FROG PRINCESS Under Protest Already

[djm99]

So why lump all "whites" into your little "slave sin" comments?

I didn't link all whites into the 'slave sin’; I argued that the poster made flawed statistics and why he didn't mention the ‘sins of whites’? He/She mentioned those of blacks. He didn't just make a statement, he/she found 'proof'. As a matter of fact, I didn't 'put' the sin on whites at all. I merely asked the question, why he/she added those statistics without the other statistics. His/Her ‘statistics’ were imbalanced. He/She almost gave the impression (I'm stretching here a bit) that the number of blacks owning another, was 'white' justification for being slave owners themselves. Or a ‘don’t forget’ statement. Guess what, we know!!!

ETA: I just noticed that the "he/she" or the poster I was referring to is you!! How funny - it was YOU! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!

 

[EUROPACL]

I didn't link all whites into the 'slave sin’; I argued that the poster made flawed statistics and why he didn't mention the ‘sins of whites’? He/She mentioned those of blacks. He didn't just make a statement, he/she found 'proof'. As a matter of fact, I didn't 'put' the sin on whites at all. I merely asked the question, why he/she added those statistics without the other statistics. His/Her ‘statistics’ were imbalanced. He/She almost gave the impression (I stretching here a bit) that the number of blacks owning another, was justification. Or a ‘don’t forget’ statement. Guess what, we know!!!

ETA: I just noticed that the "he/she" or the poster I was referring to is you!! How funny - it was YOU! Ha Ha Ha Ha Ha!!!!

The funny part is that you still haven't been able to read the post correctly and see the stats for whites are there and have been from the start. Which I've pointed out twice now. The other funny part is that you still won't can't or don't understand that I was answering a direct point and quoted it.

Does that lighten the sins of whites

Sorry you should be more clear with your attacks on whites then...as it sounds like you mean all whites.




...edit. BTW why do you need the stats for whites listed so badly anyway....I provided them for kicks and giggles...but I don't see you harping on Spanish, Asian, Indian slave ownership stats.

 

[djm99]

The funny part is that you still haven't been able to read the post correctly and see the stats for whites are there and have been from the start. Which I've pointed out twice now. The other funny part is that you still won't can't or don't understand that I was answering a direct point and quoted it. Sorry you should be more clear with your attacks on whites then...as it sounds like you mean all whites.

According to federal census reports, on June 1, 1860 there were nearly 4.5 million Negroes in the United States, with fewer than four million of them living in the southern slaveholding states. Of the blacks residing in the South, 261,988 were not slaves. Of this number, 10,689 lived in New Orleans. The country's leading African American historian, Duke University professor John Hope Franklin, records that in New Orleans over 3,000 free Negroes owned slaves, or 28 percent of the free Negroes in that city

To return to the census figures quoted above, this 28 percent is certainly impressive when compared to less than 1.4 percent of all American whites and less than 4.8 percent of southern whites. The statistics show that, when free, blacks disproportionately became slave masters.

I'm not 'understanding' your quote because it seems to be missing information. You know the information about how many whites owned slaves/ or the percentage. The above is the quote YOU used - please point out to me where the above quotes states the number or percentage of whites that owned slaves. The 1.4% and the 4.8% statement "census figures quoted above" part of the quote is referring to information NOT stated. I found the article you used, seems you should have cut and paste this part:

The census also determined that there were fewer than 385,000 individuals who owned slaves (1). Even if all slaveholders had been white, that would amount to only 1.4 percent of whites in the country (or 4.8 percent of southern whites owning one or more slaves).

http://americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm

Now that's funny!!! - all that pointing out to me and you didn't even read your own post. You just cut and paste w/o adding the "census figures quoted above" information.

What's not so funny (but it could be to you) when I googled that quote you gave, some interesting sites came up. This article was popular in certain circles...... ummmmmm

...edit. BTW why do you need the stats for whites listed so badly anyway....I provided them for kicks and giggles...but I don't see you harping on Spanish, Asian, Indian slave ownership stats.

I don't need them, just questioning you and your motive for the statement. Since you were in the mood to google, cut and paste things, thought those stats might be interesting to you. Since finding stats of AA's owning slaves was an interest to you. The article was totally 'off' too, but an interesting read.

