Disney - Sexism and Animation

[ThabisoMhlaba]

It's like, just let me die already? Dying in battle is my fucking birthright. Men have the right to die, right? I'd MUCH rather die than have someone "DURRHURR, I SAVED YOUR LIFE CAN WE HAS SMEX?" No.

Everyone has the right to die. You seem to think that men WANT to die. No. Not everyone is fit for battle. Just so happens that fitness for battle is skewed to the male population.

I did hear one story of a female bartender fighting off an assaulting, 2x sized, heavy looking guy (I hope there's footage on youtube, I saw it on TV) and winning without a FUCKING gun.

I am so over with these "Oh, men do come in handy in fights, lol, what if you were in a _________" arguments. Women are handy and they don't always need a gun.

That kind of story is the exception. There's a reason we have a double standard when it comes to assault laws. Often times if a woman attacks a man first and he retaliates he might be charged with assault as opposed to self defense because of using excessive force, when really he was just reacting the way he would if he was being attacked by a man.
Because the law is based on equal retaliation, or enough to disable your opponent, punching a woman tends to do more damage to her, simply because of bone structure.

I'm with Christopher Hitchens when it comes to the rights of Women.
Ofcourse women should be treated as equals, and be paid the same, for doing the same work, and allowed to hold office, etc. But there are differences between men and women that cannot be overcome, and rather than struggling so hard against these difference that we can't change we should embrace them. I have no problem with a girl who wants to fight, she can fight all she wants. But I have it in me that it's my duty to protect my partner, Because thats what i'm good for. I'm not so effective at giving birth, or raising a child, there are shoes that I cannot fill. So I will fill the ones I can, and it is my hope that she will fill the ones that she can. We're different for a reason.

[ThabisoMhlaba]

Actually I think unintentional racism/sexism is worst than being intentionally offensive. To be unconsciously immoral, to act primitive while not even understanding the ramifications of it, just shows how noone really does research or critically think about their reality anymore. They are "sheeple".

of course an intentional offensive act is still pathetic, but at least the person would know that they're being vulgar on purpose, and so they have the control to not do it. They're not brainwashed, thinking it's normal behavior.

I dunno. Unintentional behavior tends to come from intentional actions that have been broadcast. For instance a politician making a certain false claim, Like the whole thing about Death Panels way back, fades into the backs of peoples minds, until it becomes a sort of unconscious piece of information. If you eliminate the source of disinformation, then you do a lot of the work that goes into re-educating people. So I'd rather take aim at the KKK than the kid who happened to live in a town with an act KKK community.

[ThabisoMhlaba]

good point. To me, if you're killing the source, then another (or 10 others) will just rise and it's always going to be the same thing over again. But if you educate people who unconsciously consume garbage, the source will die out on it's own, false information will stop spreading as fast.

I think that is the concept of the society we're living in, that we are all free thinking individuals. but it's not so obvious at times. A lot of people just eat up false information, from news outlets especially, because that is what to us would seem the most real.

True, I mean ideally problems should be tackled from all angles. I'm just going for the easiest. In any case I just think we have an issue of priorities here. Disney I can honestly say that I never watched a Disney movie and thought "This is racist, or this is sexist" as a 10 year old child, and I don't know anyone who has based any large part of their view of society on some cartoons they saw as a child.

I mean while we're at it why don't we get on Cow and Chicken, or Dexter's Lab, where both Moms were housewives. Or any plethora of cartoons where good looking girls are airheads and the ugly girls are super smart, but just a little socially akward. Lets bash Powerpuff Girls for perpetuating the stereotypical feminine personalities.

It's sounding a little ridiculous isn't it?

[JDSart]

If you produce a movie that is going to be screened around the world to very different people, where an enormous investment of time and money have been put, where your ass is always on the line with any single thing you do and is with 100 % chance going to be heavily nitpicked by millions, you might want to not play smarty pants artist and stay in business doing that simple love story thats proven to work, and thousands of people on the payroll who worked their asses off may breath at ease.

They are not demons trying to endoctrinate the youth to mess with society and create a new world order, they are not made of one James Bond style villain ordering thousands of henchmen , the are a corporation, a big one, they interest is keepin the money flowing and staying in business.

