We want to redhead!

[Disney_and_Wine]

Understood. I would just say that today, a bunch of PEOPLE still like the scene -- women included -- or at least aren't bothered by it.

100%. No doubt about it.

 

[mirak]

I don't see why we cannot apply the "Would it be done today?" test to things like this. For example, suppose there was no NFL team in Washington DC and the NFL just awarded the city an expansion franchise. The franchise had to submit a proposed team name to the league office. Would they ever consider submitting "Redskins" as an option and even if they did, would the league ever accept it? The whole idea is ridiculous. So why is it ridiculous to think that the league should make them change it now? Same here.

That's a good comparison but I would respectfully submit that it cuts against your argument. Nobody is forcing the Redskins to change their name, or the Indians. In fact the Supreme Court just recently slapped down an attempt to deny their trademark registrations.

Just like with those team names, I strongly disagree with censoring time-honored traditions based on a PC "would it be done today?" litmus test. There are a LOT of things about Disney that wouldn't be done today. Like the entire Small World ride for starters. That's not a reason to whitewash everything!

Consider it a teachable moment! If your child ever asks (and there's a 99.9% chance they won't), just say "times were different back then." And I don't mean "pirate times" because I'll be the first to admit this isn't a museum - it's a ride! By "times" I mean the 50s and 60s when these sorts of rides were made.

That was always my favorite scene in the ride - definitely the funniest - and it's not because I somehow endorse slavery. Really?! It's because it's a funny throwback to an earlier, more innocent time when the people who made the ride didn't have to worry about people getting offended about everything! Disney is taking an eraser to that and it makes me sad.

 

[NuJoy]

()

 

[danikoski]

It was Alice Davis, Marc Davis' his wife, and she was a costume designer. Here is a good article on the history of the attraction.
http://www.disneyavenue.com/2016/09/imagineers-remember-creating-pirates-of.html?m=1

Thanks for the info!

 

[Disney_and_Wine]

Nobody is forcing the Redskins to change their name, or the Indians.

Nobody is forcing Disney to either. One company decided to change with the times and the others have not.

I strongly disagree with censoring time-honored traditions based on a PC "would it be done today?" litmus test.

And that is the flip side. I get it. I just don't believe in the concept of "time-honored". Time is an inanimate construct. It can't "honor" anything. Only people can. And when people stop honoring the tradition (such as the word "redskin" among others), it is rational to make a change.

 

[Slapshot1188]

I think that what you're saying does appear to be true of millennials IN GENERAL (not everyone, etc., etc., etc. ).

However, I am raising my kids NOT to be so easily offended by so many things... to put everything they see/hear in proper historical context... not to expect everything in the world to bend/shape to their CURRENT preferences/sensibilities, etc.

Perhaps this is part of why no one in our family is offended by this depiction of PIRATES in a theme park ride.

Absolutely!

 

[GPC0321]

I haven't read through all responses yet, but I can see both sides to this debate.

On the one hand, for PotC in particular, the current generation of kids will equate the ride with the movies, and those movies don't depict pirates as bad guys. In fact, kids can take part in a tutorial to "become pirates" themselves not far from the ride itself. Then they can buy their pirate gear and toys in the gift shop, and later that night they can go on the pirates & pals fireworks cruise if they'd like. Pirates, as related to PotC are not "bad guys" to most of the children who visit Disney in this day and age. So I can see the need to tread carefully. The PotC movies have made the idea of pirates and piracy cool to today's kids. And no one would want them to think selling women is cool, much less "funny". I totally get that.

But I do worry about the PC stuff going too far. There was a thread recently about meeting with Gaston and being upset that he was such a jerk. That's his character, and it would be a shame for him to have to be "nice" just so that he doesn't offend anyone. He's supposed to offend people. And when I meet him, he better say, "Smile like you're making me a sandwich," because I think that's hilarious! I know it's not serious and is part of his misogynistic character though.

The difference is, kids don't look up to Gaston and think he's cool. They know he's the "bad guy" and expect him to behave accordingly. But that line is blurred in the case of the PotC pirates. Captain Hook? Definitely bad guy. Jack Sparrow? Not so much. And kids/people equate the PotC pirates with the "good/funny" kind instead of the villainous kind.

 

[BattyKoda]

While not even close to being offended by the scene I do have to admit to being a bit surprised (for lack of a better term) when I first saw it, just didn't strike me as "DISNEY"(this thread needs more underlines and Bold).

That said, I could care less if they get rid of it or not (hence my vote of no).

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

While not even close to being offended by the scene I do have to admit to being a bit surprised (for lack of a better term) when I first saw it, just didn't strike me as "DISNEY"(this thread needs more underlines and Bold).

That said, I could care less if they get rid of it or not (hence my vote of no).

I'll try to work in some MORE just for YOU.

 

[BattyKoda]

There's a wonderful article on disneytouristblog.com. Tom Bricker has some good points about the ride.

Thanks for the link, that was a great article!

 

[NeuroCindy]

I agree. But I also don't understand why society says this scene must go but Big Love is a-ok, won many awards and is rated very highly! Can someone please explain that to me?

Because one is modeling human trafficking, and the other is adults choosing (consenting) to enter a non-monogamous relationship. I'm not sure why you're equating the two?

I think that what you're saying does appear to be true of millennials IN GENERAL (not everyone, etc., etc., etc. ).

