Feminists and Fallacies
Warning: Considerable ranting. Not suitable for easily bored, unargumentitive, or worn out people. Some ad hominems, straw men, and exaggerations. 905 words.
I'm a girl. I'm my own unique self. I'd gladly take a sword or, better yet, a bow to battle over sewing tapestries. Despite this, I'd also rather dance at a ball in a beautiful ball gown than participate in some random contest to prove that girls are just as strong as boys. In other words, I am not even close to being feminist. However, I'm not non-feminist either. This probably only makes sense to me though. Strictly speaking, I consider myself firmly against feminism, but also against the view that women are weak. Women are not men, but that doesn't mean that they are inferior or superior. Girls and boys are simply different, but not as different as we grow up learning. We are equal. End of story.
So, I recently came across an article ranting against Disney's make-over of Merida, the heroine of the new animated movie, Brave. Wanting to know more about the whole issue, I started to read. I soon discovered how little the article would tell me. It's never good for me to come across articles that are passionate and seething with bitterness and anger, considering I have enough potential for all of that inside, because I usually leave it incensed either for the argument or against it. In this case, I couldn't believe how utterly prejudiced the writer was. I won't even post the link or give the title for the article since it's not worth reading the whole thing.
The writer of the article starts out by stating how much Merida has been esteemed and hailed as the first feminist disney character, especially after all of the other princesses who "never encouraged ambition in little girls." As she says later, "I wish that Brave had been around when I was a little girl, to show me an alternative to all those big-skirted damsels in distress, with their "some day my prince will come" and their serenading of small mammals." She even called the princesses two-dimensional. Her tone throughout the entire article displays strong bitterness and feminism.
Now, let me clarify. I don't agree with the very brief dazzling image change of Merida either, but everyone's known to make mistakes. I almost wonder if it the implications in the image were unintentional. Sure, we don't need girls looking up to examples that convey the idea that beauty and getting the boys is what matters most, but I strongly believe that the traditional Disney never conveyed that through their heroines. Also, Merida is not a feminist, she's her own unique self. She doesn't provide a perfectly feminist image to young girls, she simply tells them to be themselves and to create stronger bonds with your family. I'll just say now that I don't think feminism is the image girls need any more than weak willed and silly girls. Strong, courageous, intelligent, funny, independent, determined, but never feministic. There is a great difference between having those virtues and being feministic.
Disney's princesses, such as Mulan, Belle, Cinderella, Aurora, Rapunzel, Snow White, and Ariel all display wonderful virtues young girls can and should look up to. Beauty isn't everything, as the writer says, but ironically, that is all she can see in them. Many may see some of these heroines as being passive and weak, but aren't we all in some way? Are our virtues always outweighed by our weakness? What is really wrong about being the damsel in distress? Doesn't the story of Sleeping Beauty awake an "ambition" to be good and virtuous, especially with all of its profound symbolism. Doesn't the story of Mulan depict the virtues of being strong and courageous? Doesn't Belle show girls how important it is to be intellectual and to look beyond the outward appearance? Aren't all people two-dimensional until we take the effort to get to know them? What's wrong with big skirts (especially considering the many centuries women have worn them)? What's wrong with wondering when your "prince" will come? Is the writer of this article suggesting that girls should completely banish the meaning of being woman?
(Okay, I'd better get off the rhetorical questions...)
A comment made on the article also argued in the same trend as the writer, though perhaps more intelligently: "Not only is being pretty prioritized over other human virtues, the "Disney-pretty" itself is a rather problematic thing, as it refuses to see the astonishing physiological diversity that makes human race so wonderful a thing to behold. Then there are other issues, of course...inequality, implicit royalty worship...very few children get the education or guidance through their maturing years to actually come to the realization that the world of Disney had serious problems."
Diversity. Pocahontas is Native American, Mulan is Chinese, Merida is Scottish, Ariel is a mermaid, Belle is French, Meg is Greek...need I continue? And as for other issues? Is it an issue to teach history in school? History is utterly full of inequality and royal worship. So, if we should ban Disney, then let's stop teaching history...which would lead to all sorts of problems. Do we really need to know the problems in the world of Disney? Is that going to make this world a better place, or make us happier? There are a whole lot of problems in this world, and Walt Disney has provided something better to look to. We don't need to learn about more problems, we need to learn that there's always some good in the world.