They are doing what thay have done always, they change very little because the things they do happen work, if they stop making money and change is what they need to do to endure, change they will do. But if all those people involved were gamblers they would go straigth to the casino. They put out the money because they expect revenue.

The production values and massive amount of talent is something that can`t be taken from them either way, their movies are gorgeus, period. That, if anything, will have me interested in whatever new they do.

That a few things dont feel quite great, sure, thats valid, and im not their demography anyways ( and people breaking in musical numbers pisses me right the fuck off) but did you see that little drunk dude from Tangled? he was awesome . I dont think is all that bad to check out something thats pretty for the sake of being pretty from time to time.

[Goog]

it's called criticism. fancy word 'round here

There is a difference between criticism of process and technique, and criticism of content. One is generally accepted on these boards, the other isn't.

[TASmith]

Velderia, that should be a comic. - the "durr" comment.

[Flashback]

I did hear one story of a female bartender fighting off an assaulting, 2x sized, heavy looking guy (I hope there's footage on youtube, I saw it on TV) and winning without a FUCKING gun.

I am so over with these "Oh, men do come in handy in fights, lol, what if you were in a _________" arguments. Women are handy and they don't always need a gun.

[JeffX99]

Trvilialising rape like that is pretty damn offensive !!
I´m sure with your knowledge you can find better examples to get your stronger male / weaker female point across.

I would never trivialize rape. I've been told in this thread however, quite clearly, that men are not required or even appreciated when it comes to the defense of women. I realize this is not the norm, or even reality, but that was my way of responding to the point. As I mentioned earlier, I would remove rapists from the gene pool if it were up to me, either through execution or castration. Most men I've talked to would do the same.

I believe I did get the point across with the division between male and female sports. This is just reality and it has nothing to do with better/worse, superior/inferior. In fact, the female of our species is primarily responsible for our current state of evolution due to her ability to select (particularly if you disregard "forced" reproduction). Which is why we ar eless hairy and a bit smarter than our cousins. If our ancestral women had preferrred things differently we would be different.

The reason this bears any connection to the Disney topic is because people are in denial about "roles" and "love interests". My very simple point is that these things are determined by biology and evolution and are part of nature. Others have a different point of view about it....that's all.

[Goog]

in the lounge all we do is criticism of content.

Which is why the lounge has such a bad rap .

[JeffX99]

... and people breaking in musical numbers pisses me right the fuck off...

See? Something beautiful, elegant and true DID come from all this banter! I for one think it was worth it!

[JeffX99]

I've heard so many stories of girls getting attacked out of nowhere in a bar and all of the other men standing by? Stockholm syndrome.

It's like, just let me die already? Dying in battle is my fucking birthright. Men have the right to die, right? I'd MUCH rather die than have someone "DURRHURR, I SAVED YOUR LIFE CAN WE HAS SMEX?" No.

I did hear one story of a female bartender fighting off an assaulting, 2x sized, heavy looking guy (I hope there's footage on youtube, I saw it on TV) and winning without a FUCKING gun.

I am so over with these "Oh, men do come in handy in fights, lol, what if you were in a _________" arguments. Women are handy and they don't always need a gun.

Sorry. What would be your solution? Oh wait, you said you'd rather die in battle. How are us "guys" supposed to know who would rather die in battle vs. be protected? And again you seem to be denying about 7 million years of hominid evolution.

Edit: I'm just genuinely curious as to the reasoning/thought process behind such a strong opinion? I mean, "MUCH rather die"? Wow. Correct me if I'm wrong, but it sounds like you are so bothered by the notion that men, in general, are stronger than you physically, that you would rather die than admit that reality? Just trying to understand where you're coming from. And sure, there are any number of women who could readily kick my, or most men's, asses due to martial arts training (leaving guns out of the equation) or just being extremely bad ass even. But again that is not the average, general situation.

[kev ferrara]

The issue is not about criticism. It is about politics. All criticism is not necessarily political, except to those for whom everything is political, which is to say personal (a.k.a. nutjobs).

The issue is about people, usually highly unhappy, yet idealistic people, who make personal preferences into political issues... which are intended to have social effect. In other words, my issue is with the people who want to physically coerce other people, through law and political power (which are equivalents), to obey their own preferences (which are usually learned as dogma through indoctrination into political cults.)