However, I am raising my kids NOT to be so easily offended by so many things... to put everything they see/hear in proper historical context... not to expect everything in the world to bend/shape to their CURRENT preferences/sensibilities, etc.

I just want to make sure we have our generations laid out correctly because I see this constantly. You take a swipe at millennials (which is fine, it's your opinion, but I encourage you to watch this:

); however, you also state that you're "raising my [your] kids NOT to be so easily offended by so many things". If you're still raising your children, meaning they're under 18, they're not millennials. They're generation Z.



Note directed to PPs but in general: There's an assumption that people were offended or complaining about this. I don't know that this is true. Also, seeing something that one things is tasteless or tacky doesn't mean that one is offended by it. I am not offended by this scene, but I most definitely see why Disney wants to change it.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

It was Alice Davis, Marc Davis' his wife, and she was a costume designer. Here is a good article on the history of the attraction.
http://www.disneyavenue.com/2016/09/imagineers-remember-creating-pirates-of.html?m=1

Thanks for sharing this!

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Note directed to PPs but in general: There's an assumption that people were offended or complaining about this. I don't know that this is true.

Perhaps Disney has market research backing this up. Or perhaps they are bending to a few loud voices. Or perhaps it has nothing to do with either of these things! Don't know.

 

[wonderstruck88]

I haven't read through all responses yet, but I can see both sides to this debate.

On the one hand, for PotC in particular, the current generation of kids will equate the ride with the movies, and those movies don't depict pirates as bad guys. In fact, kids can take part in a tutorial to "become pirates" themselves not far from the ride itself. Then they can buy their pirate gear and toys in the gift shop, and later that night they can go on the pirates & pals fireworks cruise if they'd like. Pirates, as related to PotC are not "bad guys" to most of the children who visit Disney in this day and age. So I can see the need to tread carefully. The PotC movies have made the idea of pirates and piracy cool to today's kids. And no one would want them to think selling women is cool, much less "funny". I totally get that.

But I do worry about the PC stuff going too far. There was a thread recently about meeting with Gaston and being upset that he was such a jerk. That's his character, and it would be a shame for him to have to be "nice" just so that he doesn't offend anyone. He's supposed to offend people. And when I meet him, he better say, "Smile like you're making me a sandwich," because I think that's hilarious! I know it's not serious and is part of his misogynistic character though.

The difference is, kids don't look up to Gaston and think he's cool. They know he's the "bad guy" and expect him to behave accordingly. But that line is blurred in the case of the PotC pirates. Captain Hook? Definitely bad guy. Jack Sparrow? Not so much. And kids/people equate the PotC pirates with the "good/funny" kind instead of the villainous kind.

I think you make a great point here! I think the Gaston stuff is funny too, and realized that I did have to ask myself why that's different in my head when they're both being played for laughs. I do think what you brought up is part of it. There's other nuances to it too that would take me longer to explain than people want to read, and I'm still fully thinking it out in my brain, but it's an interesting point/comparison and I'm glad you brought it up.

 

[HopperFan]

Almost 24 hours in and I find the results so far very interesting.

Thank you OP for posting the poll.


We want to redhead!
Does this part of the attraction really bother you?

• Yes
  19 vote(s)
  13.8%

• No
  119 vote(s)
  86.2%

 

[Farro]

Almost 24 hours in and I find the results so far very interesting.

Thank you OP for posting the poll.


We want to redhead!
Does this part of the attraction really bother you?

• Yes
  19 vote(s)
  13.8%

• No
  119 vote(s)
  86.2%

Again - there is a difference between being bothered by it (which I am not), but understanding the reasoning why others would be. It's not hard. What was more enlightening to me in a previous thread was the "wording" people chose to use when trying to defend why it should stay, which ironically made me dig my heels in deeper about why it should go (when I didn't care in the first place).

 

[HopperFan]

Again - there is a difference between being bothered by it (which I am not), but understanding the reasoning why others would be. It's not hard. What was more enlightening to me in a previous thread was the "wording" people chose to use when trying to defend why it should stay, which ironically made me dig my heels in deeper about why it should go (when I didn't care in the first place).

And again - I find the votes interesting.

If you vote it does not bother you, then that to me is a vote that it could stay and you'd be fine with it.

Not what anyone else thinks, just your vote.

 

[Farro]

@HopperFan Then there really should be an option for "It doesn't offend me personally, but I don't mind if they replace it". I think the votes would be different. As it stands, I think people may view a vote for it doesn't offend me to also mean they don't want it to change, you know?

 

[MamaBelle4]

And again - I find the votes interesting.

If you vote it does not bother you, then that to me is a vote that it could stay and you'd be fine with it.

Not what anyone else thinks, just your vote.

That's why I actually haven't voted on this poll. It did not bother me, but I am actually glad it is being replaced.

As I stated at length in the other thread that is now closed, I find it to be, at best, tasteless and crass to depict women as sex slaves (which is what they are about to become). I also mentioned that the 1970's were very different as far as feminism and women's rights and that allowed this to be depicted without a stir. I am glad it is being changed but I (and no one else that I'm aware of) did not call for it.

So was I bothered by it, no, but as I'm glad it is changing, I feel like that's not really the right answer for this poll.

 

[Farro]

@MamaBelle4 - I totally agree with you. Nice to meet you!