 

[rantnnravin]

Also, please tell me, how being a maid will fit into this story. If this is indeed the story that Disney is going ahead with.

because it will more than likely be an adaptation of THIS story, by the Brothers Grimm:
The Frog-Prince

One fine evening a young princess put on her bonnet and clogs, and went out to take a walk by herself in a wood; and when she came to a cool spring of water, that rose in the midst of it, she sat herself down to rest a while. Now she had a golden ball in her hand, which was her favourite plaything; and she was always tossing it up into the air, and catching it again as it fell. After a time she threw it up so high that she missed catching it as it fell; and the ball bounded away, and rolled along upon the ground, till at last it fell down into the spring. The princess looked into the spring after her ball, but it was very deep, so deep that she could not see the bottom of it. Then she began to bewail her loss, and said, ’Alas! if I could only get my ball again, I would give all my fine clothes and jewels, and everything that I have in the world.’
Whilst she was speaking, a frog put its head out of the water, and said, ’Princess, why do you weep so bitterly?’ ’Alas!’ said she, ’what can you do for me, you nasty frog? My golden ball has fallen into the spring.’ The frog said, ’I want not your pearls, and jewels, and fine clothes; but if you will love me, and let me live with you and eat from off your golden plate, and sleep upon your bed, I will bring you your ball again.’ ’What nonsense,’ thought the princess, ’this silly frog is talking! He can never even get out of the spring to visit me, though he may be able to get my ball for me, and therefore I will tell him he shall have what he asks.’ So she said to the frog, ’Well, if you will bring me my ball, I will do all you ask.’ Then the frog put his head down, and dived deep under the water; and after a little while he came up again, with the ball in his mouth, and threw it on the edge of the spring. As soon as the young princess saw her ball, she ran to pick it up; and she was so overjoyed to have it in her hand again, that she never thought of the frog, but ran home with it as fast as she could. The frog called after her, ’Stay, princess, and take me with you as you said,’ But she did not stop to hear a word.
The next day, just as the princess had sat down to dinner, she heard a strange noise–tap, tap–plash, plash–as if something was coming up the marble staircase: and soon afterwards there was a gentle knock at the door, and a little voice cried out and said:
’Open the door, my princess dear,
Open the door to thy true love here!
And mind the words that thou and I said
By the fountain cool, in the greenwood shade.’ Then the princess ran to the door and opened it, and there she saw the frog, whom she had quite forgotten. At this sight she was sadly frightened, and shutting the door as fast as she could came back to her seat. The king, her father, seeing that something had frightened her, asked her what was the matter. ’There is a nasty frog,’ said she, ’at the door, that lifted my ball for me out of the spring this morning: I told him that he should live with me here, thinking that he could never get out of the spring; but there he is at the door, and he wants to come in.’
While she was speaking the frog knocked again at the door, and said:
’Open the door, my princess dear,
Open the door to thy true love here!
And mind the words that thou and I said
By the fountain cool, in the greenwood shade.’ Then the king said to the young princess, ’As you have given your word you must keep it; so go and let him in.’ She did so, and the frog hopped into the room, and then straight on–tap, tap–plash, plash– from the bottom of the room to the top, till he came up close to the table where the princess sat. ’Pray lift me upon chair,’ said he to the princess, ’and let me sit next to you.’ As soon as she had done this, the frog said, ’Put your plate nearer to me, that I may eat out of it.’ This she did, and when he had eaten as much as he could, he said, ’Now I am tired; carry me upstairs, and put me into your bed.’ And the princess, though very unwilling, took him up in her hand, and put him upon the pillow of her own bed, where he slept all night long. As soon as it was light he jumped up, hopped downstairs, and went out of the house. ’Now, then,’ thought the princess, ’at last he is gone, and I shall be troubled with him no more.’
But she was mistaken; for when night came again she heard the same tapping at the door; and the frog came once more, and said:
’Open the door, my princess dear,
Open the door to thy true love here!
And mind the words that thou and I said
By the fountain cool, in the greenwood shade.’ And when the princess opened the door the frog came in, and slept upon her pillow as before, till the morning broke. And the third night he did the same. But when the princess awoke on the following morning she was astonished to see, instead of the frog, a handsome prince, gazing on her with the most beautiful eyes she had ever seen, and standing at the head of her bed.
He told her that he had been enchanted by a spiteful fairy, who had changed him into a frog; and that he had been fated so to abide till some princess should take him out of the spring, and let him eat from her plate, and sleep upon her bed for three nights. ’You,’ said the prince, ’have broken his cruel charm, and now I have nothing to wish for but that you should go with me into my father’s kingdom, where I will marry you, and love you as long as you live.’
The young princess, you may be sure, was not long in saying ’Yes’ to all this; and as they spoke a gay coach drove up, with eight beautiful horses, decked with plumes of feathers and a golden harness; and behind the coach rode the prince’s servant, faithful Heinrich, who had bewailed the misfortunes of his dear master during his enchantment so long and so bitterly, that his heart had well-nigh burst.
They then took leave of the king, and got into the coach with eight horses, and all set out, full of joy and merriment, for the prince’s kingdom, which they reached safely; and there they lived happily a great many years.

