HOME | DD

Description
Top Five Reasons for the Disney "Backlash"

I, like many of you out there, grew up watching Disney movies. They are for
many of us an integral part of our childhood and helped shape many of our early ideals.

For many years, Disney has had a monopoly on children's programming mainly due to its clever storylines, memorable characters, and catchy musical numbers. Disney was also often
viewed as the moral standard for children's programming. The good guy always won, the
bad guy always lost and there was usually a lack of "gray area" when it came to morals.
The hero is always morally in the right while the villain is always in the wrong. Overall, I do think that Disney did have the best interests of children at heart, but looking back at our cherished childhood memories with an adult eye you can definitely see some major
issues that make us cringe. But because of the nostaliga that we have built up around
these films we often don't want to fully admit that maybe the filmmakers should have
thought things through a little more carefully. Here is my list of top five (in no particular order) cringe worthy Disney-related issues. (please hold your torches and pitchforks until the end of the review. I swear this is not really as much of a Disney bashing session as it seems)

1. Princesses
As many of you who have read some of my other material, you know that I have
an active dislike of Disney princesses, particularly the earlier ones. I have a variety of
reasons for this. I'll start with the most obvious reason that everyone goes with first. They all have perfect bodies. While they may have worked in more racially diverse princesses in later years, most Disney princesses are Caucasian women with a perfect hourglass figure. This is not entirely Disney's fault as this beauty myth has been a staple of American society for a long time, however, Disney does help perpetuate that stereotype to little girls that in order to be considered pretty you better look like one of these girls. Which is NOT what a normal woman looks like.

Okay, now that that one's out of the way, I will move on to why I actually dislike
these glittery nuisances. Many of them, particularly the older ones, are SO
INCREDIBLY PASSIVE!! These women rest on being pretty and kind with perhaps one
other "quirk" to carry their storylines. Belle likes to read. Ariel likes to sing. Jasmine
wants to escape and see the world. Blah. Blah. Blah. I know what you're thinking. In the olden days women were expected to act that way and I can't really fault the earlier models like Cinderella and Snow White because those were the conventions of the times, and I will agree. But what about the nineties princesses during the Disney renaissance? I bring to the court exhibits A, B, and C. Ariel, Belle, and Jasmine (Yes, I know her name doesn't start with a "C" just go with it!)

Anyways, Jasmine whines about wanting to escape the real world. Goes to real
world. Finds out it kinda sucks. Gets rescued by Aladdin. Is lied to by Aladdin not once
but TWICE. Gets rescued again. And is married off.

Same could be said about Ariel. She whines about going to the surface. Sacrifices
everything to go to surface and be with a man, her ill advised contract comes back to her
haunt her, gets rescued and is married off AT SIXTEEN.

Belle is slightly better, but still kind of fits into the same mold. Sacrifices self to
save father, lives in fear initially, changes man, and is married off.
Why is this bad? Mainly because Disney is marketing these princesses as role
models for young girls, but they are terrible examples. The princesses never have very
lofty goals apart from wanting "something more" and typically this is code for "I need a
man in my life." Don't get me wrong. I am not anti-men or anti-love. I'm a big fan of
both, but I also think that women in life need to have more to strive for than to simply get married. The princesses are also written rather poorly which views them less as actual
well-rounded characters and more as rewards to the male lead for HIS heroic actions. I
can probably best sum this up in the words of my dear mother, "Never marry a man for
his money, make your own instead." or in this case. Don't wait for a guy to rescue you,
rescue yourself!

They also inadvertently send out the message that the world is dangerous and frightening unless you have a man to rescue you. Often their "ambition" is revealed to be mistaken for wanting a man. Again, not a great message.

It's hard to say whether Disney has learned its lesson about princesses or not. In
recent years, Disney has produced a lot more proactive female leads including Mulan (not
a princess BTW), Kida, and Tiana. These women do fill the romance role but do not rely
as heavily on their male leads in order to survive and have loftier goals. Yes, they still fall in love, but they do that in addition to more nobler aspirations.

However, they still follow similar patterns as far as body image and Disney has
put a lot of money into reviving the older, less proactive princesses largely because they
are able to market the "princess" concept. In many ways, little girls are still being taught to be "pretty" rather than smart and the whole Disney Princess marketing scheme doesn't always help.