[Lady Medusa]

I've heard so many stories of girls getting attacked out of nowhere in a bar and all of the other men standing by? Stockholm syndrome.

It's like, just let me die already? Dying in battle is my fucking birthright. Men have the right to die, right? I'd MUCH rather die than have someone "DURRHURR, I SAVED YOUR LIFE CAN WE HAS SMEX?" No.

I did hear one story of a female bartender fighting off an assaulting, 2x sized, heavy looking guy (I hope there's footage on youtube, I saw it on TV) and winning without a FUCKING gun.

I am so over with these "Oh, men do come in handy in fights, lol, what if you were in a _________" arguments. Women are handy and they don't always need a gun.

What? A good man-friend would not ask for sex in return..
Although I know that not all things can be settled peacefully, what I was talking about was that guys are less likely to assult a female if she is in company of a guy. Specially if the guy-friend is larger than the perverted predator.
Most people do try to avoid conflict whenever its possible.

And if someone wants to have sex with you, you do have the opinion to say no, or pretend you don't understand his rather obvious hints.

You have no idea how many guys stop stalking/starring at you when you just simply hug your male friend. Even if you scream the very cliché "I fucking love you man" in an obviously drunk manner.

Nobody should be expected to die for a complete stranger.. or die in a bar fight. You know.. going to a bar isn't lethal.
Why do I even care about this part of the discussion?
---
Back to Disney! We must also take in consideration that most Disney movies are based on old fairy tales, where gender-roles still wasn't that big of a deal. It was just accepted. And a lot of people still doesn't mind it.
I'm with the people saying that unintended sexism and racism isn't really a big problem. It can't be their fault that someone sees it as too sexist when even the general public doesn't seem to mind.

[MatthewHD]

[ThabisoMhlaba]

LOL I remember seeing that, that was a clean connection. Thats a case of an overreaction I think. I don't think he should have gone with a straight punch. But if I recall correctly it was due to some serious verbal provocation. Physical self defense is sometimes substantiated by verbal provocation, for those who may not know.

Shouldn't have punched her though, could've just walked away.

I will say though that if it was a guy he punched, the most that probably would've happened is him getting kicked out of the bar.

[Kamber Parrk]

* * *

Physical self defense is sometimes substantiated by verbal provocation. . .

A dubious assertion.

[ThabisoMhlaba]

A dubious assertion.

Its definitely considered when someone is tried for assault, sometimes people get acquitted or a sentence heavily reduced. I don't have any actual knowledge of this, I'm only saying what my dad tells me and he's been a lawyer for over 35 years so I trust his knowledge on the matter.

[Kamber Parrk]

Its definitely considered when someone is tried for assault, sometimes people get acquitted or a sentence heavily reduced. I don't have any actual knowledge of this, I'm only saying what my dad tells me and he's been a lawyer for over 35 years so I trust his knowledge on the matter.

I think you may be misunderstanding what he's told you. Mitigation of sentences involves someone who's been CONVICTED. An acquittal would involve the prosecution merely failing to prove all the elements of assault.

Self defense would involve the defendant acknowledging physically attacking the alleged "victim" but meeting HIS affirmative burden to prove justification of his actions under whatever doctrine of self defense exists in the jurisdiction.

Generally, a citizen can only use the equivalent level of force needed to successfully defend himself.

But, my knowledge of generic assault law comes from TV and the Interwebs and being a true crime junky. And my knowledge of the law of carryin' guns into bars in WA is pretty non-existent!

[JeffX99]

I've heard so many stories of girls getting attacked out of nowhere in a bar and all of the other men standing by? Stockholm syndrome.

You mean the "Bystander Effect"? Where people don't get involved to help someone in trouble? The Stockholm Syndrome relates to the paradoxical bond a victim feels for their kidnapper.

Still confused though because your further statement indicates you approve of the "Bystander Effect"?

[Kamber Parrk]

From:

http://www.washingtongunrights.com/

FACTS ABOUT CARRYING A
FIREARM IN WASHINGTON STATE

* * *

(5). Carrying concealed (with a CPL) or openly in establishments that serve alcohol is allowed in Washington, so long as it is not carried into an area designated as “no minors allowed” by the Washington Liquor Control Board. Refer to RCW 9.41.300 to view the complete list of prohibited places.