 

[djm99]

because it will more than likely be an adaptation of THIS story, by the Brothers Grimm:
The Frog-Prince

The king, her father, seeing that something had frightened her, asked her what was the matter.

If Disney is using the Brothers Grimm Version of this story - I would be elated. It is a WONDERFUL story. BTW, I don't know if you read the story you posted, but she was NOT a maid, but a PRINCESS - her father was a KING indeed. She's not working for a rich family, no rich white debutant. All those additions would be Disney's 'creative' control (and contributes to the stereotypes of that day).

I'll even take it a step further and say that affluent AA’s of that day would have been 'viewed' or pre-judged as snooty (often feeling 'superior' over those of less affluent circumstances, i.e. poor blacks and many whites), so this version of the story would work. Again, the history of African/French Creole history in New Orleans is quite interesting. Many ‘passed’ as white. In Alex Haley’s book, “Queen” his grandmother would ‘pass’ as white for quite some time, IN NEW ORLEANS. After reading that version, I am excited about this film. Thanks for listing this story. I will share this one with my little one pictured below. If you’re interesting in reading a fiction or non-fiction book about this subject refer to my earlier post. I listed two excellent books.

 

[Nom]

That's also not to mention movies from other Disney business Units, Miramax, Buena Vista, etc. After all, Pulp Fiction was a Disney movie and two of the 4 biggest parts were black males.

After all of the discussion on this thread regarding young black males need for positive role models, I am STUNNED that you would hold the two black males in pulp fiction up as possible role models. Have you read the thread, and the concern about the negative portrayals of black masculinity in the media that young black boys see every day??????????? Do you believe that the two black men in Pulp fiction are positive role models????????? Don't you see- they are an example of the negative way black men are portrayed in the media.

And hopefully young boys are not seeing that movie anyway. My point about wishing the prince in this new animated film was black was to fill the void of positive role models in films targetted towards children.

I have not read the rest of the new posts yet, I was just so stunned by that post I had to comment. Now off to read the rest.

 

[Nom]

I do get it. I don't know why you needed to refer to the capturing of slaves (over 200 years ago) with a first person reference.

Charade and Euro, There are so many white people who talk about ansestors coming over on ellis island, talk about their people and heritage etc. Many people say 'when we came over from italy, ireland... when we went to ellis island, etc.' Why is it wrong or offensive to you if a black person talks about how their ansestors came over? It is their heritage. It's their right.

Some people relate to their heritage that way, others don't.... and this relating to heritage really crosses color lines. It's just that most black people's heritage involves their ansestors being forcibly removed from africa, torn apart from their families, put in chains, and brought over here to be slaves. It's an ugly thing, and I think many white people feel ashamed deep inside when it is brought up. Even though we as generations after slavery had nothing to do with it, it's an ugly thing to be reminded of. I think that is why many of us react so strongly when we hear it. That reaction is OUR issue though... it's a black persons right to say it, because it's reality! It's their past, and their heritage. Just like I have the right to say, when we came over from Germany, etc. It's not a black persons fault that their statement carries the baggage it does.

