Email address for Disney Guest relations? Odd experience with an Eeyore character

Status
Not open for further replies.
LadyDulcinea1 said:
This actually isn't the first time I've hear someone say that a character made "kissing" noises, so I wonder if those are really that uncommon. :confused3 As for the rest of your experience, that definitely sounds like it should be brought to the attention of someone at Disney, especially if it made you and your children uncomfortable.

Well, it might be a new thing the kissing noises, we just got back and Mickey, Minnie, and some others made the kissing noises to the kids, they kissed their hands and blow the kiss, i didn't think it was bad!
 
I feel like I'm tellling and re-telling the story :confused3

but in regard to the kissing noise question--I think a differentiation would be whether it's an "in character" kiss--in my particular case the Eeyore "character" was not "acting out a kiss"--to anyone around us, Eeyore was standing stockstill posing for a picture. The person in the costume -- whether inadvertantly or intentionally-- moved some of my clothing with some of his fingers "inside" the "paw" and used other fingers to rub or massage my skin. He also used the fingers to move along my waist, while moving his hips against mine, and simultaneously made a low laugh and kissing noise which were intended only for me to hear, and were not accompanied by any "in character" gestures. I am very conscious of how false accusations can ruin a person's career and life, and have replayed this scene a thousand times in my head to be sure I'm not inflating it.

But do I think this means that the "risk" of inappropriate interactions means character should be glimpsed behind plate glass--absolutely not.

By a rough count, my daughter had interactions with more than 30 costumed characters, and somehow managed to "collect" 9 "Princesses" as well. She was hugged, kissed, embraced -- all of it was life-affirming for her, and all of it was appropriate. It's far better for Disney to set standards and enforce them than to cease the interactions.

One very interesting thing I've noticed in this thread is the division along gender lines. It's not a 100% thing, but the women tend to take this seriously, while the guys are tending to have critiques of my reporting style or timing or whether it should have been reported. In my own family my son (age 17) thinks that I should think that being "pawed" by Eeyore is funny and I should be "flattered" as a middle-aged mom; my hubby thinks it's not worth making a "to do" over, while my 9 yo daughter strongly thinks an Eeyore who "laughs like that should be stopped." What tipped me over the edge in reporting is that I don't want to model for my daughter that it's okay not to speak up.
 
erinch said:
The person in the costume -- whether inadvertantly or intentionally-- moved some of my clothing with some of his fingers "inside" the "paw" and used other fingers to rub or massage my skin. He also used the fingers to move along my waist, while moving his hips against mine, and simultaneously made a low laugh and kissing noise which were intended only for me to hear, and were not accompanied by any "in character" gestures.

"Whether inadvertantly or intentionally", this sounds to me like you are unsure of how you really feel about all that went on. If I was to write a long letter of complaint to a company that could possibly lead to the termination of an employee, I would try to make sure that I was 100% sure that what went on had malicious and perverse intent behind it. These characters wear very large gloves and I seriously doubt that they can feel something as small as a bra strap through gloves and clothing. There are so many factors that play into this. You said this was in a crowded restaurant while this was going on which I am sure was quite loud, is it possible that maybe you thought you heard something. I just don't understand (especially in situations like this) where nothing is definite, that we automatically assume the worst.
 
erinch said:
I feel like I'm tellling and re-telling the story :confused3

but in regard to the kissing noise question--I think a differentiation would be whether it's an "in character" kiss--in my particular case the Eeyore "character" was not "acting out a kiss"--to anyone around us, Eeyore was standing stockstill posing for a picture. The person in the costume -- whether inadvertantly or intentionally-- moved some of my clothing with some of his fingers "inside" the "paw" and used other fingers to rub or massage my skin. He also used the fingers to move along my waist, while moving his hips against mine, and simultaneously made a low laugh and kissing noise which were intended only for me to hear, and were not accompanied by any "in character" gestures. I am very conscious of how false accusations can ruin a person's career and life, and have replayed this scene a thousand times in my head to be sure I'm not inflating it.

