womens' rights except in reference to history, because even though my dad is extremely overprotective, it was never because I was a girl, and it was never because he wanted to control my life, it was because I was his child, female or not, and he wanted to control some situations I was in in order to protect his child. Some people have tried to start up a conversation with me about how my dad is sexist somehow deep down and I laugh at them because I know all of his protectiveness has absolutely nothing to do with me being a girl and everything to do with him being paranoid in general. Lol. This is fact.
But anyway. The point of ALL THAT is that I never felt opressed or put into a cookie cutter image of what a girl should be. I was always encouraged to be whatever I wanted to me so when I was a little girl learning about things I didn't really think sexism still existed. XD LOL. And so I never had to think of myself as a feminist because I didn't think feminists were needed anymore. AHAHAHA. Obviously I know differently now. XD Though, the sexism you read about in history books is for the most part gone, because sexism has taken shape in different ways entirely. BUT THAT is a whole other story.
But back to Disney and Sexism, because this isn't about Sexism and the Media or Sexism and the Media Industry and it isn't about sexism today. It's about finding the balance when talking about these things. It's about how people go overboard when they're pointing and saying "Sexist!" and how it discredits them entirely. Like I said, I was reading this article about Ariel vs. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty in terms of being a stronger female character. The crux of the article was that Ariel was supposed to be the great role model for little girls after the Womens' Rights movement gave Disney flak about their portrayl of women, and how she was better, but still fell short of being a good role model. It's true. There are still many, many things wrong with the Ariel in terms of her being the perfect female role model, as she was supposed to be. But I did have a problem with the article and that was that it continually referenced King Triton "giving her permission" to go live in the human world as one of the reasons it's sexist because he had to give her permission. And this brought up a problem I have with many articles or essays on the subject of Disney and sexism.
My point is that King Triton was her Father and she was Sixteen. She would have needed his permission or her mother's permission regardless, in a normal "land" scenario too, and she's a princess to top it off. Daddy actually you know, BEING A DADDY shouldn't be viewed as sexist. The problem that I have with many of these articles is that anything that involves a man influencing the princess or the girl in question, even in the case of non Disney films, it becomes part of their entire argument, and to me, discredits it, because that is not always the case. Disney makes movies that have men in them. Disney also makes movies about Boy/Girl, Heterosexual relationships. There are going to be men who influence the character one way or another just by existing, but it could just as easily be a woman.
Once, someone brought up the point and I don't remember if it was a conversation or if it was an essay right after Princess and the Frog came out, about how a male drove all the princesses, even Tiana in that her dream was based off of her daddy's dream and that's the only reason she moved forward. I'm sorry, what? You finally get a Disney princess whose MOTHER is alive, and Disney still can't win with you because her DEAD FATHER'S DREAM was important to her, even though she obviously shared his dream when she was a child? Like, seriously guys? Tiana saved Naveen's tail all over the place, went after her goals and to me at least, was a very strong female character, heck she defeated the villain all by herself and got out of his trap all by herself but because her father died and she wanted to make his dream come true (and it was HER DREAM TOO BTW), her entire story is "driven by a man"? I just. That is absolutely stupid. Give me something concrete, other than the fact that a male character existed that influenced the princess in some way.
If you were to make a story about me, who was raised by the ideals of both my mother and my father, who was inspired and influenced by Walt Disney and various and assorted male Mangaka as well as female mangaka and artists, by the arguments I see all over the freaking place, the story of my life would be seen as sexist. Um. What?
I just, taking things too far is what discredits a lot of feminist articles, at least to me. I was totally with the Ariel vs. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty article writer until they started spouting that Triton had to give Ariel permission to live on land as being part of their argument. HE IS HER ONLY LIVING PARENT AND SHE IS UNDERAGE >:| I think it was more of giving her PERMISSION TO MARRY THE OF-AGE MALE. You know. Like you'd have to give to legally here. If someone wanted to marry a sixteen year old.
Not to say that all feminist articles are like that, they're not. It's just, that is my biggest problem with a majority of it that I end up finding.