 

[Charade]

Charade and Euro, There are so many white people who talk about ancestors coming over on Ellis island, talk about their people and heritage etc. Many people say 'when we came over from Italy, ireland... when we went to Ellis island, etc.' Why is it wrong or offensive to you if a black person talks about how their ancestors came over? It is their heritage. It's their right.

Some people relate to their heritage that way, others don't.... and this relating to heritage really crosses color lines. It's just that most black people's heritage involves their ancestors being forcibly removed from Africa, torn apart from their families, put in chains, and brought over here to be slaves. It's an ugly thing, and I think many white people feel ashamed deep inside when it is brought up. Even though we as generations after slavery had nothing to do with it, it's an ugly thing to be reminded of. I think that is why many of us react so strongly when we hear it. That reaction is OUR issue though... it's a black persons right to say it, because it's reality! It's their past, and their heritage. Just like I have the right to say, when we came over from Germany, etc. It's not a black persons fault that their statement carries the baggage it does.

I don't think it's proper when anyone does it. I've never done it. I don't even know my true ancestry because I'm adopted. IMO, whenever I hear someone refer to an event in the first person, I think it's their experience, not those of their forefathers.

There's nothing for me, as a white person to be ashamed of no matter what my ancestors did. I'm not my fathers keeper.

Seriously, if someone in a casual converstation said to you "when we came over from Germany to the US..." , you'd think they were talking about themselves. I know I would as probably most people would . If they said "when my granparents or ancestors came from Italy to the US...", you know exactly who they're talking about.

 

[EUROPACL]

I'm not 'understanding' your quote because it seems to be missing information. You know the information about how many whites owned slaves/ or the percentage. The above is the quote YOU used - please point out to me where the above quotes states the number or percentage of whites that owned slaves. The 1.4% and the 4.8% statement "census figures quoted above" part of the quote is referring to information NOT stated. I found the article you used, seems you should have cut and paste this part:



http://americancivilwar.com/authors/black_slaveowners.htm

Now that's funny!!! - all that pointing out to me and you didn't even read your own post. You just cut and paste w/o adding the "census figures quoted above" information.

What's not so funny (but it could be to you) when I googled that quote you gave, some interesting sites came up. This article was popular in certain circles...... ummmmmm

Do you find it hard to see the trees because of the forest?

1.4% of White American as a whole owned slaves.
4.8% of White "Southern" owned slaves.

Those are the stats. If you want something more do your own ressearch. I don't care who wrote the article what I do care about is the Facts listed and cited properly as such in the article. If you have a problem with them talk to Duke University professor John Hope Franklin about his book From Slavery to Freedom: A History of African Americans .

I don't need them, just questioning you and your motive for the statement. Since you were in the mood to google, cut and paste things, thought those stats might be interesting to you. Since finding stats of AA's owning slaves was an interest to you. The article was totally 'off' too, but an interesting read.

Wow you seem to be unable to read at all at this point. I've stated several times that I was answering a direct question about blacks, slaves and them owning or working for other blacks. That was why they were listed. Listing the number of whites was done becuase I was sure someone like you would come along and demand to know...as you still want to blame "whites for their sins"....when in all it was a very small number of people hundereds of years ago that were involved in it. Yet you still seem to be missing the real point is that it was more than just "whites". So you can stop hating all whites now and blaming them for slavery considering that your own race was invoved in the act as well.

btw I love the fact you just throw out the the article was totally "off" comment without so much as word as to what was off.

 

[Charade]

1.4% of White American as a whole owned slaves.
4.8% of White "Southern" owned slaves.

Those are the stats.

That's the way I read it too.

 

[rantnnravin]

my jewish anscestors very likely did not appreciate being enslaved by africans and forced to build pyramids in the searing heat, but
i'm not blaming every person of african descent today for that infraction

so, while i can understand those of african descent being upset with the plantation/slave owners, why hold those who came from italy, ireland, or germany (and THEIR descendants) in the late 1800s who were forced to work in deplorable conditions in factories to blame for things that happened and ENDED before they even arrived in this country???

 

[freakylick]

Yes you are correct. I took a little time and read through a few. Most refer to this black princess as Maddy - how would they know what her name was (Maddy) if this petition was in fact all a ‘after the fact’. Many of the comments refer to the black princess by name. I see this ONE mom’s petition (which I would have gladly signed) and doubt seriously that Disney ever saw this petition and weighed their decision on this petition (if it would have an in pack at all. According to the date this article was written it does look like it was written around the announcement. But surely this ONLINE petition can't be proven as a clamor for a black princess. The 28th person to sign this petition stated that this was 2006 'get with it Disney' - this is NOT an old petition at all. This is a new petition.