Still, I remain slightly optimistic viewing previews for the upcoming Disney/Pixar
movie Brave which seems to feature a less than perfect appearing heroine determined to
take control of her own fate. Cross your fingers, Disney just might fix this yet.

2. Date? We Don't Need to Date

According to a study by Psychology Today, the average happily married couple
dates approximately 25 months before anyone pops the big question. That's almost two
years. The average Disney courtship? Two to three days. Aurora and Philip is probably the most irritating case. The two of them have ONE date before Aurora rushes home and announces that she's found her true love. Call me a cynic, but I think that's a bit rushed. In fact, Aurora spends the bulk of the movie snoozing and not interacting with the prince at all. Why does it matter? Well, it's kind of hard to understand the motivation of the characters. The male leads are ready to risk their lives and possibly die for women that they have known for less than a week.

Yes, I'm aware that it's a movie and a wedding is often a joyous occasion that
conveniently offers a happy ending. Yes, I'm aware that kids are watching it and don't
care about the catalog of complexities that marriage brings and they really can't show the
25 months where Cinderella and Prince Nameless (seriously he has no name) cohabitate
and figure out if they're compatible. I'm sure the kids don't want to see Ariel and Eric
having their discussion about whether they should spend Christmas with his family or
hers. (thought the fact that one is underwater would complicate that) And yes, I'm aware that the motion picture for children is basically an extension of the classic fairy tales which are simple and feature happy endings. I get that. Really, I do.

And again I am NOT anti-love or anti-marriage. So you're probably wondering
what's my point. Well, I'm getting there put down your rotten eggs and tomatoes.
What bothers me is the message that true love is easy. To quote another Disney
character, Hades of the movie Hercules, "You dance, you kiss, you smooze, you carry on,
you go home happy." That IS kinda the disney formula for romance. Sure they throw in a
couple of obstacles, but ultimately it does make it seem that lightning will strike and your life will be perfect. And also adds to the mindset in children (mostly girls as this goes hand in hand with the princesses) that the main goal in life is to get married and once I got the butterflies over some guy I should start picking out wedding dresses NOW!)

I'm not saying that they shouldn't include love stories, just be a little more
practical about how you end these stories. And to be honest Disney is getting better. They
have stopped marrying off sixteen year olds. Rapunzel of Tangled mentions that she is
over eighteen (a legal adult) and the ending states that it is several years after the events of Tangled before Flynn and Rapunzel are married. Mulan does not get married directly at the end of her movie and the sequel (while still kinda iffy in my book) does address many of the difficulties that couples face and shows that love takes work and
understanding but is ultimately worth it which in my mind is a much more powerful
message.

Other movies such as Aladdin, Tarzan, Atlantis, and Hercules end with the
couples together and happy, but not exactly racing to the altar. Again Disney is slowly but surely refining their writing.

3. Sugarcoated History

Of all the awkward Disney issues we have to address, this seems to be the most
difficult for people to face. Partly out of love for the films partly because we simply don'twant to face the bad things our bad ancestors did and it's easier to believe in the
Disney-fied version.

Okay, you know I'm going there so I'll just get right to it. Pocahontas. Ouch.
Many Native American groups were outraged by this presentation and honestly you can
sort of see why. We learn as we get older that the American image of the first
thanksgiving is largely a myth given to children because it is easier for them to deal with that than learning about the genocide that came with colonization. They can simply learn the truth when they're old enough to handle it. Well… maybe not so much if you're of
Native American descent and you find out the truth about your culture but Disney is
trying to put a "positive" spin on the massacre of thousands of your ancestors.
To put this into perspective (and I am in no way supporting this) imagine if
Disney did a movie based on the holocaust. There would be mass public outrage and
rightfully so because it would be making light of a very tragic event in history and not
paying respect to the victims of violence by portraying them as they were.

And Pocahontas is…. Basically that. If you crack open the history books you'll
find that the original story of Pocahontas is a depressing one. The actual relationship with John Smith is more than likely a story that Smith himself created to increase interest in the colonies. Pocahontas was TWELVE when John Smith arrived.
Pocahontas DID end up moving to England (where she later died from cholera) and she
married a John Rolfe, but he was a tobacco farmer not a statesman. And Pocahontas was
viewed by the people as more of an oddity instead of a respected representative of her
country. FUN FACT: Pocahontas was a nickname given to her by her father, her real
name was actually Matoaka and she did adopt the Christian name Rebecca.

