he thing is, I just don't think it's necessary for all women in children's media to be perfect role models for girls,
No, they shouldn't, but the problem with this is that the Disney Princesses are being treated and upheld as role models for young girls by the media and Disney itself. It's not the assumption that they are role models; the 'perfect role model' syndrome is more or less implicit in the marketing for these characters, right down the simplistic chapter books that are used to teach children heavy-handed morality lessons and the only persons that presumably know better are those old enough to know there's no such thing as a perfect role model. The princesses' can do no wrong even when its shown they can. It's not these characters are being lambasted by feminist criticisms for simply make heinous mistakes or being reflective of sexism of their male creators only, its the fact that they make mistakes and are either rewarded for it, or the matter entirely is glossed over and never addressed in the narrative at all and the marketing continues to herald these characters as people to follow by example and that there is a dangerous message.
The Hans Christian Andersen thing bugs me in particular because the original story I see as an allegory for Andersen's own unrequited love, which is not criticized and dissected as problematic because, well, he's a man and it's not problematic for men to make huge sacrifices for a man (or woman) they love, or for one person to be the entire motivation for their actions.
Andersen isn't unlike Van Gogh in the respect that his work(s) are inspired by love and the rejection of affection by women (or men) and that he had problems with overt sexuality as 'exploited' by women. Anyone who knows of Andersen's history knows Little Mermaid (oft described as a tale of error, sacrifice and redemption), Red Shoes (Sexuality is abhorrent and the women is punished for embracing it) and The Snow/Ice Queen (the older woman is again reflected as a negative figure while the youthful girl the figure of good), are largely his opinion of women and how they should or shouldn't behave in society. The problem is, the general interpretation and meaning oft derived of Mermaid is the fact the female makes a mistake that is reflective and the largest loss agency in a woman that could happen and it's for a man and the opportunity to gain an immortal soul through love with this man. But the male is the sticking point of the story alongside thematic element of "to suffer is to learn/live/sacrifice" (I.E., Christian/Religious Allegory) and the negative outweighs the good or rather who happens to be writing it which may be indicative of male privilege regardless.
And actually, I pretty sure Disney was that lazy. It's not out of the realm of possibility given how they misrepresent the tiniest to the largest details regarding POC cultures.
![[community profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/community.png){kind=small}
![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png)
timeasmymeasure
no subject
Date: 2012-09-03 08:40 pm (UTC)No, they shouldn't, but the problem with this is that the Disney Princesses are being treated and upheld as role models for young girls by the media and Disney itself. It's not the assumption that they are role models; the 'perfect role model' syndrome is more or less implicit in the marketing for these characters, right down the simplistic chapter books that are used to teach children heavy-handed morality lessons and the only persons that presumably know better are those old enough to know there's no such thing as a perfect role model. The princesses' can do no wrong even when its shown they can. It's not these characters are being lambasted by feminist criticisms for simply make heinous mistakes or being reflective of sexism of their male creators only, its the fact that they make mistakes and are either rewarded for it, or the matter entirely is glossed over and never addressed in the narrative at all and the marketing continues to herald these characters as people to follow by example and that there is a dangerous message.
The Hans Christian Andersen thing bugs me in particular because the original story I see as an allegory for Andersen's own unrequited love, which is not criticized and dissected as problematic because, well, he's a man and it's not problematic for men to make huge sacrifices for a man (or woman) they love, or for one person to be the entire motivation for their actions.
Andersen isn't unlike Van Gogh in the respect that his work(s) are inspired by love and the rejection of affection by women (or men) and that he had problems with overt sexuality as 'exploited' by women. Anyone who knows of Andersen's history knows Little Mermaid (oft described as a tale of error, sacrifice and redemption), Red Shoes (Sexuality is abhorrent and the women is punished for embracing it) and The Snow/Ice Queen (the older woman is again reflected as a negative figure while the youthful girl the figure of good), are largely his opinion of women and how they should or shouldn't behave in society. The problem is, the general interpretation and meaning oft derived of Mermaid is the fact the female makes a mistake that is reflective and the largest loss agency in a woman that could happen and it's for a man and the opportunity to gain an immortal soul through love with this man. But the male is the sticking point of the story alongside thematic element of "to suffer is to learn/live/sacrifice" (I.E., Christian/Religious Allegory) and the negative outweighs the good or rather who happens to be writing it which may be indicative of male privilege regardless.
And actually, I pretty sure Disney was that lazy. It's not out of the realm of possibility given how they misrepresent the tiniest to the largest details regarding POC cultures.