MovieChat Forums > Sleeping Beauty (1959) Discussion > To those who jump on the 'damsel in disr...

To those who jump on the 'damsel in disress' bandwagon

posted 11 years ago by LaMelodyVita
32 replies | jump to latest

First of all, why is it such an issue that Aurora doesn't play a huge role in the progression of the story?

Second of all, Aurora is shunned for being 'weak' because of her inability to act to further the story. I think it's safe to assume that these criticisms come from self-proclaimed feminists. It is also a feminist cause to shun 'victim-blaming', i.e claiming that a girl/woman who becomes intoxicated to the point of unconsciousness, removing her own will, plays a role in any rape that may occur during this state. Yet, Aurora had her will forcibly taken from her and she is labeled with all sorts of negative adjectives from this same group. Why is this blatant victim-blaming permitted with Disney characters? Cinderella is on the receiving end of this double standard as well. She's called 'weak' because she remained under the abusive rule of her stepmother and stepsisters for such a long time. Yet if anyone questions why an actual victim of abuse and/or kidnapping remained so long in the situation, the 'victim-blaming' defense is played yet again. Which is it? Should victims be shunned as weak when they don't act to protect their best interests, or is blaming the victim taboo? Make up your minds.

[–] cheedo 11 years ago

Hear, hear. Also goes for Snow White for the same reasons as Cinderella. Funny you mention feminists. The loudmouthed ones are ridiculously hypocritical about this stuff. Like, they will wildly praise Belle for sacrificing herself for her dad but ignore what Aurora did for a kingdom she didn't even know
, not even complaining as Belle did (no offense to Belle). They want women to be victims but then condemn the victims if they've got a personal grudge against them.

It's also REALLY sexist to both sexes to imply needing a man's help is wrong- implying men aren't good enough to help women and if she does accept it she should be ashamed of herself. It's very arrogant to think you never need help with anything. Besides, every single Disney heroine got help from a man.

Let the storm rage on, the cold never bothered me anyway.

[–] LaMelodyVita 11 years ago

Great points. I think the only reason the first three princesses get backlash is because their movies were made before the 70's. Either that or it's based on a personal bias against the characters or their movies.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] ladylaughinglizard 11 years ago

Wow, I'm a feminist and I disagree with what you are saying and DON't find Sleeping Beauty to be weak. The "decision" to willingly leave the cottage to go to the castel was a practical one. On one hand, she knew the guy in the woods for what, twenty minutes!? (It couldn't have been long - remember it all happens in one day before sunset on her sixteenth birthday) On the other hand, she just puns out she's a princess and it is time to go back to her REAL parents. I mean, come on. I think going back to the family you have probably been curious about that you haven't seen since infancy is the more feminist response than throwing it away sight unseen for a boy you just met!

Victim blaming is a real thing and I don't think it should be brought up so loosey. Any guy who takes advantage of a woman is a pig. You want to flip it around? Ask yourself how you would feel if a guy took advantage of another guy when he was passed out drunk at a party. Hmmm. Wouldn't happen, would it? Because the guy could physically retaliate? If it did happen, would you blame the guy for drinking too much?

[–] cheedo 11 years ago

Well, most of the critics do seem to be feminists. They praise Mulan for supposedly breaking gender roles, praise Pocahontas and Merida for not marrying, praise Belle for not falling for Gaston (which is dumb if you ask me- who would? And she wouldnt even outright tell him no!), Rapunzel is praised for manipulating Flynn, and even the "anti-feminist" Ariel gets praised for being proactive. None of this is even related to equality. Modern feminists have the bad habit of attacking "old fashioned" women, traditional femininity, marriage, letting the man lead or save you, not being proactive, etc. And those are all related to the classic heroines. Check out feministdisney on Tumblr to see them in action.

Not to get too OT but women are almost never victim blamed (thank God!); just the opposite, the court/society back up the woman and wish death on the assaulter. And the horrible thing is, women have so much power in the court, she can get away with a false accusation (as many women have done, ie regretting having sex with a guy the next day), ruining an innocent guy's life. I tend to see more blaming of male assault victims ("men can't be raped! If he has a boner that means he likes it!" "LOL what a wimp to let a girl overpower him." etc.)

