DVDizzy Forum

Seems Kirk's poor behavior on the set of his movies, his drug issues, his spending of company money and his affair with someone 8 years younger than him (and a minor) were more the reason for his removal from the company than the fact that his was gay.

Yikes! I had heard about his drug problem, but I thought that was after his Disney days. And the fact that a 23 year old was dating a 15 year old is pretty gross, but then again, Miley Cyrus just did a similar thing.

milojthatch wrote:Seriously, just stop, these characters are not, nor have they ever been gay. You can read it seems into what ever you want to. Case in point, it was mentioned that Jafar was gay. If that was really so, he sure did enjoy that kiss from Jasmine a little too much for a gay man. I mean really guys, give it a break!

Um…noone said that. What I said was that Jafar and several others have been thought of as reflecting negatively on the gay community because they have been given mannerisms and characteristics mostly accepted as “gay” behavior and are then pushed into the role of villain. Accepting that many people believe films for children affect a child’s view of the world, and obviously you must feel so as well considering you are so opposed to the presence of a gay character in “children’s” programming, it’s not a huge leap to say that pairing gay stereotypes up with evil characters inclines children to grow up hating what is considered gay before they even know that’s what it is.

Marce82 wrote:As for the article accusing Disney of basing Cruella and Medusa on drag-queen-like figures...I think that says more about the author than about Disney. Granted, as I said before, SOME characteristics in disney villains are stereotypically related to homosexuals. Doesnt mean its true.

It doesn’t matter if Disney intentionally or unintentionally fitted several of their villains with gay qualities—the fact is that those qualities are there to predispose children’s feelings on a subject before they even understand it.

Would we say something is not sexist/racist/what have you because the creator didn’t intend it to be so? I know I personally wouldn’t. With film, and just about any other source of entertainment, the viewer is much more important in what a film means than the creator.

Hm... Of course there should be a gay character with no stereothypical approach in a children's movie in the near future! You guys already said that very well, but why hide social realities from children? Of course it cannot be anything shocking, sexual, perverted. But gay people ARE NOT more shocking, sexual and perverted than straight people.

But, well... maybe this research is a little bit "the other side" of homosexuality, like a counter-prejudice... just like those first wave's feminists who became sexists, hating men and stuff. I don't think the gay community should hate the straight community, seeing prejudice and intollerance everywhere.

Disney movies show love, and love should not need to be labeled, for it's love in every way. And it's just stupid to ignore that the society we live (beween 1930 and 2009) just hasn't showed enough maturity to accept an explicit gay couple in a kid's movie. And that's not Disney's fault at all...

Kyle wrote: Gays can be perfectly nice people, but it doesnt make it right.

So, what do you think should be done about it? If one person feels exclusively attracted by the same sex, and not a single bit of sentimental and sexual attraction by the opposite sex, and it never was different in this person's life. What do you think this person should do?

Hm, let's see... Avoid falling in love and being unhappy and incomplete forever? Kill him/herself for not being born like "God designed the human being"? A sin solved by another sin? Or even worse: become a preacher, go crazy for the lack of religious vocation and develop pervertion, starting to feel attracted by little children?

People who disagree of homosexuality are just closed-minded, period. No offense, but you should stop reading your manipulated Bibles and start reading History, Sociology and Psychology books. Or else read your Bible with good-sense, putting it where it is: a historical document, made and edited in historical contexts, with historical purposes, by historical people.

God's word is in our heart, and it shows up when we are good people and don't intent to damage others.

"Gays can be perfectly nice people, but it doesnt make it right".

I've always been a nice person. You, for instance, are ideologicaly helping to damage me. So, nothing stops me to believe that I have God in my heart more than you do, though it's not something measurable.

Sorry if I got too personal, but you did the same to me, offended me, keep offending me in your thoughts, and you must know it. (Not 'you' Kyle, but y'all who think and keep saying homosexuality is an effin' choice).

Disney's Divinity, I didn't write what you quoted me as saying. Marce82 did. But to touch on the point that you made, as a kid I never knew Cruela and Medusa were based on drag queens. In fact, I didn't even know what a drag queen was and I certainly don't have anything against drag queens. Both villains are over the top, but I wouldn't say that makes them gay. It makes them comical. I watched 101 Dalmatians more times than I can count and I never developed a prejudice towards gays. Heck, I am gay!