But do I think this means that the "risk" of inappropriate interactions means character should be glimpsed behind plate glass--absolutely not.

By a rough count, my daughter had interactions with more than 30 costumed characters, and somehow managed to "collect" 9 "Princesses" as well. She was hugged, kissed, embraced -- all of it was life-affirming for her, and all of it was appropriate. It's far better for Disney to set standards and enforce them than to cease the interactions.

One very interesting thing I've noticed in this thread is the division along gender lines. It's not a 100% thing, but the women tend to take this seriously, while the guys are tending to have critiques of my reporting style or timing or whether it should have been reported. In my own family my son (age 17) thinks that I should think that being "pawed" by Eeyore is funny and I should be "flattered" as a middle-aged mom; my hubby thinks it's not worth making a "to do" over, while my 9 yo daughter strongly thinks an Eeyore who "laughs like that should be stopped." What tipped me over the edge in reporting is that I don't want to model for my daughter that it's okay not to speak up.
Here's another "guy's" perpective...write the letter and state everything that you have discussed here. How it made you feel, how and why it was inappropriate, etc. You're on vacation at WDW, and I guarantee getting handled inapropriately at a character breakfast, or anywhere in the park, for that matter, is something that the Walt Disney Company needs to look into, innocent or not! They can talk to the CM, he can give his side of the story and they can deal with it as they see fit. You're not looking to press charges...you were creeped out. Women do need to take charge in these kinds of situations and letting something that made you feel weird go by giving this CM the benefit of the doubt... "Well, the gloves are big, and I'm not sure if he really laughed, or I'm sure that his intentions were honorable"...does a disservice to WDW and the other guests that visit. What if he has a prior mark on his record with WDW for this type situation and he really does have a problem? What if something worse happens? If you haven't already, write the letter.

Edit: Sorry, I read about the incident on the first couple pages and got fired up and skipped to the last page. I just read your email and it looks very good. Hope you get assurance from WDW that this kind of behavior is being monitored and won't happen again!
 

I believe you handled it properly

What if this EEyore had ONE prior incident..and this will make TWO and therefore VERIFY something is not right....

If this is his first incident, and he never gets another.....then you can rest assured you don't have a pedophile or creepy old man EEYORE running around


It can't do any harm...I think if he doesn't have ANY prior reports of misconduct that perhaps it was a strange link of "non-intentional" events
 
Again, as a former CM, I highly doubt that anyone will get fired over this unless he/she is a repeat offender and already has something like this in his/her file. Reprimanded, yes. Fired, no.

If a CM, character or not, does anything that makes a guest uncomfortable the people at WDW would want to know and Erin did the right thing.
 
This is from Snopes.com

The Three Little Molesters

Legends: * Costumed cast members molest Disney theme park guests.

Origins: * We expect the costumed characters who roam the grounds at Disney theme parks to be nothing less than kind and cuddly all the time. Even the not-so-cute "evil" characters (e.g., Jafar, Captain Hook) are supposed to exhibit nothing but boundless patience and good cheer in accommodating guests and posing for endless streams of souvenir photographs, however much they may be pushed, pulled, punched, taunted, or otherwise abused by some of Disney's less well-behaved clientele. It's all too easy for some park visitors to lose themselves in the fantasy and forget that those figures are not really indestructible cartoon characters but flesh-and-blood people laboring inside of hot, heavy, cumbersome costumes. These cast members generally exhibit nothing but good cheer while working under difficult circumstances for relatively little pay, but should any of them ever lapse and momentarily display the very human reactions of frustration or exasperation, you can bet that someone will complain about it.

Sometimes the complaints lodged are quite serious, with guests maintaining that a costumed cast member was not just rude or uncooperative, but acting in a hostile and physically abusive manner — to the extent that some complaints have resulted in civil or criminal proceedings. In most cases, though, the defense that character costumes so limit cast members' peripheral vision and body movements that the alleged actions would be impossible or extremely difficult to perform intentionally wins out.