I'm a girl. I'm my own unique self. I'd gladly take a sword or, better yet, a bow to battle over sewing tapestries. Despite this, I'd also rather dance at a ball in a beautiful ball gown than participate in some random contest to prove that girls are just as strong as boys. In other words, I am not even close to being feminist. However, I'm not non-feminist either. This probably only makes sense to me though. Strictly speaking, I consider myself firmly against feminism, but also against the view that women are weak. Women are not men, but that doesn't mean that they are inferior or superior. Girls and boys are simply different, but not as different as we grow up learning. We are equal. End of story.
So, I recently came across an article ranting against Disney's make-over of Merida, the heroine of the new animated movie, Brave. Wanting to know more about the whole issue, I started to read. I soon discovered how little the article would tell me. It's never good for me to come across articles that are passionate and seething with bitterness and anger, considering I have enough potential for all of that inside, because I usually leave it incensed either for the argument or against it. In this case, I couldn't believe how utterly prejudiced the writer was. I won't even post the link or give the title for the article since it's not worth reading the whole thing.
The writer of the article starts out by stating how much Merida has been esteemed and hailed as the first feminist disney character, especially after all of the other princesses who "never encouraged ambition in little girls." As she says later, "I wish that Brave had been around when I was a little girl, to show me an alternative to all those big-skirted damsels in distress, with their "some day my prince will come" and their serenading of small mammals." She even called the princesses two-dimensional. Her tone throughout the entire article displays strong bitterness and feminism.
Now, let me clarify. I don't agree with the very brief dazzling image change of Merida either, but everyone's known to make mistakes. I almost wonder if it the implications in the image were unintentional. Sure, we don't need girls looking up to examples that convey the idea that beauty and getting the boys is what matters most, but I strongly believe that the traditional Disney never conveyed that through their heroines. Also, Merida is not a feminist, she's her own unique self. She doesn't provide a perfectly feminist image to young girls, she simply tells them to be themselves and to create stronger bonds with your family. I'll just say now that I don't think feminism is the image girls need any more than weak willed and silly girls. Strong, courageous, intelligent, funny, independent, determined, but never feministic. There is a great difference between having those virtues and being feministic.
Disney's princesses, such as Mulan, Belle, Cinderella, Aurora, Rapunzel, Snow White, and Ariel all display wonderful virtues young girls can and should look up to. Beauty isn't everything, as the writer says, but ironically, that is all she can see in them. Many may see some of these heroines as being passive and weak, but aren't we all in some way? Are our virtues always outweighed by our weakness? What is really wrong about being the damsel in distress? Doesn't the story of Sleeping Beauty awake an "ambition" to be good and virtuous, especially with all of its profound symbolism. Doesn't the story of Mulan depict the virtues of being strong and courageous? Doesn't Belle show girls how important it is to be intellectual and to look beyond the outward appearance? Aren't all people two-dimensional until we take the effort to get to know them? What's wrong with big skirts (especially considering the many centuries women have worn them)? What's wrong with wondering when your "prince" will come? Is the writer of this article suggesting that girls should completely banish the meaning of being woman?
(Okay, I'd better get off the rhetorical questions...)
A comment made on the article also argued in the same trend as the writer, though perhaps more intelligently: "Not only is being pretty prioritized over other human virtues, the "Disney-pretty" itself is a rather problematic thing, as it refuses to see the astonishing physiological diversity that makes human race so wonderful a thing to behold. Then there are other issues, of course...inequality, implicit royalty worship...very few children get the education or guidance through their maturing years to actually come to the realization that the world of Disney had serious problems."
Diversity. Pocahontas is Native American, Mulan is Chinese, Merida is Scottish, Ariel is a mermaid, Belle is French, Meg is Greek...need I continue? And as for other issues? Is it an issue to teach history in school? History is utterly full of inequality and royal worship. So, if we should ban Disney, then let's stop teaching history...which would lead to all sorts of problems. Do we really need to know the problems in the world of Disney? Is that going to make this world a better place, or make us happier? There are a whole lot of problems in this world, and Walt Disney has provided something better to look to. We don't need to learn about more problems, we need to learn that there's always some good in the world.
Comments
Post a Comment