Also, in regards to Jafar being a gay stereotype, while he is flamboyant and flashy, he is also lusting after Jasmine, so I would say he can easily be ruled out. And while Ursula was physically modeled after Devine, I also wouldn't consider her a gay character. Besides, she knows a lot about men and "body language." The only Disney villain that I can see people claiming is gay would be Scar. Not only is he very theatrical, but when he is king, he forces all of the lionesses to the lower level or Pride Rock. However, with how many gay people work for Disney and in feature animation, and also with Elton John involved in the film, I don't think Scar, or any Disney villain, was intended to be gay or perceived that way. And I certainly never thought any of them were growing up or as I've rewatched them as an adult.

As someone who supports gay rights, I find this whole "study" stupid.

It is NOT Disney's JOB to teach children ANYTHING. I agree with others that if gay rights activists wish to have more gays in childrens animation then they should FUND IT THEMSELVES.

Take Veggie Tales for instance. That started as a VERY SMALL company supported by Christian parents, investors, artists, and writers who felt there was not enough Christian entertainment for very young children. Now look where they are.

If there is a market for entertainment for children that puts a positive light on homosexuality, then let a group separate from Disney take care of it. Disney has proven time and they DO support homosexuals. Look at their damn theme parks. Probably over 80% of the cast members are gay. That number may even be higher with the entertainment area of cast members.

^I agree with you. However, there are is one point that hasn't been brought up yet. This isn't Rowling announcing Dumbledore being gay. That was supported by an awful lot of people. On the other hand, with Disney, people a constantly looking for reasons to cry foul every time disney does something that's 0.1% risky. You've seen how people have reacted to*ahem* certain things involving Vanessa Hudgens, Miley Cyrus, and TPATF. It's the whole "sugar-coated" view people have taken of the company, and the execs blindly follow those people, not realizing that it's their fault, and theirs alone.

Disney Duster - studies that protected the identity of the gays and straights alike have found that about 10% of Americans are gay. Multiple studies have found that number to be true, every study I've found is right around there (only a little above or below). I don't think a gay would lie and say they were straight when they knew for a fact their identity was secure. So, gays are a pretty big minority still.

But you must not realize I'm defending you guys. Again, got a gay cousin and friend. Go back and look at my post previous to this - you'll see how I'm defending you if you pay attention.

I don't have any problem with Disney making a movie for blacks. However, why are so many black bloggers and news outlets bashing the movie? If they wanted it done right, they should have made one themselves. Sure, it doesn't have the Disney name - but still, not like there isn't enough talented black animators out there with the resources to start their own studio. They began a record company (Motown), they have magazines all for themselves (Ebony) a TV channel (BET), so why not an animation studio where they can make fairy tale princess movies with an all-black cast that they feel proud of and that represents them?

And when did I ever say animation was for adults?

Look at my previous signature banner:



So we have Benjamin, the has-to-be-gay manatee from "The Little Mermaid: Ariel's Beginning", Dory who is voiced by a gay woman, a purple animal (purple often being considered a 'gay color'), and Tod & Copper - who's bromantic relationship has often been labeled as 'homosexual undertones'. I don't have a problem with gays or Disney's 'gay characters'.

ajmrowland wrote:

However, there are is one point that hasn't been brought up yet. This isn't Rowling announcing Dumbledore being gay. That was supported by an awful lot of people. On the other hand, with Disney, people a constantly looking for reasons to cry foul every time disney does something that's 0.1% risky. You've seen how people have reacted to*ahem* certain things involving Vanessa Hudgens, Miley Cyrus, and TPATF. It's the whole "sugar-coated" view people have taken of the company, and the execs blindly follow those people, not realizing that it's their fault, and theirs alone.

How is it the executives fault if V Hudge releases some naughty pictures or if Miley Cyrus dates someone much older than her? These are people with lives who have free will and make their own choices. Disney does not own them, so I don't see how their personal actions in any way are Disney's fault. I mean, aside from her record deal, Vanessa Hudgens isn't involved with the company very much. And Miley's personal choices haven't been severe enough to ruin her career or her future with Disney.

Siren, then what do you think of The Princess and the Frog? Look, if Disney makes a movie that features gay characters, they will let young children who may turn out to be gay have something that shows them positively, or straight kids (and parents) who can learn about gay people and see them in a positive light. A story that shows what some gay people may go through, what a romance for them would be like, for all audiences. If it's done by Disney, a straight-parented family, or any family, will see the Disney name and be far more likely to buy it, and face it, Disney will do it so very well, so beautifully, so cool, children want it just from the trailers. Also, people will actually hear of it, less likely with some studio just starting out. You see, gays could use a very big movie from a very big studio to show them in a big, beautiful, positive way for a big audience.