* * *

Well, hey, I guess you can carry guns in bars in WA, sort of. I'm guessing that means you can't sit down at the bar and start drinking while armed-- probably a good thing!

[velderia]

You mean the "Bystander Effect"? Where people don't get involved to help someone in trouble? The Stockholm Syndrome relates to the paradoxical bond a victim feels for their kidnapper.

Still confused though because your further statement indicates you approve of the "Bystander Effect"?

I don't, and regardless it's a typical human response that can't really be controlled, at least not easily.

I remember at a gas station this elderly woman tripped on the sidewalk and fell, scraping her arms and glasses and her head bumped into the glass door.
The very first reaction is where people actually stood still, not knowing what to do, thinking someone else was going to do something else first. Even I stood still doing that, and I read about stockholm syndrome prior to that accident. That doesn't necessarily mean I approve of my actions.

Eventually some people started doing something after a woman shouted behind me, "Why doesn't anyone go out and help her?!?" My mom went, attempting to open the wrong door in panic. Some other people slowly came forward and help. It took about 5 min for us to actually get to her and help her up.

How many people does it take to unscrew a lightbulb? One, but if you have too many people, who goes first?

And me and my mom were talking about it later, we both felt guilty because we felt like we should of done something better.


... Ugh, this thread. I'm drawn to it like a fly drawn to a lightbulb.

Edit: Oh, and this isn't even necessarily a "We Can Do It!" type of thing. But that weird expectation that men should save women, especially smaller women, doesn't happen in real life. At least more often than not. If you want to save me, go ahead, but don't do it because of some supposed biological expectation.

Edit2: And Jersey Shore fucking sucks: http://www.cracked.com/blog/jersey-s...ast-since-911/

[Goog]

pffft, without these kinds of threads, all there is left is the cheer me up. (also its ironic that you're giving a criticism right now)

Yes, that is true...

It wasn't a criticism but an observation.

[JeffX99]

I don't, and regardless it's a typical human response that can't really be controlled, at least not easily.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stockholm_syndrome
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bystander_effect

Just wanted to clear that up.

I agree that these things are difficult to control - probably due to very primitive, deeply buried survival instincts themselves. But the individual can overcome that and act.

Edit: Oh, and this isn't even necessarily a "We Can Do It!" type of thing. But that weird expectation that men should save women, especially smaller women, doesn't happen in real life. At least more often than not. If you want to save me, go ahead, but don't do it because of some supposed biological expectation.

Weird expectation? You mean the one built up over the seven million years of hominid evolution? The same one which can be seen when a Bull Elk protects his cows? Or a female elephant protects her young from lions? It is the same instinct...not some weird expectation.

Happens in real life all the time, everywhere, with all sorts of animals. The strong protect the weak (unfortunately the strong also prey on the weak - if they can get away with it - until one stronger takes them out). Does this give the alphas some breeding advantages? Yes. Nature is like that.

It isn't done because of some supposed biological expectation...I would protect a young child, a smaller adult, an elderly person the exact same way.

I hope that makes it a little more clear?

[Beeston]

Oh my. I really wasn't expecting to read something like this from the OP. I really wasn't.

Really? I expected it before I saw who the OP was.

To be perfectly honest.. I kinda expect nothing less from the OP. In fact when I saw the title I immediately thought 'Ah, a Naomi thread!'

[Lady Medusa]

I read about stockholm syndrome prior to that accident.

I hate to be nit-picking, but it's an important difference. Again.. it's the "Bystander effect". Not Stockholm syndrome... Think of it this way. Bystanders are passive whilst kidnappers in Stockholm are hot. It's probably not acurate, but I bet its easier to remember the difference this way.

I'm the complete opposite though.. If I see someone fall. I will rush over to see if that person needs help. Probably because I would not expect anyone else to do so.. But I did once see a similar episode. An elderly woman fell on a loose tile. 4 people rushed to help her up and one went in the store and seemed angry as he talked to the personel. It's probably a rare thing, but it does happen.
If my friend is attacked at a bar I WOULD bite back, despite the agressor being huge, and although I don't personally expect much of people. I do expect my friends would do the same for me. Even my male friends.