Do I think the filmmakers intended to insult an entire group of people? No.Do I think they kinda screwed up on this one. Yes. The dangers of messing with history is that
you are messing with a very personal topic. History is fact, not fantasy. And painting it
up and presenting it to children ultimately does more damage than good by perpetuating
stereotypes and making it appear that our country can do no wrong.

While Pocahontas is probably one of the more obviously inaccurate Disneyfied
history movies. There are other instances that do not acknowledge the struggles of gender
and minorities of the time periods. Examples include: educated women in earlier
historically placed movies such as Beauty and the beast, inaccurate cultural
representations as seen in Aladdin, and racial unity before it was really culturally
accepted such as the crew of Atlantis.

And those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

4. Racial Inaccuracies

While we're on the topic of historical inaccuracies we can move right on to
cultural insensitivities as they often tie in together. Again, most of this issue arrived from movies that were created in a different time, before the PC era. (Politically correct not personal computer) This includes such gems as Uncle Remus from Song of The South
(The one movie Disney would really rather not mention) The Indians from Peter Pan
(why is the red man red? Anybody?) and the crows from Dumbo (whose leader name is
Jim Crow).

But thankfully we as a country have learned and grown. We see the error of our
ways and no longer resort to such hurtful stereotypes? Right?

RIGHT?

Well…. Not so much.

Once again, look at Aladdin. Aladdin, the main lead, looks and talks like a boy
that escaped from the US Midwest and got a tan. Meanwhile, the villains or crueler
villains are the ones that appear more stereotypically Arabic apart from Jasmine, the
exotic beauty (who still has many "American features"). The merchant at the beginning
of the movie, Jafar, and Razul the captain of the guards. All have hints of an "Arabic"
accent and features and are portrayed as either foolish, evil or both.

Other issues? Right back to Pocahontas. She doesn't really look like any specific
nationality other than exotic and pretty. There are some similarities in coloring, but
that's about it. Other issues involving race? How about a complete absence of African American animated characters? Don't believe me. Okay off the top of your head name an African American character… that was NOT from Princess and the Frog. The list is rather short and includes Uncle Remus (Yikes!) from Song of the South, Joshua Sweet from Atlantis, Cobra Bubbles from Lilo and Stitch, and the Muses from Hercules. Please note that most of them were not lead characters. Try to name a Hispanic character. Audrey Ramirez from Atlantis and…. And… and…

The lack of ethnic diversity is almost as disheartening as the stereotypes. Though
Disney is getting better by presenting The Princess and the Frog with its cast of
characters and the positive main lead of Tiana.

5. The "Bambi" Complex

This one often varies by person and area where you live. But what I'm referring to
is the idyllic portrait that Bambi presents where all of God's creatures live together in
harmony and there is no such thing as the food chain.

This can also be seen in movies such as the Jungle Book and The Lion King. I
only include this "issue" because of where I grew up. In Midwestern WI, there's this
thing called "deer season" and when you see "Bambi" strung up on the back of some
guy's truck as a child…. Semi-devastating.

And no I don't think you should force your kid to watch Wild Kingdom and see a
cheetah disembowel a gazelle just so your children see THE TRUTH about nature. But a
little bit of a warning might have helped. Nature is cruel. And for some more sensitive
kids figuring this out for the first time really stings. And also leads to some difficult
issues when you are served venison for the first time.

****
Okay, so I promised that this wouldn't be a Disney bashing. Please hear me out.
The issues that I have just described do need to be addressed, but in all honesty Disney is not the only one guilty of these issues. It's pop culture in general. There is still the notion of the damsel in distress in films and tv shows (*cough* Bella Swann *cough*). Body issues galore from all corners of the globe. Inaccurate or absence of racial diversity in media. Romantic comedies urging us to get married NOW! And countless "historical fiction" films that are more "fiction" than "history" It's all over people, but for some reason people are very quick to judge Disney the harshest. Is it because they're making money or making movies aimed at kids? I don't know. But really it's not entirely fair. Disney has actually been making some progress as I have mentioned through out whereas other forms of media have remained stagnant. These films have some flaws, but generally the messages of their films are good. So yes, they are a little misguided in some areas, but so are all the other media out there. Part of these issues is that these movies reflect the views of a society. Really it would help if people stopped dumping on Disney and started focusing on the roots of these issues.