People complain about Flynn cutting off Rapunzel's hair, when it should have been her to do it. Um. She wouldn't have. She had just promised, which they established that she never ever breaks a promise, to stay with Mother Gothel. She had it drilled into her to protect that hair and protect that power no matter what. Flynn was her heterosexual love interest. Flynn was you know, the only other main character that wasn't a Chameleon or a Horse, or the Bad Guy in the general vicinity. If Tangled had been a film about two girls, the other girl would have been the one to cut off her hair. The way the story was set up and the way the characters were established, personality and moral-wise, Rapunzel never. would. have. cut. her. own. hair. Not unless cutting it would have saved someone. Which it wouldn't have based on the world's established rules. >:| That's not because she's not a strong female character, it is because she is a strong female character who sticks to her morals, her beliefs, and her ideals. "The man had to save her in the end >:|." Because she was being self sacrificing to save him. It's not that she couldn't save herself, because that girl was strong and totally would have gotten out eventually, did you see the way she was struggling? It was because she wouldn't save herself because she was trying to save him. I Just. Argh. This is my same problem as people who claim that Roxanne Ritchi is a damsel in distress in Megamind.
Yes, she played the Damsel in Distress, that was her role in their game. But the thing is that she is classified as a damsel because she "has to be saved by the hero all the time." Well, you know, here's the thing. When facing Super anything. Super Geniuses, Super Heroes, Super Villains, Someone is going to have to be saved. Do we call Comissioner Gordon a damsel because he had to be saved by Batman all the time? No. And Batman doesn't even have any super powers, and neither does the Joker. They just have access to superior technology than the normal person.
Roxanne Ritchi is a normal human being. She was kidnapped by a Super Villain who was a Super Genius and an Alien. All the time. Then she got kidnapped by a Super Powered all but Invincible Super Villain. How in the hell can you call her a damsel because she couldn't get away from the man with Super Strength? I just. If she had been kidnapped and taken hostage by, oh.....a random guy with a gun AND THEN didn't try and get away, then you MAYBE MAAYBBEEE call her a damsel. But if a guy consistently got captured by guys with guns, you wouldn't call him a damsel. Even the gun analogy isn't a good one, because she's a NORMAL PERSON. Like. Holy shit, what are you going to do if some guy holds you hostage with a gun? Go into Super Kung Fu Fighting Girl mode and kick his ass? That'd be great if you were a super kung fu fighting girl, but no. You generally have to wait for someone with training to come help you. Like the police. Female OR Male. I dunno. I'm not going to tell the male police officer "Hey, no, I'll wait for a lady officer, thanks."
Is Megamind an example of a sexism-free movie? Hell no. I love that movie to pieces and I could still name off several things that would fall under the umbrella of "sexism". Did Tangled have sexist issues too? Again, love that movie to death, could name a few too. But the are far, far fewer than say, Snow White, or Cinderella. But those had to do with the era they were in. Considering that we are now in the era of Bella Swan "The Biggest Setback to Feminism Since the Sandwich" according to a highly amusing and accurate demotivator, the animated movie industry is doing much better than they used to be. They are continuing to improve. Giving them nothing but shit because they've gone from 1000 itterations of sexism to say maybe 10? (as a non accurate, explanational example) isn't going to tell them "hey you're doing good." It's going to tell them "Hey, we'll never be completely satisfied." Saying things like ":D You're doing much better, but you should take a look at this this and this" would be a much better way to say to the industry that HEY YOU'RE GETTING THERE KEEP GOING IN THIS DIRECTION as opposed to the clusterfuck flame war I keep managing to stumble across unwittingly.
So, to make a long story short (Too Late. Far too late):
1) Just because a man exists within the realm of a story structure in a movie dealing with HETEROSEXUAL ROMANCE, does not mean it is necessarily sexist, nor does it mean everything that the male does is sexist, nor does it mean that just because any male in the movie influences the female ever so slightly means THAT is sexist either.
2) Fathers are parents too. Permission to wed and/or leave your house when you're 16 is needed. Unless you're emancipated.
3) Stop flaming the industry and encourage them, kthx.
To reitterate, this isn't about all feminist articles dealing with animation or Disney and it certainly isn't about all feminist articles in general. I would just like to read an article that does three things. a) Makes the good argument I see in MANY MANY articles but b) Without turning everything dealing with a man into it being sexist, only taking the actual sexist things dealing with men into the argument and c) Mentioning ALL THE THINGS the movie/animation/whatever in question is doing RIGHT.