As for victim blaming in Disney, I do see that a lot, it's always people's #1 reason for hating Cinderella and often Snow too. Which really shows how spoiled and well-off people are if they honestly think a penniless girl in 1700s France can just give her steps the finger and it's pie after that. No, they'd hurt her worse or let her rot in the streets. And hello, Snow lived with an insane witch! As for Aurora, I hate that when puts others before herself (accepting her duty as princess), she's called spineless. But when Belle, Rapunzel, Mulan, or Pocahontas do it, they're called strong, brave, selfless women. I see courage in all of them, in different ways.

Sorry for the essay. I just have a lot to say about feminism and Disney.

We're collecting dust, but our love's enough.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Furienna (3345) 2 years ago

Even if Aurora had only known Philip for twenty minutes, she did arrange for him to be introduced to her "aunts".
It is hardly fair to see that as unimportant, even if she did what seemed to be her duty without too much fuss.

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] Vaklu 11 years ago

I have no idea why on earth whould people overcomplicate things by discussing feminism and gender roles and such in a Disney movie.

This movie in particular is a pretty close adaptation of a centuries old fairy tale. The movie itself came out 50+ years ago. So why the hell is that people expect it to comform perfectly with todays standards and expectations?

Yes Disney did a hell of a job to modernize it as much as possible. Hence the biiiiiiig action sequence at the end or giving modern personalities to age old characters.

But unless you write a brand new story the old tropes, character archetypes and morals will be there still under the surface.

And while Aurora has an incredibly fun and engaging personality in this movie the sad truth is that storywise she and most of the Disney princesses are still based on and supposed to represent the ideal woman of the age their original stories were written. And that woman is THE antithesis of everything feminism stands for.

And the shocking and most ironic thing is the following.

Do you know who are the characters in Disney movies who are representing the ideal woman of our age and the feminist idol?

They are:

http://i.imgur.com/gLVVM96l.png ( The most obvious example)

http://i.imgur.com/R1vgMqrl.png

http://i.imgur.com/IJQCRbvl.jpg

Yup. Buried under feets of religious male propaganda and human superstition at the core of these characters is the woman we are idolizing today. Gross huh?

So yeah this is why its useless to analyze these movies and try to apply modern values to them. My advice is to appreciate the movies for their fantastic art and as windows to a previous era. But to use them to find role models and use them as guides to life itself? Forget it!

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] 11 years ago

[deleted]

[–] velcronewsletter 11 years ago

because she is boring. we never see her develop. the woman has almost no lines and doesn't get a star role in her own film. what's the point? it's a terrible story to even try to recreate if you read the original and see. she gets to do nothing whatsoever

-----------------------------------------

let's not go to camelot, it is a silly place

[–] cheedo 10 years ago

Why does she need to "do" anything? Which she does, she never just stands there like a tree. So if she just blindly ran off to have an adventure like an idiot for the sake of "doing something" would you guys be happier? I don't understand people's logic when they say that.

I thought the point of characters was, you know, their character. Which Aurora has. She wants more (sound familiar?) but knows better than to be selfish and run off, even when she finally meets someone she likes. She's dutiful, philosophical, a bit free-spirited and lives in her own little world and is pretty admirable for someone with less lines.

You know who lacks development? Belle, Ariel, Jasmine, Esmeralda, Kida, and tons of others. Yet people only say this about the older princesses- especially Aurora. And Fantasia- they have NO lines and LESS screen time than her yet people love those characters, despite SB being a very similar film. I don't get why people make this complaint- it's called SLEEPING Beauty for a reason, and Disney did a great job fleshing out her personality.

Lommy: What if the wolves come?
Arya: Yield.

[–] velcronewsletter 10 years ago

she gets no time to develop a personality. she gets 4 lines and a song. why shouldn't she do something? so many people are bored when a character doesn't do anything, who wants a sleeping teenager as an icon or one to admire?

[–] watcher101 10 years ago

Aurora was a damsel in distress that gets saved by a prince. Ok, so what about Phillip being imprisoned by Maleficent and being saved by the fairies. Strange the people that complain about the damsel in distress thing tend to over look that.

[–] velcronewsletter 10 years ago

strange how nobody here has actually complained about that. nobody is pointing out his rescue by the fairies as being the same deal because he ends up slaying the dragon. which means he got to do something in the end instead of just wait around the entire time

[–] watcher101 10 years ago

He didn't do it on his own though. Not only did the fairies free him and give him the weapons, they also guided him the entire way out of Maleficent's palace, through her army, and past the thorn forest, using their magic all the while. Even in the fight with the dragon, they guided him up the mountain and filled his sword with magic in order to kill the dragon. Basically, all Phillip did in the fight was manage to not die and throw the sword. The fairies clearly state that their magic can only do good, so, basically, they used Phillip as a "tool" to defeat Maleficent.