Neal, some of those people may have said they were straight because of the same reason any person wouldn't admit they were gay. Because they deny it even to themselves. Or think about it, they may not want to say they're gay to the people doing the study, just feeling embarassed in front of them. And aside from those in denial, there are those who aren't even aware they are gay because they just couldn't accept it, and then those that just fear and are paranoid of something happening to them if they ever said they were.

Well, gays outnumber you on here, and long ago most people liked the same sex (as well as the opposite) in ancient Greece, so and that tells me something, so, I'll just let you go with that.

You are defending some things about gays, but not all. Saying someone is a small, small group, doesn't feel so good, perhaps you may soon understand.

As for how you feel about animation, I know you don't think it's just for kids, of which you are in the minority. The majority of the population thinks it's for kids, at least it seems.

goofystitch wrote:ajmrowland wrote:

However, there are is one point that hasn't been brought up yet. This isn't Rowling announcing Dumbledore being gay. That was supported by an awful lot of people. On the other hand, with Disney, people a constantly looking for reasons to cry foul every time disney does something that's 0.1% risky. You've seen how people have reacted to*ahem* certain things involving Vanessa Hudgens, Miley Cyrus, and TPATF. It's the whole "sugar-coated" view people have taken of the company, and the execs blindly follow those people, not realizing that it's their fault, and theirs alone.

How is it the executives fault if V Hudge releases some naughty pictures or if Miley Cyrus dates someone much older than her? These are people with lives who have free will and make their own choices. Disney does not own them, so I don't see how their personal actions in any way are Disney's fault. I mean, aside from her record deal, Vanessa Hudgens isn't involved with the company very much. And Miley's personal choices haven't been severe enough to ruin her career or her future with Disney.

Agreed. Disney is not babysitting these people 24/7. They choose what they want to do with their time off payroll. If that includes taking risque pictures of themselves, how is that Disney's fault or respondsibility? They are too bankable to just out right fire for something like a few pictures.

Disney Duster wrote:Siren, then what do you think of The Princess and the Frog? Look, if Disney makes a movie that features gay characters, they will let young children who may turn out to be gay have something that shows them positively, or straight kids (and parents) who can learn about gay people and see them in a positive light. A story that shows what some gay people may go through, what a romance for them would be like, for all audiences. If it's done by Disney, a straight-parented family, or any family, will see the Disney name and be far more likely to buy it, and face it, Disney will do it so very well, so beautifully, so cool, children want it just from the trailers. Also, people will actually hear of it, less likely with some studio just starting out. You see, gays could use a very big movie from a very big studio to show them in a big, beautiful, positive way for a big audience.

Then I want Disney to make a movie that puts Pagans in a positive light. I want them to do a whole movie that makes real Pagan witchcraft and Wicca be all about nature and white magick. Do you think the masses will love that? Do you think is is massively marketable to all families?

Look, its not Disney's job to teach kids stuff. They make entertainment first, they throw in morals later. They have characters who could be considered gay, but are not out right saying it because its not important to the story at hand. Disney wants to make movies that EVERYONE will love. That are not made for ONE group.

And again, I use Veggie Tales as my example. Started as a small company, now they made big budget CGI movies. Their movies and books are is a dozen or so major languages. And it all started with a dream and a few thousand dollars. Gays don't NEED Disney to make something good for them.

Yes, most laypeople (parents, regular movie-goers) think animation is just for kids, but tell me one actually animation hobbyist who thinks that? No one. No one on this forum, either. I don't understand what that even has to do with this. Do you think animation is just for kids? Why are you even brining that up? A handful, if anyone, on this forum thinks it's just for kids. But that has no relation to this thread.

How is saying someone is a minority hurtful? I am a teenage male who prefers creative writing and watching Disney movies to playing football and having sex. I'm a definite minority. That's just a fact. Why should that be hurtful?

Also, I know that whites will be the minority race in America within my lifetime. Why should that hurt? It's just a truth.

I don't at all understand how being called a minority is hurtful. I'm not demeaning your population, I'm just stating a fact.