In 1981, for example, Disneyland was the target of a lawsuit alleging that, three years earlier, a nine-year-old girl had received a beating delivered by one Winnie-the-Pooh. The lovable bear had supposedly slapped her in the face, resulting in bruising, recurring headaches, and possible brain damage. As writer David Koenig described the ensuing trial:
[Disney attorney W. Mike] McCray's first witness was Robert Hill, the actor who portrayed Pooh bear at the park that day. Hill testified that while in costume, his vision and movements are severely restricted. The girl, then nine years old, was tugging at him from behind and, in turning to see who it was, he accidentally struck her with an ear. "We're trained not to retaliate," he said.

McCray then asked for a brief recess. After jurors returned to their seats, Hill reentered the courtroom in costume. Taking the witness stand, Pooh answered the lawyer's questions by nodding his head and stomping his feet. "What do you do at Disneyland?" McCray asked. Pooh got up and did a jig down the aisle. The courtroom audience burst into laughter. "Have the record show that he's doing a two-step," noted the judge. By calling Pooh to the stand the attorney was able to present a lovable, sympathetic witness who wouldn't — and couldn't — hurt anyone. The bear demonstrated that he couldn't have slapped the girl in the face as she claimed. The costume's arms were too low to the ground. The jury took just 21 minutes to acquit Pooh on all charges.
In another civil case, in 1976 a woman filed a lawsuit against Disneyland and sought $150,000 in damages for assault and battery, false imprisonment, and humiliation, asserting that a park employee wearing a pig costume had run up to her near the "It's a Small World" attraction, grabbed her, and fondled her breasts while squealing "Mommy! Mommy!" — an experience that had supposedy left her so upset that she gained 50 pounds. That complaint never saw the inside of a courtroom, as the plaintiff dropped her case after Disney's showed her a photo of the pig costume which revealed that the outfit had no operable arms, only stubs.

In 2004, a Disney cast member was actually prosecuted on criminal charges. Michael C. Chartrand, a Walt Disney World employee who worked inside a Tigger costume, was the subject of a police investigation after a 13-year-old girl complained that he had fondled her breast while she posed for a photo with him and her mother in WDW's Magic Kingdom park on 21 February 2004. (The girl's mother maintained that she had been similarly fondled, but her allegation was not an element of the criminal case.) Mr. Chartrand was arrested in April 2004 and charged with lewd and lascivious molestation of a child and simple battery; by the following week 24 more complaints about him had been lodged with authorities. (All of the other complainants either lacked sufficient evidence to press charges or were unwilling to do so, however.)

Mr. Chartrand declined a plea bargain and took his case to trial, and in August 2004 a jury deliberated for less than an hour before returning a verdict of "not guilty" on the charge of lewd and lascivious molestation. As part of his closing argument, Mr. Chartrand's attorney, Jeffrey Kaufman (who himself worked for Disney as a costumed character), donned the Tigger costume to demonstrate to jurors the difficulty of maneuvering and seeing while inside in the outfit.

Last updated: * 15 August 2004


The URL for this page is http://www.snopes.com/disney/parks/molest.asp

Urban Legends Reference Pages © 1995-2005
by Barbara and David P. Mikkelson


Linda ::MinnieMo
 
WedwayRocks said:
"Whether inadvertantly or intentionally", this sounds to me like you are unsure of how you really feel about all that went on. If I was to write a long letter of complaint to a company that could possibly lead to the termination of an employee, I would try to make sure that I was 100% sure that what went on had malicious and perverse intent behind it. These characters wear very large gloves and I seriously doubt that they can feel something as small as a bra strap through gloves and clothing. There are so many factors that play into this. You said this was in a crowded restaurant while this was going on which I am sure was quite loud, is it possible that maybe you thought you heard something. I just don't understand (especially in situations like this) where nothing is definite, that we automatically assume the worst.


