🐱 Disney labels Tinker Bell, Captain Hook as 'potentially problematic’

CatParty

While going through its library of content for films and shows to put on its streaming service, Disney has reportedly labeled a few of its beloved characters as "potentially problematic," according to a report from the New York Times.

Tinkerbell and Captain Hook from the classic 1953 Disney animated movie "Peter Pan" reportedly fall under the category of characters who could possibly require a disclaimer on the Disney+ streaming service, as they could be seen as perpetuating negative stereotypes.

The NYT article says Disney's version of Tinker Bell, based upon J. M. Barrie's 1904 play "Peter Pan" and its 1911 novelization "Peter and Wendy," was flagged for concern because Tinker Bell is jealous of Peter Pan's attention toward Wendy, and because she is "body-conscious."


Captain Hook, who famously has a prosthetic hook where his hand would be, was reportedly flagged because he exposes Disney to accusations of prejudice against disabled individuals due to his villainous nature.


Disney's "Stories Matter" team was responsible for flagging potentially problematic characters and sending their findings to senior leads at the company, current Disney executives reportedly told the NYT.

Stories shape how we see ourselves and everyone around us. So as storytellers, we have the power and responsibility to not only uplift and inspire, but also consciously, purposefully and relentlessly champion the spectrum of voices and perspectives in our world," Disney's Stories Matter Team says on its website. "As part of our ongoing commitment to diversity and inclusion, we are in the process of reviewing our library and adding advisories to content that includes negative depictions or mistreatment of people or cultures. Rather than removing this content, we see an opportunity to spark conversation and open dialogue on history that affects us all. We also want to acknowledge that some communities have been erased or forgotten altogether, and we're committed to giving voice to their stories as well.
We can't change the past, but we can acknowledge it, learn from it and move forward together to create a tomorrow that today can only dream of," the Stories Matter Team says.
Another reported example of a potentially problematic Disney character is Ursula the Sea Witch from Disney's 1989 animated classic "The Little Mermaid."

The NYT article says Disney's team was concerned Ursula could come across as "queer-coded," and therefore her flamboyant behavior is potentially homophobic.

Also, as Ursula is of dark complexion and of a darker, light-purplish skin tone, the villainess was also reportedly a potential target of critics who would see her as a possible racist depiction.


Disney's "Stories Matter" team has been placing advisories on the company's content and products whenever potential problematic content is flagged and acknowledged. The advisory appears before the content is played.

This program includes negative depictions and/or mistreatment of people or cultures. These stereotypes were wrong then and are wrong now. Rather than remove this content, we want to acknowledge its harmful impact, learn from it and spark conversation to create a more inclusive future together," the content advisory reads. "Disney is committed to creating stories with inspirational and aspirational themes that reflect the rich diversity of the human experience around the globe.
Examples of content deemed necessary to receive the advisory by Disney include the animated movies "Aristocats" and "Dumbo."

In Aristocats, a cat with slanted eyes and buck teeth is noted by the team to be "a racist caricature of East Asian peoples." In Dumbo, a murder of crows who perform musical number is noted by the team to be an "homage to racist minstrel shows, where white performers with blackened faces and tattered clothing imitated and ridiculed enslaved Africans on Southern plantations."

Peter Pan is also a recipient of the advisory warning, as the team says the animated film portrays Native Americans in a stereotypical manner.

A celebration between the "Indians" and Peter Pan after the titular character rescues Princess Tiger Lily has characters engaging in "dancing, wearing headdresses and other exaggerated tropes, a form of mockery and appropriation of Native peoples' culture and imagery," the team says.

The Stories Matter Team is consulted by third-party organizations, such as the African American Film Critics Association, GLAAD Media Institute, and the Geena Davis Institute on Gender in Media, among various others.
 
Man, this is some Harrison Bergeron shit, even by Disney standards. Hell, they couldn't stop shilling Tinker Bell as a company mascot after Mickey himself, because I saw her on Disney promotional material all throughout the 2000s.
 