And, I really doubt those studies are wrong. Dozens of studies have produced the same results - from collegiate researchers, to independent, to studies by gays themselves. Even if some people lied, I wouldn't place the percentage at much higher than 15%. Why is that hurtful? It's just a fact. Be proud of who you are. It doesn't mean you are a 'lesser people', minority simply means there's less of you then the others you are among.

But, one man with an extremely loud voice can be heard over ten with weak voices. Minority does not = lesser person.

The same study shows that possibly 40-50% are bi-sexual or at least bi-curious in this country. I'm not trying to flaunt a 'straight-man supremacy', if that's what you're feeling. Because some of the studies that say 10% of people are gay also claim straights are a minority.

I believe gays are born that way. I believe God gave us the gift of childbirth. So, if gays are born gay and God is the one who created procreation, gays cannot be evil.

And, I see the flaws of the Bible, as well. It says eating shell-fish is a sin, that touching dead animal skin is a sin, and that wearing a shirt of two interwoven fabrics is a sin (how many gay- bashers always wear 100% cotton or 100% woolen shirts? How many gay-bashers make sure their football isn't made of animal skin?)

Disney's Divinity, I didn't write what you quoted me as saying. Marce82 did. But to touch on the point that you made, as a kid I never knew Cruela and Medusa were based on drag queens. In fact, I didn't even know what a drag queen was and I certainly don't have anything against drag queens. Both villains are over the top, but I wouldn't say that makes them gay. It makes them comical. I watched 101 Dalmatians more times than I can count and I never developed a prejudice towards gays. Heck, I am gay!

Also, in regards to Jafar being a gay stereotype, while he is flamboyant and flashy, he is also lusting after Jasmine, so I would say he can easily be ruled out. And while Ursula was physically modeled after Devine, I also wouldn't consider her a gay character. Besides, she knows a lot about men and "body language." The only Disney villain that I can see people claiming is gay would be Scar. Not only is he very theatrical, but when he is king, he forces all of the lionesses to the lower level or Pride Rock. However, with how many gay people work for Disney and in feature animation, and also with Elton John involved in the film, I don't think Scar, or any Disney villain, was intended to be gay or perceived that way. And I certainly never thought any of them were growing up or as I've rewatched them as an adult.

Oh--sorry I put the wrong name. Gah. I'll go fix that.

As for everything else you said, I'll direct you to this:

Me wrote:

milojthatch wrote: Seriously, just stop, these characters are not, nor have they ever been gay. You can read it seems into what ever you want to. Case in point, it was mentioned that Jafar was gay. If that was really so, he sure did enjoy that kiss from Jasmine a little too much for a gay man. I mean really guys, give it a break!

Um…noone said that. What I said was that Jafar and several others have been thought of as reflecting negatively on the gay community because they have been given mannerisms and characteristics mostly accepted as “gay” behavior and are then pushed into the role of villain. Accepting that many people believe films for children affect a child’s view of the world, and obviously you must feel so as well considering you are so opposed to the presence of a gay character in “children’s” programming, it’s not a huge leap to say that pairing gay stereotypes up with evil characters inclines children to grow up hating what is considered gay before they even know that’s what it is.

To reiterate, whether or not they were actually made or said to be gay is not the point. Would the Indians in Peter Pan have to directly say, "Hey, I'm a comical bit of racism!" to be seen as such?

Siren wrote:Then I want Disney to make a movie that puts Pagans in a positive light. I want them to do a whole movie that makes real Pagan witchcraft and Wicca be all about nature and white magick. Do you think the masses will love that? Do you think is is massively marketable to all families?

I thought they did something sorta like that already--yeah, it looks like Atlantis didn't do so well. Though Brother Bear did pretty good. And The Lion King did massively well.

Neal wrote:I don't at all understand how being called a minority is hurtful. I'm not demeaning your population, I'm just stating a fact.

I think it's more the fact that you say someone's feelings/concerns/opinions are unimportant because they aren't the majority. But I get that sometimes the minority loses out for the majority.

I'm gay and I don't have a problem being part of a minority. In fact, the fact that we are a minority is what gives us a strong bond. What most people don't understand is that the gay community is just as diverse as the straight community. My boyfriend loves baseball and football, hates the color pink, and the most feminine quality he has is his love for Disney. If the gay community hadn't been so oppressed, we wouldn't have this sense of community and we would be united by a common goal: equality.

