Much to my chagrin, the post on this blog that has received the most hits is the one in which I linked to an article by a feminist on the evils of the Disney Princesses. I barely even commented on the article; I just provided the link. Over the last couple of months the hits have gone out of sight. I have no idea why and would be really interested to know why.
In my search for the reason, I have come across a better known article on the subject that was published in The New York Times in December, 2006 by Peggy Orenstein, entitled “What’s Wrong with Cinderella?” Seems the feminists have a love hate relationship with Cinderella and her cohorts. What would probably be more of concern to the regular readers of Mary Victrix is the way in which young girls are being hyper-sexualized and the way in which the story’s minimize fatherhood; what concerns the feminists, however, is the do-nothing, girlie-girl image of the Princesses (Mulan and Pocahontas, excepted).
In spite of her uneasiness with pink dresses and tiaras for toddlers Orenstein wonders if the current Princess-mania is part of the third wave of feminism. Women are claiming their “right” to have it all: to be one of the boys and a princess at the same time.
The first wave of feminism was the “fight for suffrage.” During the 60s and 70s of the women’s movement saw its second wave, which “fought for reproductive rights and economic, social and legal equality,” and which eschewed gender image altogether, especially that which made women subject to men, either by way of authority or sexuality. The third wave of feminism, according to Orenstein has reclaimed “sexual objectification as a woman’s right.” In other words the new feminists see nothing wrong with being a sex-object as long as it is on their own terms.
Now that “reproductive rights” are fairly secure, men are not entirely to be exiled from the midst of the Amazons. Now the game of exploitation can be engaged in on a much more level playing field. Now feminists are teaching girls to use their sexuality to secure their independence even further and have fun at the same time. They still remain concerned about issues of equality and the culture which puts so much pressure on girls to look like models and Hollywood actresses, but God forbid anyone teach chastity. They are worried about “age-inappropriate” exposure to the culture of lust, but not about the consequences of an unchaste spirit itself.
Without being paranoid, one would think that in this age of pedophilia, the feminists would be less fearful of chastity and do more to reexamine the dictates of common sense. One can still hope.
Disney is not the worst of it, for sure, what with Bratz dolls and fashions like Abercrombie & Fitch. Still, what remains particularly distressing about Disney is the target age of little girls and the relative “wholesomeness” of the Disney reputation in main-stream culture.
There seems to be a great deal of latent anger against men who have neglected and abused their wives and abandoned their children. We have much work to do in order to restore respect for the institution of fatherhood. Fathers have a tremendous amount of work to do in order to teach their sons to respect their mothers and sisters and to teach girls that not all male attention is exploitative and selfish.
Mary Victrix 
You and I have a lot in common…we exploit the popular. My post on the Joker from back in January has been soaring high. So I wrote another post.
Back on topic, I took a look at that article. I can’t help but laughing at the Princess names attached to everything. Princess-Chair, Princess Pancake. Sort of reminds me of the 1960’s Batman. Bat-Shark-Repelant, Bat-Computer, Bat-Belt, Bat-Copter, Bat-Boat, I’m sure Alfred even served Bat-Breakfast! 🙂
Well, we’ve certainly spiraled out of control and I’m not sure where and how we’re going to get off this very scary ride. The femi-nazis are panicking that the’re losing ground and conservative women are disgusted. At times, though, I do get glimpses of hope beamed my way. (Which is what makes some women panic, I suppose.) For instance, I meet more and more stay-at-home moms lately (well educated, I might add) who left lucrative careers. Granted, they have their few kids and then ‘fix’ themselves to assure not being home FOREVER, but as they stay home, they begin to see the maternal thing ain’t all that bad … it’s very hard work but worth every bit. They wind up being more vulnerable but it also forces their husbands to bear a weight that I think many have stopped bearing. Many families have become so used to living with dual incomes and owning multiple homes, new ‘beamers’ every couple of years, etc that the thought of sacrificing things is frightful. The men know they cannot maintain such standards on one income (for the most part) so they don’t want their wives to stay home! But, once their wives are home and begin socializing with other one-income families, their mentality begins to change. (As I tell my teens, you become who you hang out with so beware!) Some of these women choose to not return back to work as they originally planned. This is a fairly new trend, I think.
This also leads me to another female concern on this Disney trend (as far as femi-nazi conversation goes) to the hope that at some point the medical community will ‘fess up to women that all of these artificial hormones being pumped into the bodies has not done us any good. It’s a short term fix with long-term ramifications. Once that happens, women will be forced to make a choice between serious health issues in the future for the sake of fertility stalling in the present …. or to embrace their fertility and not have to worry about the future ramifications of it all. This to me will be a HUGE piece to the puzzle to destroy the femi-nazi regime. Right now, teenage girls to menopausal women are being put on hormones … or, for some older women, the hysterectomy is recommended or a cauterization (which renders one infertile) … all the solutions render the woman infertile. So, once women go back to embracing their true femininity, maybe then they can start to realize that these sleazy outfits are TRASH.
I don’t know, but somehow I think there will need to be an order to how all of this ultimately unravels. I cannot imagine the immodest clothing for little girls being the start of repairing this damage. To me, it’s the result of it all. Maybe I’m wrong. Apparently, enough people purchase the stuff or it would not continue as it does.
On another note, I happened to read the ol’ Dear Abby this morning (don’t know what it’s called now). I only mistakenly do this about once every 6 months because the headline catches my eye … it’s like a soap opera and I really can’t stand it. Anyway, this college grad female writes in that she graduated from a *different* kind of college and now that she’s home, all the guys she tries to befriend just assume that the night will end under the sheets. She’s disgusted. She goes on to say that she’s not a prude (as if that’s a bad thing to be) but can’t believe how this is just expected now.