Description
Top Five Reasons for the Disney "Backlash"

I, like many of you out there, grew up watching Disney movies. They are for
many of us an integral part of our childhood and helped shape many of our early ideals.

For many years, Disney has had a monopoly on children's programming mainly due to its clever storylines, memorable characters, and catchy musical numbers. Disney was also often
viewed as the moral standard for children's programming. The good guy always won, the
bad guy always lost and there was usually a lack of "gray area" when it came to morals.
The hero is always morally in the right while the villain is always in the wrong. Overall, I do think that Disney did have the best interests of children at heart, but looking back at our cherished childhood memories with an adult eye you can definitely see some major
issues that make us cringe. But because of the nostaliga that we have built up around
these films we often don't want to fully admit that maybe the filmmakers should have
thought things through a little more carefully. Here is my list of top five (in no particular order) cringe worthy Disney-related issues. (please hold your torches and pitchforks until the end of the review. I swear this is not really as much of a Disney bashing session as it seems)

1. Princesses
As many of you who have read some of my other material, you know that I have
an active dislike of Disney princesses, particularly the earlier ones. I have a variety of
reasons for this. I'll start with the most obvious reason that everyone goes with first. They all have perfect bodies. While they may have worked in more racially diverse princesses in later years, most Disney princesses are Caucasian women with a perfect hourglass figure. This is not entirely Disney's fault as this beauty myth has been a staple of American society for a long time, however, Disney does help perpetuate that stereotype to little girls that in order to be considered pretty you better look like one of these girls. Which is NOT what a normal woman looks like.

Okay, now that that one's out of the way, I will move on to why I actually dislike
these glittery nuisances. Many of them, particularly the older ones, are SO
INCREDIBLY PASSIVE!! These women rest on being pretty and kind with perhaps one
other "quirk" to carry their storylines. Belle likes to read. Ariel likes to sing. Jasmine
wants to escape and see the world. Blah. Blah. Blah. I know what you're thinking. In the olden days women were expected to act that way and I can't really fault the earlier models like Cinderella and Snow White because those were the conventions of the times, and I will agree. But what about the nineties princesses during the Disney renaissance? I bring to the court exhibits A, B, and C. Ariel, Belle, and Jasmine (Yes, I know her name doesn't start with a "C" just go with it!)

Anyways, Jasmine whines about wanting to escape the real world. Goes to real
world. Finds out it kinda sucks. Gets rescued by Aladdin. Is lied to by Aladdin not once
but TWICE. Gets rescued again. And is married off.

Same could be said about Ariel. She whines about going to the surface. Sacrifices
everything to go to surface and be with a man, her ill advised contract comes back to her
haunt her, gets rescued and is married off AT SIXTEEN.

Belle is slightly better, but still kind of fits into the same mold. Sacrifices self to
save father, lives in fear initially, changes man, and is married off.
Why is this bad? Mainly because Disney is marketing these princesses as role
models for young girls, but they are terrible examples. The princesses never have very
lofty goals apart from wanting "something more" and typically this is code for "I need a
man in my life." Don't get me wrong. I am not anti-men or anti-love. I'm a big fan of
both, but I also think that women in life need to have more to strive for than to simply get married. The princesses are also written rather poorly which views them less as actual
well-rounded characters and more as rewards to the male lead for HIS heroic actions. I
can probably best sum this up in the words of my dear mother, "Never marry a man for
his money, make your own instead." or in this case. Don't wait for a guy to rescue you,
rescue yourself!

They also inadvertently send out the message that the world is dangerous and frightening unless you have a man to rescue you. Often their "ambition" is revealed to be mistaken for wanting a man. Again, not a great message.

It's hard to say whether Disney has learned its lesson about princesses or not. In
recent years, Disney has produced a lot more proactive female leads including Mulan (not
a princess BTW), Kida, and Tiana. These women do fill the romance role but do not rely
as heavily on their male leads in order to survive and have loftier goals. Yes, they still fall in love, but they do that in addition to more nobler aspirations.

However, they still follow similar patterns as far as body image and Disney has
put a lot of money into reviving the older, less proactive princesses largely because they
are able to market the "princess" concept. In many ways, little girls are still being taught to be "pretty" rather than smart and the whole Disney Princess marketing scheme doesn't always help.