Saying Captain Hook is bad because it makes a disables a villain is retarded. The few permanently disableds I know prefer to be treated like a normal human; obviously some things just don't work that way, but they're not interested in being coddled.
That remind me of Nurse Gullum in South Park.
Edit: Also figuring Tinkerbell is problematic not because she's body conscious; but a lot of the ham planet wine aunts who love Disney favor Tinkerbell. The character isn't body conscious, Disney's target demographic is.
Well I don't want to imagine Chanty "Big Red" Binx or Trigglypuff as Tinkerbell....
 
There's nothing wrong with Tinkerbell. This is really reaching hard. And if you are going to warn that Captain Hook might trigger muh ableism you better do it for every pirate movie you have. Because most of them have peg legs or hook hands.

Might as well slap a warning on everything they show. "Warning! Contains content".
 
They're probably thinking that if they stigmatize their old movies enough, the general public will feel "obligated" watch their new stuff.

Disney's shitty new writers hate that they're only beloved for the classics and they'd love to completely replace them.
 
They're probably thinking that if they stigmatize their old movies enough, the general public will feel "obligated" watch their new stuff.

Disney's shitty new writers hate that they're only beloved for the classics and they'd love to completely replace them.
This is surprisingly true. A lot of the new hires are extremely salty that the old, carefully hand-drawn animation is somehow seen as better than their shitty CGI monstrosities or their live-action abortions

Since they can't beat them with quality, they're going to try to make them an embarassment instead.

It's like some bratty twenty-something that's done nothing with their lives saying "Well sure Grandpa saw combat in WWII, won a medal for bravery, then came home, built a house, and started a huge family.

But he says mean things about minorities and calls gay people fruits! I may be broke, living alone in a shitty studio apartment, and embarassed about my worthless degree and shitty job... but at least I'm WOKE and not some OLD RACIST!"
 
I assume this is true. I read a while back that Disney executives hired and set up a group within the company to ensure things were not offensive and were inclusive. As it was just the current era thing to do.

They went and hired seemingly qualified people, set them up and empowered them to make "positive" changes within the company. They did this naively, without understanding that they are radicals with an extreme ideology that has been nothing but awful for the company and they don't quite know how to reverse course. As in the current political environment, they'll look bad if they fire or disband these groups.

So these people then set forth to find what is problematic and of course, are finding EVERYTHING problematic. Driving the executives and hire ups insane. They set them up in a way that makes them incredibly hard to push back on.

At a time where the company has suffered poorly due to the pandemic. They are endlessly having calls for financial outlays of things that need to be changed in the theme parks. Even down to animatronic animals not be voiced by the right ethnicity.

So yeah, this is more of that. There's people they stupidly hired to find problematic stuff and with current dumb woke ideologies, everything is problematic.
 
Last edited:
These days everyone but Captain Hook is a problem because they are white, but Captain Hook is ok because he's a white male, the perfect Disney villain now.
Clayton is the epitome of everything the current left despises as a toxic white male that bullies his way around and cuts through forests with reckless disregard and kidnaps gorillas. Gaston is basically the same thing as a womanizer, hunter, etc. Only he has charm that acts as a sort of Chad teflon against criticism. Feminazis etc love him because he's just the sort of man they're attracted to even though they would never admit it.

At least Captain Hook *might* be gay...
 
LMAO, these people are insane... ok, I've seen the movie a lot when I was a kid and I remember the scene they're trying to portray as "body-conscious".

Tinkerbell stops on top of a small mirror and she starts to look at herself and realises his hips are too big.


The joke is that she probably has never seen a mirror before, so she has a "omg, that's how I look?" moment. This, basically:

imagen_2022-04-21_015142324.png
It's a gag that goes over anyone's head. When I saw it first, I thought she was mad because her skirt was too short.
 
Back