Now, I pray this is just *soap opera* nonsense. I pray that what this girls is saying is not true. We are in SERIOUS trouble if it is. I always had a number of male friends and it was understood that it was platonic and never (or rarely) did any of them even think of hitting on me in any way. If they did, they were quickly very embarrassed which doesn’t seem to be the case anymore. I don’t consider my generation to be so innocent, mind you … but this is just something that women BETTER start putting an end to. And, you’re right Father Angelo, fathers at home MUST start to teach their sons some serious manners and serious restraint.
Again, I’m hoping this girl’s story is just nonsense.
Great post Father Angelo, being a male that has been thoroughly indoctrinated into the pro-feminism movement and growing up on the mouse movies, the common thought in society is that theses movies are harmless for little girls to watch and emulate. Being a father of a 4 year old darling princess (not of Disney, but of God), I can say that these movies are crack cocaine to little girls. They can not get enough of them. With the long flowing dresses (not available in stores) and their beautifully embossed diamond tiaras (once again not available in stores, and way out of my budget) how can they not be? It is romanticism on full throttle with prince charming off to rescue them from the evil witch, dragon, wicked step mother, sea urchin, blended family, evil genie, and oh yes positive father figures. Notice that last one, positive father figures, wait there hasn’t been a Disney cartoon made that has one, at least to my knowledge. You think the feminazi would be happy with that one, no positive father authoritative role model in any of the Disney movies. But we all know that. Wait a second, you know what, there are no positive mother figures either, well there is Bambi but his mother gets blown away by the evil man-hunter, and of course there is Dumbo, but she gets sold into some metaphoric slavery, so yup no positive parental figures in any Disney movies. Although I must say the in the Emperor’s New Groove the secondary main character has a pregnant wife and 2 children back on his homestead farm, great movie check it out if you haven’t yet. Alright back to my soap box, I was saying that there are no positive parental figures in the happiest place on earth (not true been there paid $6.00 for a hot dog, I wasn’t too happy about that) movies. Now to equate that to us, dum, dum, dum, so as a Catholic father, husband, and all around nice guy I’m suppose to raise my children in the way, the truth, and the life, and my children are suppose to view my wife and myself as our child’s first step to having a relationship with God the Father, and Our Lady. Meaning that parents are suppose to mirror God the Father, and Our Lady here on earth, so our children can grow stronger in love, and honor towards God, and Mary, to be raised as saints and not as sinners. So as Disney has cleverly taken the parents out of the equation therefore he has taken God and Our Lady out of that very same equation, and sent all the princess down the path in which if not redirected no prince charming can rescue them from. So I don’t know why all the feminists are up in arms about it, Disney is doing what they wanted him to do. Maybe they are lamenting after Hillary’s loss to Obama, and need to take out their aggression. Or maybe, just maybe they are upset at the lives they have lead, and realize it is all a lie, therefore they are wrong, and let’s face it you can’t tell a women that she is wrong
I’ll be the first to admit that it is quite rare, if not almost impossible for a woment that shows true feminity with graces from Our Lady to be wrong.
Pingback: Chivalry Under Fire « Mary Victrix
Follow the money. As Orenstein points out, they’re raking $billions from the “Princess” line alone. Does anyone hold for a second that they care about virtue or innocence, or even feminism? The welfare of children? Please. Every capitalist for himself. Sensibilities be damned. Flood airwaves and schools (and minds) until sales ebb, then move on to the next new thing. The American way. Sex sells. If they can train little girls at a young age into thinking that “being pretty” is important, so much the better.
What’s particularly troubling though, is how parents buy into this nonsense as if they will do damage to their children if they don’t go along. It’s a rare parent that says “no” to this fluff, but parents that do say no are chastised for taking away their child’s “fun”. We’ve been indoctrinated alright (as Skeet says,) but the indocrination goes deeper than mere feminism. You can be conservative, liberal, gay, feminist, traditionalist, atheist or religious; you can work at an abortion clinic or a crisis pregancy center, and people might think you’re a little weird – but, if you don’t allow your kids to watch Disney cartoons…?? That’s really weird. You’ve really lost touch. You’re really, really radical. The horror. You probably deal automatic weapons to Islamics too. The neighbors stop visiting. Extended family speaks in whispers… Parents are afraid to say no to culturally accepted norms for fear of being different and weird in other’s eyes. What a perfect setting for radical materialists (corporate marketers.) They ought to be congratulated for creating it.
At the end of Orenstein’s piece, she talks about an encounter with a woman named Anne McAuliffe in some youth decadence training facility where her daughter runs up and says,
“They have the best pocketbooks here,” she said breathlessly, brandishing a clutch with the words “Girlie Girl” stamped on it. “Please, can I have one? It has sequins!”
“You see that?” McAuliffe asked, gesturing at the bag. “What am I supposed to say?”
Mrs. McAuliffe, you’re supposed have the courage to say, “No.” Then bring your daughter home where she can make use of your cookie sheets, your measuring spoons and your time.
not all princesses are bad but they are not good for boys to watch them soo i won’t let them eany more i just did that when i was littel now sooooo my dad olways when i was the princess wile he was the king soo and me and Lucas played king and queen every sunday and my dad was the king and my mom was the queen and Marc was the priest and Jacquelline was the maid and Adam was the buttler and i was allwase the princess and Lucas was allwase he prince the end.
Yes, Hanna you are always the princess and a good one at that. Not all princesses are bad. I bet Jacquelline makes a good maid and I am sure you really like the idea of Adam as a butler. Actually, I like that idea too.
But Lucas a prince. . . I don’t know.
Pingback: Kings and Queens in Disguise « Catholic+Discussion+Blog