Articles that do this sort of overboard thing are what is discrediting and making people write off feminists as "crazy feminists". It's hurting the cause, not helping it.
EDIT 5:20: Lolololl I am hormonal and I'm now sitting here going "oh god what if someone misunderstands me and is offended and waaahhhhhhhhhh" and like the irrational side of me is "TAKE IT DOWN AVOID CONFLICT" but the rational side of me is all "You put this up for a reason because you've been thinking about this a lot but there was never a catalyst and dammit IT IS YOUR OWN BLOG, YOUR FRIENDS KNOW YOU AND AREN'T GOING TO TAKE IT THE WRONG WAY."
So. I'm leaving it up. But know that I'm worried. so don't tease me too hard. D:
EDIT EDIT 5:24: LOLOLOLOLOLOL and then I was like "oh god, I said I was hormonal, I know girls who get super offended when I dare to blame my period for freaking out maybe I should change my edit" and then I was like ">:| FUCK DAT SHIT. First of all I don't thiiinkkk anyone like that is on my f-list and second of all I don't care, it DOES make me more spastic than usual. I am already a spaz, I know this, but lady times make them more intense. It's not an excuse, but I shouldn't feel guilty for actually knowing my body. RAWRGH" ...lololol /end edit x2
Disney and Sexism is a very long and involved subject that you could take in any one of threethousand directions and argue several different ways. It's an old discussion and it will always continue to be a discussion.
I've never described myself as a feminist before. Now I do. Not from anyone's direction but growing up, in my head, my definition of "feminist" was one of two things depending on the context. When a reference to history, it was the term for women during the Womens' Rights movement. In reference to modern times it was something entirely different and referred to crazy, off the handle, man hating, angry women. No one told me that, but that was the impression that I grew up with as a kid. Now, of course, I know differently. The latter definition of "feminist" I had would be a self explanitory definition as it only really defines those types of people. Even calling them "Crazy Feminists" doesn't help the notion that there is something wrong with feminists.
A good friend of mine asked me if I was for equal rights, of anyone and everyone. I said "Yes, of course" and she said "Well, then, you're a feminist." And it really changed my view on the whole thing. I've never felt like I had to grow up and get married, even though I lived in a very crazy and at times orthodox "this is the norm" type of family, that was never once put into my head. I played with babydolls and barbies and again, never in my head. My parents never once told me that's what they expected and they never implied it and I never got it. When people asked what I wanted to be when I grew up, it was always a job. When I was little it was a teacher, then when I found out I actually had a passion about something it became an artist, then animator.
But I'd never really given a thought about womens' rights except in reference to history, because even though my dad is extremely overprotective, it was never because I was a girl, and it was never because he wanted to control my life, it was because I was his child, female or not, and he wanted to control some situations I was in in order to protect his child. Some people have tried to start up a conversation with me about how my dad is sexist somehow deep down and I laugh at them because I know all of his protectiveness has absolutely nothing to do with me being a girl and everything to do with him being paranoid in general. Lol. This is fact.
But anyway. The point of ALL THAT is that I never felt opressed or put into a cookie cutter image of what a girl should be. I was always encouraged to be whatever I wanted to me so when I was a little girl learning about things I didn't really think sexism still existed. XD LOL. And so I never had to think of myself as a feminist because I didn't think feminists were needed anymore. AHAHAHA. Obviously I know differently now. XD Though, the sexism you read about in history books is for the most part gone, because sexism has taken shape in different ways entirely. BUT THAT is a whole other story.
But back to Disney and Sexism, because this isn't about Sexism and the Media or Sexism and the Media Industry and it isn't about sexism today. It's about finding the balance when talking about these things. It's about how people go overboard when they're pointing and saying "Sexist!" and how it discredits them entirely. Like I said, I was reading this article about Ariel vs. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty in terms of being a stronger female character. The crux of the article was that Ariel was supposed to be the great role model for little girls after the Womens' Rights movement gave Disney flak about their portrayl of women, and how she was better, but still fell short of being a good role model. It's true. There are still many, many things wrong with the Ariel in terms of her being the perfect female role model, as she was supposed to be. But I did have a problem with the article and that was that it continually referenced King Triton "giving her permission" to go live in the human world as one of the reasons it's sexist because he had to give her permission. And this brought up a problem I have with many articles or essays on the subject of Disney and sexism.