I didn't understand the bra strap thing either. They do where heavy gloves or mitts and I couldn't figure out how he could play with the bra strap. Also, I thought that all characters are trained to have the same signature. I know that my signatures are the same as other people's who have gone at different times.
 
Wheather it was intentional or unintentional does not matter. She felt uncomfortable by what happened. If she felt uncomfortable then there is a problem. No one has a right to judge Erin and what she felt. No one can say if it was intentional or unintentional. You were not in her situation.

I have had to report sexual harrassment before. It was a very hard thing to do. I questioned myself then and I still sometimes question myself (it happened in 2001). I know he was wrong even if he did not intented what he did was sexual harrassment. I actually reported him and was told I mistook.
 
Windy City Heather said:
Wheather it was intentional or unintentional does not matter. She felt uncomfortable by what happened. If she felt uncomfortable then there is a problem. No one has a right to judge Erin and what she felt. No one can say if it was intentional or unintentional. You were not in her situation.

I have had to report sexual harrassment before. It was a very hard thing to do. I questioned myself then and I still sometimes question myself (it happened in 2001). I know he was wrong even if he did not intented what he did was sexual harrassment. I actually reported him and was told I mistook.

It really does matter though. I find things uncomfortable everyday that others may not. Just because something makes you uncomfortable doesn't make it wrong. Does this mean that everytime someone does something that makes us uncomfortable that we turn on defense mode and immediately assume that the person has bad intent. I'm not saying this person did not mean to "laugh creepily" and "rub her clothes, with his/her fingers, under his gloves? But we dont know. Another question, if this was a face character (such as cinderella, belle or Jasmine) that you knew was a female, and this same situation had occured, would you still have reacted the same way, or would you just assume that the laughs, touchs, and bumps were due to some other circumstance? I would asssume not, which is just human nature. But just because something makes you uncomfortable, does not make it wrong.

Also, I am not judging Erin for her decision about what happened. But this is a forum, which gives me equal opportunity to discuss the topic as for her to post it. I dont mean any harm, and I have been nothing but kind with my statement, but if you don't want to read an opposing opinion, you may not want to post in a forum.
 
Shinji said:
Sooner or Later, people being how they are, it is bound to upset a guest. I can only imagine what it is like to be encased inside a hot costume with limited vision and covered hands. Then to have someone flatter themselves by accusing the character of a sexual advance.
I didn't understand the bra strap thing either. They do where heavy gloves or mitts and I couldn't figure out how he could play with the bra strap.

I agree with BOTH posts. I worked as a character before, but not at Disney. I could barely SEE out of that costume looking straight ahead. In order to see a bra strap, I would have to turn my head completely to the side, which is next to impossible. To FEEL a bra strap, would be impossible, especially with those giant Eeyore hands. Give me a break. :rotfl2:
 
In my particular instance, my perception is that he disengaged his own hand from the "paw" and was fumbling with my shoulder through the layer of fabric on his costume which would be the "palm" or lowerside the paw. He was not using the entire "paw." Sight wasn't necessary and at no time did he "look" at me
 
I have read every post and finally decided to weigh in with my opinion. It does not matter if the incident was intentional. In fact, let's just say, for the sake of argument, it was completely innocent. Disney stills need to know that the way Eeyore acted made the OP feel uncomfortable. If it was innocent, s/he has or will act the same way with someone else, and I'm sure the same behavior will make someone else also feel uncomfortable. Of course, not everyone will be weirded out by the same conduct, but my bet is there are plenty who would be. If it was innocent, then maybe some more training or a change in protocols is necessary. WDW is in the business of making people feel great and happy and when something makes a guest uncomfortable, WDW needs to know.

