[ SECRET POST #2059 ]

[case]

⌈ Secret Post #2059 ⌋

Warning: Some secrets are NOT worksafe and may contain SPOILERS.

01.


__________________________________________________



02.


__________________________________________________



03.


__________________________________________________



04.


__________________________________________________



05.


__________________________________________________



06.


__________________________________________________



07.


__________________________________________________



08.


__________________________________________________



09.


__________________________________________________



10.


__________________________________________________



11.


__________________________________________________



12.


__________________________________________________



13.


__________________________________________________



14.


__________________________________________________



15.


__________________________________________________



16.


__________________________________________________



17.


__________________________________________________



18.


__________________________________________________



19. [repeat]


__________________________________________________



20.


__________________________________________________









Notes:

Secrets Left to Post: 02 pages, 045 secrets from Secret Submission Post #294.
Secrets Not Posted: [ 0 - broken links ], [ 0 - not!secrets ], [ 0 - not!fandom ], [ 1 - too big ], [ 0 - repeat ].
Current Secret Submissions Post: here.
Suggestions, comments, and concerns should go here.

Comments

[(Anonymous)]

I'm pretty sure this won't happen in Disney's lifetime. A company like Disney aims to cover the biggest possible share of its own market, and having characters like the ones you listed means losing a good chunk of their audience. The world won't become progressively more acceptable to alternative lifestyles, there will always be something that will throw society back, there will always be countries (or rather regions of countries) which are less acceptable and would ban these stuff , and even if those people who wouldn't be against a lesbian/Trans*/etc. princess, many (if not most of them) still wouldn't watch movies about them, because they are unable to relate to the characters (like almost all of my liberal friends, they are all about gay rights and equality, but would never watch a show where the focus is on gay/lesbian romance, because they cannot relate to it, they feel alienated). And from a business POV, why would Disney want to include an aromantic princess, for example? The market is just too niche for that, there's not profit in it.

[iggy]

I don't agree. Disney has done multiple biracial relationships, and those are still condemned by a chunk of society. I feel like, thirty years down the line, homosexual relationships will probably be in a similar boat, and Disney won't be too scared of doing one.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

Um, biracial relationships (many which were already presented in the source materials which Disney adopted) and homosexual relationships are really not the same things. Really not.

[iggy]

I know they're not. I didn't mean to compare them on the level of civil rights movement is omg just like the gay rights movement. I apologize.

I simply meant to say that they are two things that sectors of society disapprove of (that were once in one case, or are in the other... in some places, illegal). Basically saying that Disney has evolved with the times in some aspects. As for them being in the source material. Huh? Pocahontas and John Smith weren't actually romantically involved, Esmeralda and Phoebus was pretty much one-sided and Disney turned it into a healthy consensual relationship, and Tiana and Naveen and Milo and Kida were created by Disney.

[(Anonymous)]

ayrt

As for them being in the source material. Huh? Pocahontas and John Smith weren't actually romantically involved, Esmeralda and Phoebus was pretty much one-sided and Disney turned it into a healthy consensual relationship, and Tiana and Naveen and Milo and Kida were created by Disney.

But Pocahontas and John Rolfe were very much so, Esmeralda was basically desired by half of Paris's white male population, people are still confused about Naveen's ethnicity (there are people who think he is white, while others think he is black), so I don't think their relationship really applies here, and while Atlantis is original Disney production, the "white male tames/wins the hot savage chick" is quite an old trope.

[iggy]

That's all true, but your comment stated that the pairings were in the source material? I simply said that they were not. Regarding Esmeralda and Phoebus though, I think there's quite a difference between an ~exotic~ (bleh) woman being desired by men and her actually being written as being in a loving and equal relationship with one. ...Also Esmeralda wasn't even technically Romani in Hugo's novel. She was a changeling. Disney's Esmeralda is very obviously not white. Score one for Disney over Hugo there, imo.

As for Naveen though, why are people arguing over whether he's white or black? He's... pretty obviously not either. Imo.

[(Anonymous)]

Thank you, you said everything I wanted to say.