Still, I remain slightly optimistic viewing previews for the upcoming Disney/Pixar
movie Brave which seems to feature a less than perfect appearing heroine determined to
take control of her own fate. Cross your fingers, Disney just might fix this yet.

2. Date? We Don't Need to Date

According to a study by Psychology Today, the average happily married couple
dates approximately 25 months before anyone pops the big question. That's almost two
years. The average Disney courtship? Two to three days. Aurora and Philip is probably the most irritating case. The two of them have ONE date before Aurora rushes home and announces that she's found her true love. Call me a cynic, but I think that's a bit rushed. In fact, Aurora spends the bulk of the movie snoozing and not interacting with the prince at all. Why does it matter? Well, it's kind of hard to understand the motivation of the characters. The male leads are ready to risk their lives and possibly die for women that they have known for less than a week.

Yes, I'm aware that it's a movie and a wedding is often a joyous occasion that
conveniently offers a happy ending. Yes, I'm aware that kids are watching it and don't
care about the catalog of complexities that marriage brings and they really can't show the
25 months where Cinderella and Prince Nameless (seriously he has no name) cohabitate
and figure out if they're compatible. I'm sure the kids don't want to see Ariel and Eric
having their discussion about whether they should spend Christmas with his family or
hers. (thought the fact that one is underwater would complicate that) And yes, I'm aware that the motion picture for children is basically an extension of the classic fairy tales which are simple and feature happy endings. I get that. Really, I do.

And again I am NOT anti-love or anti-marriage. So you're probably wondering
what's my point. Well, I'm getting there put down your rotten eggs and tomatoes.
What bothers me is the message that true love is easy. To quote another Disney
character, Hades of the movie Hercules, "You dance, you kiss, you smooze, you carry on,
you go home happy." That IS kinda the disney formula for romance. Sure they throw in a
couple of obstacles, but ultimately it does make it seem that lightning will strike and your life will be perfect. And also adds to the mindset in children (mostly girls as this goes hand in hand with the princesses) that the main goal in life is to get married and once I got the butterflies over some guy I should start picking out wedding dresses NOW!)

I'm not saying that they shouldn't include love stories, just be a little more
practical about how you end these stories. And to be honest Disney is getting better. They
have stopped marrying off sixteen year olds. Rapunzel of Tangled mentions that she is
over eighteen (a legal adult) and the ending states that it is several years after the events of Tangled before Flynn and Rapunzel are married. Mulan does not get married directly at the end of her movie and the sequel (while still kinda iffy in my book) does address many of the difficulties that couples face and shows that love takes work and
understanding but is ultimately worth it which in my mind is a much more powerful
message.

Other movies such as Aladdin, Tarzan, Atlantis, and Hercules end with the
couples together and happy, but not exactly racing to the altar. Again Disney is slowly but surely refining their writing.

3. Sugarcoated History

Of all the awkward Disney issues we have to address, this seems to be the most
difficult for people to face. Partly out of love for the films partly because we simply don'twant to face the bad things our bad ancestors did and it's easier to believe in the
Disney-fied version.

Okay, you know I'm going there so I'll just get right to it. Pocahontas. Ouch.
Many Native American groups were outraged by this presentation and honestly you can
sort of see why. We learn as we get older that the American image of the first
thanksgiving is largely a myth given to children because it is easier for them to deal with that than learning about the genocide that came with colonization. They can simply learn the truth when they're old enough to handle it. Well… maybe not so much if you're of
Native American descent and you find out the truth about your culture but Disney is
trying to put a "positive" spin on the massacre of thousands of your ancestors.
To put this into perspective (and I am in no way supporting this) imagine if
Disney did a movie based on the holocaust. There would be mass public outrage and
rightfully so because it would be making light of a very tragic event in history and not
paying respect to the victims of violence by portraying them as they were.

And Pocahontas is…. Basically that. If you crack open the history books you'll
find that the original story of Pocahontas is a depressing one. The actual relationship with John Smith is more than likely a story that Smith himself created to increase interest in the colonies. Pocahontas was TWELVE when John Smith arrived.
Pocahontas DID end up moving to England (where she later died from cholera) and she
married a John Rolfe, but he was a tobacco farmer not a statesman. And Pocahontas was
viewed by the people as more of an oddity instead of a respected representative of her
country. FUN FACT: Pocahontas was a nickname given to her by her father, her real
name was actually Matoaka and she did adopt the Christian name Rebecca.

