We want to redhead!

[Robo]

the scene that has existed for 50 years.

That, right there, is reason enough to change it.

[Edit: I can see that I needed to note that my line above is SARCASM.]


I will be looking forward to what kind of over-reactive changes will be made
to the creative work that current artists are making today...
just because someone might decide they don't like it at some future date.

What goes around...

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

That, right there, is reason enough to change it.

I will be looking forward to what kind of over-reactive changes will be made
to the creative work that current artists are making today...
just because someone might decide they don't like it at some future date.

What goes around...

Disagree. It's about a blend of old and new to me. Just the fact alone that something has been around for 50 yrs is NOT reason to remove it in my view. Nope.

 

[amberpi]

That, right there, is reason enough to change it.

I will be looking forward to what kind of over-reactive changes will be made
to the creative work that current artists are making today...
just because someone might decide they don't like it at some future date.

What goes around...

I actually like to see these kinds of evolutions in all parts of culture, if I could live 50 more years to see it, that'd be really rad.

 

[Robo]

Its art.
Its not.
Its art.
Its not.
Its art.
Its not.

 

[Boski]

No not really.

Its all in how you define it. There are posts in this very thread that could be deemed "troll like". And some of them actually make sense and are relatable to the subject being discussed.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

Sometimes being called a troll can be a compliment on this board.

No not really.

Its all in how you define it. There are posts in this very thread that could be deemed "troll like". And some of them actually make sense and are relatable to the subject being discussed.

It's never meant as a compliment when someone is called a troll.

 

[mirak]

I get what you're saying... All I'm saying is that these little things add up and if too many of the rides get too "dated" kids can be turned off, especially with Universal breathing down Disney's neck. As I've said before I have no problem with them keeping it, I will be a little sad that my childhood is disappearing actually, but it's very likely a business decision and over time little things will be picked off one by one. I get annoyed by my kids often because they don't show the same reverence for It's a Small World that I do

I think you are mistaken. Yes, Disney needs to continue to add new attractions to keep pace with other theme parks, but a big reason Magic Kingdom remains popular is that they've kept so many of the old rides!!!

That's a big reason why parents bring their kids back - to experience what they experienced as kids. If not for the nostalgia, they might as well go to universal which is otherwise in most ways.

By tinkering with rides like Pirates, Disney runs the risk of killing the golden goose.

 

[Parkercrew]

Who's "outraged"?

Many of us have said repeatedly that we have no idea why Disney chose to do this. Of course it's their call. One can know that and still comment that it doesn't appear that there was a public outcry AGAINST the scene that has existed for 50 years.

I made a statement that there isn't a need for outcry to justify anything. I perceive that you're agitated at my statement. Maybe it was too obvious a thing to be said? The last part of my post was my conclusion.

 

[ofcabbagesandkings]

I like this idea. You can keep the line. Perhaps one of the guys bidding at the auction saying something like "who cares about the item, We wants the red head!" Like a poor attempt at flirting.

I'm not attached to the auction scene personally, nor am I personally bothered by it, but I think that sex slavery is a very sensitive subject. If someone else is bothered, then it is worth re-thinking the scene.

I think that makes the line actually funny. She's auctioning off a clock, a goat, and some dolt says, "we want the redhead." Then she dunks him under the water, like who's laughing now? I don't know. Right now it's not very funny to begin with. Unless you like fat jokes.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

For those who are outraged...

Who's "outraged"?

I made a statement that there isn't a need for outcry to justify anything. I perceive that you're agitated at my statement. Maybe it was too obvious a thing to be said? The last part of my post was my conclusion.

"Outraged"... "agitated"... nope!

 

[bryanb]

This conversation has become a little confrontational, to be honest.

 

[minniemous]

Well, is the whole ride gone? No. Despite the fact that pirates were atrocious people. So that's your "I'm not going to make a change".

Not sure why you want to keep a scene that's basically depicting imminent rape (for a lifetime) within a ride...

But I get that not everyone has kids that ask serious questions of their parents (like my kid) and who want REAL answers not just fluff. And even when you don't *answer* thoroughly because if the age of the child at the time of the question, it sets up a series of questions in your mind that results in "what the heck is this scene doing in this ride?" thoughts...


You say PC (like it's always a bad thing"; I say "let's stop being jerks and maybe think about what we are depicting."

I totally agree. It is not a historical book or piece of literature. It is a park ride and it is offensive to an entire group of people. I am happy it is on its way out. I have enough respect for myself, my daughter and all women to not argue against the removal of a scene that makes light of sexual slavery. This in my opinion is not art that needs to be preserved.

