Pages

Saturday, May 11, 2013

Honeybees and Disney Princesses

Today has been a really interesting day on the internet.  I feel like I've had some good discussion about Disney Princesses and I've finally let the world know (via Facebook) how concerned I am about the honeybees dying.  This is something that has really been bothering me for the past year, and has especially picked up in light of statistics realized in the last couple of weeks.

Here's an article on it from National Geographic: The Plight of the Honeybees.  This is something we really should all be concerned about.  We almost didn't have enough bees this year to pollinate the California almond crop.  I read that 31% of the hives died out this year, and the numbers in Europe weren't all that great either.  The other day I got on my soapbox with my dad about the use of neonicotinoids and how it sickens me that pesticide companies wouldn't even TRY to not use them for a few years in an effort to up the bee population.  Maybe they are right and it's not their pesticide, but we should at least try to fix this problem anyway we can, and fast.  How can a bottom line mean more than the continuation of human existence?  There's not going to be any use for money if bees don't exist.  Then today I read the article above, and that gave me some hope: the EU has banned neonicotinoids for the next two years.  If only the United States would do the same.

As far as the Disney Princesses go, I read the Merida petition online.  I posted it to Facebook, and it generated some interesting discussion.  Zan's cousin pointed out that saying that adding some glitz and glamour makes someone immediately "vapid arm-candy" was just as detrimental as what Disney is doing.  I hadn't thought of it in those terms, but she's absolutely correct.  It's just as wrong to tell girls who love make-up, dresses, heels, etc. that they are mindless as it is to tell girls that don't like those things that they are not "princess material."  I enjoy dressing up.  I spent a good part of my childhood refusing to wear pants, opting only for skirts.  I enjoy hitting the town with high heels and a cute dress.  I spend a ridiculous amount of time looking at/thinking about fashion.  Why?  Because I like it.  Because it makes me happy and it makes me feel pretty and confident.  That does not make me "vapid arm-candy."  About 98% of the time I opt for no make-up and a pair of jeans, but when I do go all out with my appearance, I do not immediately turn into a mindless bimbo.

In fact, that type of thought perpetuates the idea that women who embrace ultra-femininity (for lack of a better term) are in some way less than their more "masculine" "tomboy" pants-wearing counterparts.  It perpetuates the patriarchy, really, and the idea that a woman must embrace traditionally masculine qualities to be strong.  That implication, within the Merida petition, is very dangerous.  The reverse of the idea that Merida is strong because she is a tomboy is that someone like Cinderella cannot be strong because she is not a tomboy.  I think, for me, what would remedy the situation is having a mix of princess looks, each one exhibiting their unique strengths, no matter her glamour level-- from Aurora and Jasmine to Pocahontas and Merida.  There are many ways to be a strong female character: we need to embrace all the different ways that women choose to live their lives.  What does suck is that fact that now EACH princess is totally glammed up-- regardless of historical or filmic accuracy.  Why is Mulan ALWAYS in the match-maker outfit?

My friend Mel did an excellent post about her concerns with the petition/the Princess line in general.  I think I'll post my comment to her blog post below, because I think that Mel and I share many of the same concerns about the Disney Princess line.  It's not that it's a bad line, necessarily, but that it seems like a dated marketing ploy that could use some updating as we progress through the 21st century.  I love the princesses and I don't think anything will change that-- I grew up identifying with Belle, wanting to go "just around the riverbend" with Pocahontas, etc.  I really, really love Disney-- but everything needs a new set of eyes, and I'm worried that Disney is wasting a great opportunity for growth within this trademark by adhering to 21st-century supermodel standards of beauty instead of promoting the beauty of each unique individual. 

Here is my comment on Mel's post:  
I totally one-hundred percent agree with your comments. The reason I posted the Merida "petition" is because I agree not so much with the exact wording of what the petitioners are saying/asking for, but for the impetus behind it: that Disney is changing their princesses to "glitter-bomb" them.

I was very frustrated with these changes. Instead of making the princesses more artificial, I would like to see them become more real. Give us body types that were in style during the 17th, 18th, 19th centuries, instead of superimposing 21st-century supermodel looks onto the princesses. Or, if it's too late for this batch, give us some new princesses with more realistic and historically accurate body types. Rapunzel is way too skinny to be sexy in her time period.

Don't get me wrong-- I love Disney. I mean, like. I LOVE DISNEY. I go to the parks all the time, I'm a DVC member, I would love to be a cast member, I've drunk that Kool-Aid. But I think even great things have flaws that could use some recognition and some reversal. I love the princesses-- Belle and Pocahontas were such role models to me. I still listen to their songs for strength and advice.

But let us see more of Lilo and her sister, Nani-- that movie is completely underrated and those characters have never gotten enough attention. Nani is such a strong character-- taking care of her little sister after her parents death. Let Mulan walk around the parks as a soldier instead of in the match-maker outfits-- that really is the one that bothers me the most. She hated that match-maker outfit and even sings a SONG about it making her feel terrible. THE SONG.

On the Mulan note-- Chinese is not the only "Asian." What about Japanese-Americans? Korean-Americans? And what about Hispanic-Americans or Russian/Eastern European-Americans (which is, admittedly white in some cases, but not always)? What about having an ACTUAL African princess? Or a Northern African princess?
(Or a South American/Caribbean Islander Princess?) Having mostly white and then "one of each color" isn't going to cut it. There are some amazing stories to tell from folklore around the world, and Disney needs to branch out.

Anyway, this is a very long post, so congrats if you made it this far.  I was going to write a bit about how ravenous I've been on the steroids for my poison ivy rash and how much fun my weekend in DC has been, but that might have to wait until another post.  Especially since my DC weekend hasn't ended yet!  So look out for another, somewhat lighter and more about my goings-on, coming soon!

1 comment:

  1. Man. I loved what you said about the dangers of implying femininity is somehow less than masculinity. That is something I constantly struggle with; moreover, my brain is wired to think that men who are more feminine are "sensitive", but women who are more feminine are "weak". For example, if a man is interested in fashion, he's exhibiting awareness and a heightened respect for the intricacies of society. If a woman is interested in fashion, she's probably a shallow-slave of consumerism. If a man writes cries constantly and writes poems about his ex, he's not afraid to express himself. If a woman does it she's obsessed. So basically I feel like if I were a man, it would be okay to be feminine, but as a woman, if I choose to be feminine I'm setting myself up for a lot of flack. So why is it okay to continue looking down on these "feminine" traits in women (or in general)?

    ReplyDelete