My 10 yr old DD plays softball and at one of the games, the ump was getting in real close to the catchers, unlike anything I've seen ever with a kids' ump. I finally couldn't stand it and told my husband in the dugout (the pitching coach) and the head coach. They both thought I was a bit crazy, but they agreed to watch him. I asked another mom if she had noticed and she said that she and her hubby had been watching this creepy behavior the whole game. She then went to my husband and the head coach too. At this point, the head coach went out and said something to the ump who umped the rest of the game from the infield. Was his weird behavior intentional? I don't know, but my DH said he watched after I said something and he thought the ump was way out of line and was getting his "jollies" by touching these girls. My thought was if it was innocent, the ump still needed to know that his behavior was bothering the parents. He could get in some real trouble for the behavior, innocent or not.

Conduct that causes discomfort should be reported so it can be remedied.
 
omigosh! I had an...'experience' w/ Eeyore at CP, too...I didn't think anything of it until the group I was with said something...he grabbed me really tightly for a picture, and then I had to squirm and kind of elbow him to get away...even after it was obvious that the pic was done (not to mention he didn't interact much w/ DD4, he was more interested in me!)...he kind of grunted, too...sounded like an old man grunt...

there's no telling, though...I do enjoy telling the story of the time Eeyore hit on me... :P
 
Isnt it possible that its hard to tell, through the small holes on these costumes, if the picture has been taken already or not and the character, who obviously does not want to mess up the picture by moving early, waits to see when the guest moves so they know that the picture is done. Also, why is it, that women think that all men are hitting on them in some form or fashion? Its a disney character for God's sakes! They are supposed to be friendly and cuddly, but you automatically assume that you are being taken advantage of you.
 
WedwayRocks said:
Isnt it possible that its hard to tell, through the small holes on these costumes, if the picture has been taken already or not and the character, who obviously does not want to mess up the picture by moving early, waits to see when the guest moves so they know that the picture is done.

YES! I was always very cautious of getting a good picture. With some of the cameras, it is hard to tell when the picture is taken. But hey, if it makes the moms feel that they are hot, let them believe it!
 
erinch said:
In my particular instance, my perception is that he disengaged his own hand from the "paw" and was fumbling with my shoulder through the layer of fabric on his costume which would be the "palm" or lowerside the paw. He was not using the entire "paw." Sight wasn't necessary and at no time did he "look" at me


Although a good question would be...

Since he could not even SEE what he was doing....

Is he some kind of back fondling pervert?
What would he gain from playing with your bra and "rubbing" your back


Seems kinda strange that it was done on purpose
 
WedwayRocks said:
It really does matter though. I find things uncomfortable everyday that others may not. Just because something makes you uncomfortable doesn't make it wrong. Does this mean that everytime someone does something that makes us uncomfortable that we turn on defense mode and immediately assume that the person has bad intent. I'm not saying this person did not mean to "laugh creepily" and "rub her clothes, with his/her fingers, under his gloves? But we dont know. Another question, if this was a face character (such as cinderella, belle or Jasmine) that you knew was a female, and this same situation had occured, would you still have reacted the same way, or would you just assume that the laughs, touchs, and bumps were due to some other circumstance? I would asssume not, which is just human nature. But just because something makes you uncomfortable, does not make it wrong.

Also, I am not judging Erin for her decision about what happened. But this is a forum, which gives me equal opportunity to discuss the topic as for her to post it. I dont mean any harm, and I have been nothing but kind with my statement, but if you don't want to read an opposing opinion, you may not want to post in a forum.

You assume that just because I post after you that I am referring to you. Many people through out this thread have judged her and questioned her.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.


Disney Vacation Planning. Free. Done for You.
Our Authorized Disney Vacation Planners are here to provide personalized, expert advice, answer every question, and uncover the best discounts. Let Dreams Unlimited Travel take care of all the details, so you can sit back, relax, and enjoy a stress-free vacation.
Start Your Disney Vacation
Disney EarMarked Producer

New Posts







DIS Facebook DIS youtube DIS Instagram DIS Pinterest DIS Tiktok DIS Twitter

Add as a preferred source on Google

Back
Top Bottom