[Izi]

To be perfectly honest.. I kinda expect nothing less from the OP. In fact when I saw the title I immediately thought 'Ah, a Naomi thread!'

I actually don't know who you are, and this statement puzzles me. I spend most of my time at another forum where such topics would be met with a multitude of "Meh, interesting" or mild agreement or disagreement. We have manual registrations - signing up requires passing a psych/intelligence test with no questions - just a blank box of "tell us about yourself". People have been turned down for all kinds of weirdass reasons, but the forums themselves require no moderation at all - although occasionally some entertainment fodder is let in to heat the place up a bit. No opposition can be terribly boring.

My initial post was pretty nondescript, at the most I expected some defense of the Lion King. I thought it was pretty ironic the letter had Snow White on it. The recipient of the letter gave up art and animation forever according to her family.




Anyways the whole gender bias on protection bothers me. Women are very protective by nature, they have to be - they are troupe animals just like the others, and they carry the young. This is pretty much a given that they will be protective. *People* can and will help other *people* given a chance. It has little to do with sex, culture perhaps but not so in the US from my experience. Some men have bouts of solipsism - they like protecting females and being chivalrous, and automatically think females are the opposite - a receptive "lady" - sure - in China Yin and Yang are Feminine and Masculine, yet the third principle, Jen, the Man line is neither. *Man* is neither wholly masculine nor feminine, but a mixture of both. You can tend towards one end of the spectrum or another but it's still going to be a mix.

The same one which can be seen when a Bull Elk protects his cows? Or a female elephant protects her young from lions? It is the same instinct...not some weird expectation.

Elk don't live in cities with mass stores of nuclear bombs, computers and vast social structures involving mobile global communication networks.

I've shot a female Elk...not sure where the Bull was but I could have shot him too. Anyways....crazy monkeys with guns are a totally different animal, with a completely different set of enviromental hazards.

[Izi]

According to cladistics, which is starting (?) to gain popularity over Linnean taxonomy in biology, birds are dinosaurs. I swear that this makes them at least 200% more entertaining to watch.

That was so funny, and so true It actually took me a few years to actually grok what Bakker was saying in The Dinosaur Heresies as it pertains to our modern world but once you realize this, and maybe see Jurassic Park - geese suddenly become horrifically creepy.

Last I checked they were treating Dinosauria as its own class. It would make sense to group them in some way but even I have a hard time wrapping my head around Triceratops and Ostriches sharing close family lines. Although I do seem to remember Triceratops and being bird-hipped...

[kev ferrara]

I spend most of my time at another forum where such topics would be met with a multitude of "Meh, interesting" or mild agreement or disagreement. We have manual registrations - signing up requires passing a psych/intelligence test with no questions - just a blank box of "tell us about yourself". People have been turned down for all kinds of weirdass reasons, but the forums themselves require no moderation at all - although occasionally some entertainment fodder is let in to heat the place up a bit. No opposition can be terribly boring.

Translation:

"I'm the Queen Breeze in my Kingdom of Wind. I have a great treehouse in the clouds, where I'm an upstanding and important member, where I'm powerful and intelligent and I sit in there wasting time and feeling important. We have absolute power to deny membership based on completely arbitrary criteria. What a rush! Ah to be an elitist at my own power game created out of thin air, and you should come try to join so I can get a thrill up my arse being in a position to judge you. We do transmutational yoga and eat alchemy sandwiches and ride flying unicorns of esoteric freudian solipsism while googling anthropology. Whee! We're brainy as brainy can be, up in our imaginary treehouse in the clouds... where we'll live forever, eleven years old and immortal, dominating the universe without ever leaving our pyjamas!"

This has been a babelfish transliterational educational production.

Signing off.
kev

[Arshes Nei]

Hi all,
I did some digging over coffee and found this remarkably well preserved letter copied and posted on Flickr.

http://www.flickr.com/photos/polaroi...5233/?edited=1


I hope you all enjoy....

If you dug further you'd see I already mentioned this letter years ago

[velderia]

If you dug further you'd see I already mentioned this letter years ago

I highly doubt we were going to see posts easily from 2008. 2008 seems like yesterday but it's actually 3 years ago, and we have different people discussing the same thing.