 

[danikoski]

The article that was posted awhile back
http://www.disneyavenue.com/2016/09/imagineers-remember-creating-pirates-of.html?m=1

Has this little paragraph:
X Atencio once said that other measures were taken as well. "We made a big banner, 'Auctioneer — Take a Wench for a Bride,' at the Auction Scene to get the point across that these guys weren't 'taking advantage' of the ladies. They were auctioning them off to be brides. We also had the girl chasing the guy in the Chase Scene to try to get the point across that this was harmless fun. We hoped that would get us off the hook. It seems to have worked."

That paragraph indicates to me they knew certain scenes might be problematic, but they got away with it. Granted, they were going for humor, but they still knew it might not fly. There is probably someone in Disney who's wanted to change the scene for awhile, and now there's a chance to introduce a new pirate and Barbossa (I believe that was the character from the movie they wanted to add)..

 

[HopperFan]

As I have said, I am fine if it stays and fine if it goes. The sadness is this was a classic Disney ride from Walt's time and I don't think it was designed with ill will. Dark humor maybe but not meant to be harmful. I don't agree that this is traumatizing to anyone, I am a female, I have been going since a child and I have a daughter who I raised to be extremely empowered and independent. And if there ever is anything she questioned, we discussed it but in the end we both knew it was a theme park and a theme park ride.

You want to sanitize the park? Well get ready for a long list. I find the suicide in the HM quite disturbing, he felt his only way out was to kill himself. That is way more obvious to children, even the voice tells you so. Love the lady in the attic with a hatchet ready to kill us or the starving dog - animal abuse, great. Peter Pan tricked Wendy to run away with him, then wanted her to be a slave to take care of all those runaway kids and let's not forget the red men, a little dicey there. Small World, don't think there haven't been lots of conversations how racist the Asian dolls are, they need to be fixed. Jungle Cruise has head hunters and they joke about it. Splash Mountain, well we know all about that one, the movie isn't even for sale here ......... all classics. We could find lots of problems ... Country Bears are very unkind, Tom Sawyer, "Dumbo" and don't get me started on the Princess stories, most of them are tough to explain.

Here is a really personal one. My DS is handicapped in many ways, he is mentally handicapped, he has a severe speech impairment and considered non-verbal, he is smaller than most his age with different ears and perfect eyebrows ............. can we talk about Dopey? He looks different, his ears are huge, he is mute, he is teased by the others and they call him Dopey .... aka stupid. Nice. He's more helpless than the wench but I'm not seeing any support there. There are groups that have actually determined his disability diagnosis. How much does that hurt to have folks make fun and laugh at Dopey because he is handicapped? What if those of us with mentally disabled family demanded there only be 6 Dwarfs because it's just not cool. Hey maybe dwarfs period are not cool.

It's a theme park and if it is so disturbing ...... don't go. Talk is cheap. Walk the walk. Don't give them your money. Getting rid of a scenery is not going to change one thing about what is going on in the world, not one. They will change it and we will all stop talking about it and it will go away. But hey, keep laughing at Dopey, cause laughing at handicapped people is funny.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

That, right there, is reason enough to change it.

[Edit: I can see that I needed to note that my line above is SARCASM.]

Some really DO suggest that it's just time to replace the old stuff (saw some of that in FB posts). Guess after reading some of those I didn't catch that you didn't mean it!

 

[Micca]

Getting rid of a scenery is not going to change one thing about what is going on in the world, not one.

Great post my friend. If the change will fix/heal something, then I'm all for it. Otherwise...

 

[srauseo]

This part of the attraction never bothered me until I rode the ride with small children and started wondering how I would explain what was going on if they asked questions. It wasn't really a conversation I wanted to get into while having a fun day at a theme park. ("Why?, Why? Why?")

 

[Robo]

A response to kids' questions could easily be, "Oh, it's just something silly..."

The same response offered by parents to kids in relation to countless "double entendre" lines in thousands of cartoon scenes over the decades.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

A response to kids' questions could easily be, "Oh, it's just something silly..."

The same response offered by parents to kids in relation to countless "double entendre" lines in thousands of cartoon scenes over the decades.

 

[GPC0321]

I think you made some really good points in your post!! To this point above, though...

By this logic, the ride should probably be shut down. These "good guys" are burning down a city, redefining drunk and disorderly, etc. We shouldn't want the kids to see any of this...

The phrase "teachable moment" might be overused, but I think it applies here. I know I had conversations with my kids when they started asking "why are they burning everything?!" Same when they asked me what "auction a bride" meant.

I guess I'm just personally a fan of facing these things and having conversations, rather than erasing them or hiding them.

Oh, I agree with you. I went on PoTC when I was a kid, and I never even questioned it. But I was the kid who was allowed to stay in the room and watch whatever my parents were watching on TV, and I also had a brother who was 6 years older than me, so I heard and saw a lot of stuff in my formative years that mostly went over my head until I was old enough to "get" it.

And there's nothing wrong with the Mrs. Potts way of handling it, IMO. "I'll tell you when you're older."