This may be "ONE" mom's petition, but there are still well over 3,500 people that signed it. Some may have already known about "The Frog Princess", but I am sure that a vast majority didn't. You claim that this is not an old petition, but I don't know why that's relevant. Does it not still substantiate the views of the signers?! Also, why did you emphasize that it's an online petition? There's not a lot of proof that I could provide that's not online. But if you want more...some quick googling gave me just a few:

This article was updated in March 07, but was originally written in August 2006 and it seems as though the author had no knowledge of this movie. The editors note references a poll showing that the majority of the 17,000 voters feel strongly enough that they feel Disney should be boycotted for it's lack of representation of blacks.

This is the forum discussing the above article with a few people desiring a black princess...several of which even mention buying white dolls and painting them black.

From these very same DIS boards. This one even got a little heated and ended up closed.

This gentleman isn't exactly clamoring, but he saw such a need for it that he wrote a book with a black princess. (I know this isn't exactly proving my claim, but he saw that there was a need for this type of book based on his discussions with children and was compelled enough to do it after talking with children.)

From a blog where one mother actually insisted that she wasn't going to buy anything Disney until there was a black princess. Another responder knew of "The Frog Princess", but said they should demand a more "universal" black princess.

From Yahoo Answers Many of these folks claim that they will write to Disney asking for a black princess...no way to prove if they ever did though.

 

[Nom]

my jewish anscestors very likely did not appreciate being enslaved by africans and forced to build pyramids in the searing heat, but
i'm not blaming every person of african descent today for that infraction

so, while i can understand those of african descent being upset with the plantation/slave owners, why hold those who came from italy, ireland, or germany (and THEIR descendants) in the late 1800s who were forced to work in deplorable conditions in factories to blame for things that happened and ENDED before they even arrived in this country???

I did not see anyone here blaming anything on their ansestors being slaves. I did not see anyone here holding any other posters to blame for slavery. instead, I am seeing a lot of people taking her identification with her heritage mighty personally!!!

 

[djm99]

I really don't like the direction this board has gone, but I'd like to add to some stats about slavery. Debate over this following stat.

The number of Africans deported to the Americas by the Europeans: about 10-15 million (about 30-40 million died before reaching the Americas).

The number of slaves sold to the new world varied throughout the slave trade. As for the distribution of slaves from regions of activity, certain areas produced far more slaves than others. Between 1650 and 1900, 10.24 million African slaves arrived in the Americas in the from the following regions.

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

I will always be amazed as SOME people conveniently rewrite, re-interpret, and misinterpret the slave trade to suit their interest in a sour attempt to alleviate their ‘guilt’. It is sad to read resourcefulness, which attempts to reverse accountability and makes the victims responsible for their own enslavement. If justice is an unchallengeable right for all humanity then those millions upon millions who died deserve to be remembered and those who murdered, brutalized and betrayed them must be called into historical account.

It is not to make others feel bad, but part of the process of telling the truth; a truth washed away in stolen history and cultural domination. If the ancestors of some Arabs, Turks, Europeans, and some Africans were participants in the destruction of African civilizations then it is not sensible for fear of offending to avoid these topics. In addition, it is equally not fair for the victims' descendants, to apply the same "racism in reverse." It is about a dialogue to heal the wounds and the bitterness. Some are so busy saying, “but” Africans did, or they did – but NOT one of these stats within this threads even attempt to acknowledge whites four fathers involvement in the slave trade. As if it was okay, because blah blah blah blah……… SOME are writing as if EVERYONE else is to blame then the VERY descendants that have often benefited. Many immigrants made a choice to come to America, to make a better life for themselves and the families to come. The same privileges your ancestors had when they got here were restricted for mine. Not just discouraged, but the threat of violence was oftentimes exampled. My ancestors were not given those choices. We were not only forcibly brought here; we were oftentimes raped, murdered, and maimed - all in the name of sport and play. We were not even human. We are documented with the animals we raised. 1/5 of a human I think it was. And that 1/5 was only to increase the number of House of Representatives - to have more ‘say’ politically.