Do I think the filmmakers intended to insult an entire group of people? No.Do I think they kinda screwed up on this one. Yes. The dangers of messing with history is that
you are messing with a very personal topic. History is fact, not fantasy. And painting it
up and presenting it to children ultimately does more damage than good by perpetuating
stereotypes and making it appear that our country can do no wrong.

While Pocahontas is probably one of the more obviously inaccurate Disneyfied
history movies. There are other instances that do not acknowledge the struggles of gender
and minorities of the time periods. Examples include: educated women in earlier
historically placed movies such as Beauty and the beast, inaccurate cultural
representations as seen in Aladdin, and racial unity before it was really culturally
accepted such as the crew of Atlantis.

And those that do not learn from history are doomed to repeat it.

4. Racial Inaccuracies

While we're on the topic of historical inaccuracies we can move right on to
cultural insensitivities as they often tie in together. Again, most of this issue arrived from movies that were created in a different time, before the PC era. (Politically correct not personal computer) This includes such gems as Uncle Remus from Song of The South
(The one movie Disney would really rather not mention) The Indians from Peter Pan
(why is the red man red? Anybody?) and the crows from Dumbo (whose leader name is
Jim Crow).

But thankfully we as a country have learned and grown. We see the error of our
ways and no longer resort to such hurtful stereotypes? Right?

RIGHT?

Well…. Not so much.

Once again, look at Aladdin. Aladdin, the main lead, looks and talks like a boy
that escaped from the US Midwest and got a tan. Meanwhile, the villains or crueler
villains are the ones that appear more stereotypically Arabic apart from Jasmine, the
exotic beauty (who still has many "American features"). The merchant at the beginning
of the movie, Jafar, and Razul the captain of the guards. All have hints of an "Arabic"
accent and features and are portrayed as either foolish, evil or both.

Other issues? Right back to Pocahontas. She doesn't really look like any specific
nationality other than exotic and pretty. There are some similarities in coloring, but
that's about it. Other issues involving race? How about a complete absence of African American animated characters? Don't believe me. Okay off the top of your head name an African American character… that was NOT from Princess and the Frog. The list is rather short and includes Uncle Remus (Yikes!) from Song of the South, Joshua Sweet from Atlantis, Cobra Bubbles from Lilo and Stitch, and the Muses from Hercules. Please note that most of them were not lead characters. Try to name a Hispanic character. Audrey Ramirez from Atlantis and…. And… and…

The lack of ethnic diversity is almost as disheartening as the stereotypes. Though
Disney is getting better by presenting The Princess and the Frog with its cast of
characters and the positive main lead of Tiana.

5. The "Bambi" Complex

This one often varies by person and area where you live. But what I'm referring to
is the idyllic portrait that Bambi presents where all of God's creatures live together in
harmony and there is no such thing as the food chain.

This can also be seen in movies such as the Jungle Book and The Lion King. I
only include this "issue" because of where I grew up. In Midwestern WI, there's this
thing called "deer season" and when you see "Bambi" strung up on the back of some
guy's truck as a child…. Semi-devastating.

And no I don't think you should force your kid to watch Wild Kingdom and see a
cheetah disembowel a gazelle just so your children see THE TRUTH about nature. But a
little bit of a warning might have helped. Nature is cruel. And for some more sensitive
kids figuring this out for the first time really stings. And also leads to some difficult
issues when you are served venison for the first time.

****
Okay, so I promised that this wouldn't be a Disney bashing. Please hear me out.
The issues that I have just described do need to be addressed, but in all honesty Disney is not the only one guilty of these issues. It's pop culture in general. There is still the notion of the damsel in distress in films and tv shows (*cough* Bella Swann *cough*). Body issues galore from all corners of the globe. Inaccurate or absence of racial diversity in media. Romantic comedies urging us to get married NOW! And countless "historical fiction" films that are more "fiction" than "history" It's all over people, but for some reason people are very quick to judge Disney the harshest. Is it because they're making money or making movies aimed at kids? I don't know. But really it's not entirely fair. Disney has actually been making some progress as I have mentioned through out whereas other forms of media have remained stagnant. These films have some flaws, but generally the messages of their films are good. So yes, they are a little misguided in some areas, but so are all the other media out there. Part of these issues is that these movies reflect the views of a society. Really it would help if people stopped dumping on Disney and started focusing on the roots of these issues.