My point is that King Triton was her Father and she was Sixteen. She would have needed his permission or her mother's permission regardless, in a normal "land" scenario too, and she's a princess to top it off. Daddy actually you know, BEING A DADDY shouldn't be viewed as sexist. The problem that I have with many of these articles is that anything that involves a man influencing the princess or the girl in question, even in the case of non Disney films, it becomes part of their entire argument, and to me, discredits it, because that is not always the case. Disney makes movies that have men in them. Disney also makes movies about Boy/Girl, Heterosexual relationships. There are going to be men who influence the character one way or another just by existing, but it could just as easily be a woman.
Once, someone brought up the point and I don't remember if it was a conversation or if it was an essay right after Princess and the Frog came out, about how a male drove all the princesses, even Tiana in that her dream was based off of her daddy's dream and that's the only reason she moved forward. I'm sorry, what? You finally get a Disney princess whose MOTHER is alive, and Disney still can't win with you because her DEAD FATHER'S DREAM was important to her, even though she obviously shared his dream when she was a child? Like, seriously guys? Tiana saved Naveen's tail all over the place, went after her goals and to me at least, was a very strong female character, heck she defeated the villain all by herself and got out of his trap all by herself but because her father died and she wanted to make his dream come true (and it was HER DREAM TOO BTW), her entire story is "driven by a man"? I just. That is absolutely stupid. Give me something concrete, other than the fact that a male character existed that influenced the princess in some way.
If you were to make a story about me, who was raised by the ideals of both my mother and my father, who was inspired and influenced by Walt Disney and various and assorted male Mangaka as well as female mangaka and artists, by the arguments I see all over the freaking place, the story of my life would be seen as sexist. Um. What?
I just, taking things too far is what discredits a lot of feminist articles, at least to me. I was totally with the Ariel vs. Snow White and Sleeping Beauty article writer until they started spouting that Triton had to give Ariel permission to live on land as being part of their argument. HE IS HER ONLY LIVING PARENT AND SHE IS UNDERAGE >:| I think it was more of giving her PERMISSION TO MARRY THE OF-AGE MALE. You know. Like you'd have to give to legally here. If someone wanted to marry a sixteen year old.
Not to say that all feminist articles are like that, they're not. It's just, that is my biggest problem with a majority of it that I end up finding.
People complain about Flynn cutting off Rapunzel's hair, when it should have been her to do it. Um. She wouldn't have. She had just promised, which they established that she never ever breaks a promise, to stay with Mother Gothel. She had it drilled into her to protect that hair and protect that power no matter what. Flynn was her heterosexual love interest. Flynn was you know, the only other main character that wasn't a Chameleon or a Horse, or the Bad Guy in the general vicinity. If Tangled had been a film about two girls, the other girl would have been the one to cut off her hair. The way the story was set up and the way the characters were established, personality and moral-wise, Rapunzel never. would. have. cut. her. own. hair. Not unless cutting it would have saved someone. Which it wouldn't have based on the world's established rules. >:| That's not because she's not a strong female character, it is because she is a strong female character who sticks to her morals, her beliefs, and her ideals. "The man had to save her in the end >:|." Because she was being self sacrificing to save him. It's not that she couldn't save herself, because that girl was strong and totally would have gotten out eventually, did you see the way she was struggling? It was because she wouldn't save herself because she was trying to save him. I Just. Argh. This is my same problem as people who claim that Roxanne Ritchi is a damsel in distress in Megamind.
Yes, she played the Damsel in Distress, that was her role in their game. But the thing is that she is classified as a damsel because she "has to be saved by the hero all the time." Well, you know, here's the thing. When facing Super anything. Super Geniuses, Super Heroes, Super Villains, Someone is going to have to be saved. Do we call Comissioner Gordon a damsel because he had to be saved by Batman all the time? No. And Batman doesn't even have any super powers, and neither does the Joker. They just have access to superior technology than the normal person.