Luckily for us, the times are changing. The straight community's attitude towards us and their perceptions of us are changing as well. Recent studies show that about half of Americans are in favor of equal rights, and that number has been drastically increasing over the past 10 years. It's only going to continue to increase. Eventually, we will have our equal rights. And as Shaun Penn stated in his Oscar speech, the people who protested and voted against equal rights will one day feel a great shame when they realize that they fought to keep rights from their children, nieces or nephews, and grandchildren who might turn out to be gay or have friends who are gay.

Yes, the gay community isn't able to be stereotyped, neither are straights. There's feminine straight males, and masculine gay males.

Talking about the Sean Penn thing... have you seen "Prayers for Bobby"? Great movie, it made me think of it.

I did see Prayers for Bobby. That was a wonderful movie. My boyfriend couldn't watch it because about 5 minutes into the movie, he realize that he grew up in the same area and remembered hearing about Bobby's death when he was about 5. It literally hit too close to home for him. For me, it was an emotional experience because a little over a year ago, a friend of mine since elementary school took his life for similar reasons (unaccepting parents).

Considering how cheesy most Lifetime movies are, it was an especially wonderful one. I also liked the similar "A Girl Like Me: The Gwen Araujo Story".

Isn't Wiggins gay? How is the relationship between Timon and Pumbaa?

Really, it's a waste of money all these academic reseaches about Disney films not representing certain minority groups enough.
What about people with AS? Why aren't they represented in Disney cartoon features? Why is there not a cartoon figure for me to identify with? (joking of course, but I really DO have AS).

The fun of Disney cartoon features is precisely that you can identify with creatures that are totally different from you: a wooden puppet, a host of animals such as talking mice; mermaids, fairy-tale princesses, an alien, a beast, talking household appliances that really are enchanted poeple, a wizard, a frog, a dragon, bugs, toys, clocks etc. etc.

If academics think that Disney should educate poeple about certain things they should try to commision them to make educational movies. During the war years Disney made many educational films commisioned by the government. And then there is that cartoon about sexual education: the development of a woman's body .

I really don't know if Disney can be commisioned by anyone to make a cartoon these days, but I think It's a better shot trying this than wasting you money on useless complaints masquerading as academic researches that a certain commercial movie-company doesn't show one thing or the other enough or in the wrong way in movies that are made for entertainment.

Siren, religion is completely seperate from a people! You suddenly changed to a different subject. Beliefs are completely seperate from people, race, or orientation. Showing people as they are, and showing how they are equal to everyone else, in love and everything else human, is completely different from saying one belief is right or works or something. And still, what do you think of The Princess and the Frog? As Disney's Divinity said, there was Brother Bear's native American magic. The Princess and the Frog will have voodoo. I personally disagree with showing any religion or spiritual beliefs in a film meant for everyone, one reason being it will always alienate anyone who doesn't believe in those, but showing a people in a positive light, and saying they love the same way anyone else loves is fact, not belief. And if some close-minded people deny it is fact and say it's belief, it's still not a spirtitual belief, unless they make it one in their closed-minds. In films meant for everyone, they should show that everyone is equal.

Walt Disney himself made the ending of Fantasia less Christian so as not to alienate anyone in his audience. Snow White is quite obviously praying, but she doesn't mention to who (though yes it was obviously intended to be God). I admit Disney seems to just portray the beliefs of the people in whatever setting they choose. European royalty believed in Christ and God, and people in other cultures believed in other things. I suppose that's alright as long as it's not focused on, they don't show their beliefs being what works in or does everything in the world. Aladdin is fine with it's mention of Allah. But Brother Bear and The Princess and the Frog are over-stepping the line. Yet, I'm not complaining, though I wish they would just have the characters be magical, and not say they practice voodoo, even if it's hinted at.

But Neal, like Disney's Divinity said, it's more that you, and others, have said that because we are a minority, what we want should not be paid attention to by the majority. If anything, it's the opposite. The smaller you are, the more help you need. Disney could help us big time.

Also, get this, there are A LOT of gay Disney fans. A LOT of gay people love, and work for Disney. So actually, making a film with gay human lead characters showing them positively would be what A LOT of Disney fans want, it would please and make happy A LOT of Disney's fans. Like I said, there are more gay people on here than straight.

So many Christian people know about the very gay-friendly things Disney does, and yet they still see and buy the films. I know the number would still go down a bit, but Disney could make a movie that shows gays positively that parents just choose to let their kids see, or not, as many parents already do. And the crazy Christians may not buy any Disney movies at all, but the majority of Christians will know they can choose what movies to show their kids, the gay-free movies.