To make matter worse, once freed we couldn't equally take part in a country we helped make successful. We had to march and protest to be considered a part of this country. This is why WE will continue to have these oftentimes ‘senseless’ debates. No one wants to acknowledge the issues, so we keep circling BS instead of moving forward. For the record, pretending like it didn’t happen is not moving forward.

ETA: Emphasis was placed on SOME, I am well aware that many acknowledge that slavery existed and was primarily practiced by whites. I have NEVER written anything about ALL whites.

Reproduction of a handbill advertising a slave auction, in Charleston, South Carolina, in 1769.

 

[djm99]

I did not see anyone here blaming anything on their ansestors being slaves. I did not see anyone here holding any other posters to blame for slavery. instead, I am seeing a lot of people taking her identification with her heritage mighty personally!!!

I have been thinking the same thing. I wonder why? I'm sure 'they' will respond.

 

[EUROPACL]

I really don't like the direction this board has gone, but I'd like to add to some stats about slavery. Debate over this following stat.

It's almost as if you are reading a different board and thread and posting responses here.

Nobody here is "debating" anything reguarding slavery. You just refuse to read the post.

 

[rantnnravin]

I did not see anyone here blaming anything on their ansestors being slaves.

re-read what i wrote please, because that's not what i said.

I did not see anyone here holding any other posters to blame for slavery.instead, I am seeing a lot of people taking her identification with her heritage mighty personally!!!

because when AA make comments like "the sins of whites" it is directed at my skin color, rather than my heritage or involvement in the oppression of a particular race.
MY people were oppressed too (6 million murdered by Germans) yet, i don't hold ALL Germans accountable for the actions of a few.
I don't hold ALL of African descent accountable for Hebrew enslavement in Egypt.
Fine, identify with your heritage, embrace it, make sure it never happens again. But be careful that you are not painting every person of a certain color with a broad brush. My ancestors got here AFTER slavery ended in this country. I am not "guilty" of anything.

The problem is, Disney is being raked over the coals for a storyline they haven't even announced or released.

 

[djm99]

my jewish anscestors very likely did not appreciate being enslaved by africans and forced to build pyramids in the searing heat, but i'm not blaming every person of african descent today for that infraction

Oh now Egypt is Africa - let the 'powers that be' tell it, Egypt is NOT Africa at all. BTW, I'm not in denial I am very much aware that the so-called Middle East is Northern Africa, but for political/separatist reasons, Egypt is spoken of as an independent continent of Africa. Many don't even know that Egypt is within the continent of Africa. Have you ever seen a map of ‘the Middle East’ – it clearly separates the part of the region from its mid and southern counterpart. If you are indeed Jewish, you would be the first for me, which have ever acknowledged Egypt as apart of Africa. Interesting that this is the first time I’ve read this and again, blame on Africa is being made. Also, according to Definitions of whiteness in the United States (From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia) The U.S. Department of Justice Federal Bureau of Investigation also categorizes "white people" as "people having origins in any of the original peoples of Europe, the Middle East, or North Africa through racial categories used in the UCR Program adopted from the Statistical Policy Handbook (1978) and published by the Office of Federal Statistical Policy and Standards, U.S. Department of Commerce.

It sounds to me that Africa is to blame for everything racially wrong in this wrong. Wow. Yet again, I’m amazed!

 

[rantnnravin]

ok, so you dispute that Egypt is on the African continent, and have even cited that some people consider it another continent- therefore, Jews were never enslaved or persecuted
and...
you ignore the entire second half of my post

i get it now

 

[djm99]

It's almost as if you are reading a different board and thread and posting responses here.

Nobody here is "debating" anything reguarding slavery. You just refuse to read the post.

I didn't refuse to read it, you didn't add the information you quoted. I added that information. You left the reader to assume that the quotes were the number of whites. And if you don't call it a debate okay – I guess you were discussing these issues. Like I stated my families history could easily disproved those numbers inaccurate, especially since the article didn’t make a distinction between those who owned slaves as a means of labor, or those who purchased their own family. There is a difference. And that was the debate (or discussion).