Roxanne Ritchi is a normal human being. She was kidnapped by a Super Villain who was a Super Genius and an Alien. All the time. Then she got kidnapped by a Super Powered all but Invincible Super Villain. How in the hell can you call her a damsel because she couldn't get away from the man with Super Strength? I just. If she had been kidnapped and taken hostage by, oh.....a random guy with a gun AND THEN didn't try and get away, then you MAYBE MAAYBBEEE call her a damsel. But if a guy consistently got captured by guys with guns, you wouldn't call him a damsel. Even the gun analogy isn't a good one, because she's a NORMAL PERSON. Like. Holy shit, what are you going to do if some guy holds you hostage with a gun? Go into Super Kung Fu Fighting Girl mode and kick his ass? That'd be great if you were a super kung fu fighting girl, but no. You generally have to wait for someone with training to come help you. Like the police. Female OR Male. I dunno. I'm not going to tell the male police officer "Hey, no, I'll wait for a lady officer, thanks."
Is Megamind an example of a sexism-free movie? Hell no. I love that movie to pieces and I could still name off several things that would fall under the umbrella of "sexism". Did Tangled have sexist issues too? Again, love that movie to death, could name a few too. But the are far, far fewer than say, Snow White, or Cinderella. But those had to do with the era they were in. Considering that we are now in the era of Bella Swan "The Biggest Setback to Feminism Since the Sandwich" according to a highly amusing and accurate demotivator, the animated movie industry is doing much better than they used to be. They are continuing to improve. Giving them nothing but shit because they've gone from 1000 itterations of sexism to say maybe 10? (as a non accurate, explanational example) isn't going to tell them "hey you're doing good." It's going to tell them "Hey, we'll never be completely satisfied." Saying things like ":D You're doing much better, but you should take a look at this this and this" would be a much better way to say to the industry that HEY YOU'RE GETTING THERE KEEP GOING IN THIS DIRECTION as opposed to the clusterfuck flame war I keep managing to stumble across unwittingly.
So, to make a long story short (Too Late. Far too late):
1) Just because a man exists within the realm of a story structure in a movie dealing with HETEROSEXUAL ROMANCE, does not mean it is necessarily sexist, nor does it mean everything that the male does is sexist, nor does it mean that just because any male in the movie influences the female ever so slightly means THAT is sexist either.
2) Fathers are parents too. Permission to wed and/or leave your house when you're 16 is needed. Unless you're emancipated.
3) Stop flaming the industry and encourage them, kthx.
To reitterate, this isn't about all feminist articles dealing with animation or Disney and it certainly isn't about all feminist articles in general. I would just like to read an article that does three things. a) Makes the good argument I see in MANY MANY articles but b) Without turning everything dealing with a man into it being sexist, only taking the actual sexist things dealing with men into the argument and c) Mentioning ALL THE THINGS the movie/animation/whatever in question is doing RIGHT.
Articles that do this sort of overboard thing are what is discrediting and making people write off feminists as "crazy feminists". It's hurting the cause, not helping it.
EDIT 5:20: Lolololl I am hormonal and I'm now sitting here going "oh god what if someone misunderstands me and is offended and waaahhhhhhhhhh" and like the irrational side of me is "TAKE IT DOWN AVOID CONFLICT" but the rational side of me is all "You put this up for a reason because you've been thinking about this a lot but there was never a catalyst and dammit IT IS YOUR OWN BLOG, YOUR FRIENDS KNOW YOU AND AREN'T GOING TO TAKE IT THE WRONG WAY."
So. I'm leaving it up. But know that I'm worried. so don't tease me too hard. D:
EDIT EDIT 5:24: LOLOLOLOLOLOL and then I was like "oh god, I said I was hormonal, I know girls who get super offended when I dare to blame my period for freaking out maybe I should change my edit" and then I was like ">:| FUCK DAT SHIT. First of all I don't thiiinkkk anyone like that is on my f-list and second of all I don't care, it DOES make me more spastic than usual. I am already a spaz, I know this, but lady times make them more intense. It's not an excuse, but I shouldn't feel guilty for actually knowing my body. RAWRGH" ...lololol /end edit x2