[–] velcronewsletter 10 years ago

and again, nobody is disputing the fairies give him guidance. that is besides the point

[–] cheedo 9 years ago

who wants a sleeping teenager as an icon or one to admire?

 Quite a few of admire and like Aurora, and for good reason.

Because she doesn't just sleep. She sings, dances, complains that she's treated like a child, plays, finds romance, acts like an awkward teenager, cries when she discovers her life is a lie, goes to the castle selflessly to become queen. This is 'doing' something. This is a personality.

How is that 'nothing'? If people need cheap, stupidly blind action to be entertained, they don't really want good characters, they want entertainment. Aurora does not provide that. She's mysterious, she's ethereal, she makes you wonder about her, which for some of us is interesting and far better than a heroine that goes blundering into adventures for no apparent reason, just for the fake of "doing anything".

Angharad, is that the wind, or just a furious fixation?

[–] 9 years ago

[deleted]

[–] velcronewsletter 9 years ago

she's a underdeveloped mannequin who gets about 10 minutes of adult conciousness in what is supposed to be her own film. if you get that little time, it's not your film. she's a pawn in the game of fairies and in the interests of the kingdom and is pushed around the board to look lovely and do little else. tepid and uninspiring

[–] Housefan2 9 years ago

she's a underdeveloped mannequin who gets about 10 minutes of adult conciousness in what is supposed to be her own film. if you get that little time, it's not your film.

You do realize that the title of a film doesn't necessarily denote the main character or who will have the most screen time and development, right? Let's look at some famous examples.

The Wizard of Oz. We don't see him until over half way through the film and we don't see him in the flesh until the very end.

Julius Caesar. He dies less than half way through his story and his stage/screen time when he's alive is limited because we follow around Brutus, Cassius and the other assassins a great deal of time.

Saving Private Ryan. Doesn't show up until the very end. Very little screen time.

Like the Wizard of Oz, Julius Caesar, and Private Ryan, Princess Aurora isn't so much the main character of the story but rather the driving force of the story. All of the actions of the characters revolve around her. She may not have the most lines, the most screen time, or the be the most developed character but there would be no story without her. They give her enough of a character so we're invested in the outcome of the story (we don't want her to sleep forever) but the movie isn't about her development or her journey. It's about waking her up.

Lizzie

To love another person is to see the face of God! - Les Miserables

[–] velcronewsletter 9 years ago

but there is still very little substance to her. it's still not her film in the end. she is a plot line

[–] cheedo 9 years ago

So are Elsa, Jasmine, and most of the Disney Princes- yet I don't see them receive such accusations.

Aurora has less screen time but that has nothing to do with her personality. We can learn a lot from her in what time we do have, even from the "I Wonder" scene alone. She doesn't need to be as deep as, say, Megara or whoever to have a personality. Why, Tinkerbell doesn't talk at all but her personality is well known.

I drink coffee FOR BREAKFAST.

[–] velcronewsletter 9 years ago

just because you don't see such accusations doesn't mean nobody makes them. i don't think she has much of a personality partly because she has very little time to make an impression. tinkerbell gets far more screen time than aurora does. aurora really doesn't have anything stand out about her in the short time she has and makes very little impression on me

[–] Enigmaticocean77 (2432) 2 years ago

I'm glad that you didn't make it over here from IMDB as facts and logic have no meaning to you.

[–] Alerra (244) 4 years ago

I realize you will most likely not see this post, but I just wanted to chime in.

You are correct. It's NOT her film. It never was SUPPOSED to be her film. It's the fairies' story, right from the beginning. The heroine of the movie is Merriweather. She's the one who provides the solution to Maleficent's curse. She's the one who kills the raven. Aurora provides the impetus for the plot -- but the movie doesn't really tell her story.

And it never really did. She isn't a major player in the source material either. The unnamed youngest fairy (portrayed by Merriweather) has always played the bigger role. And it's worth mentioning that Disney didn't come up with the title. It was Charles Perrault who made the princess the title character, and Disney rolled with it. He didn't even come up with her name.

[–] JulyNoir 10 years ago

Good point. It isn't at all fair that the classic Disney princesses/princes are often on the receiving end of hate for "doing nothing" or being "bland". They're not that at all! No reason for anyone to get all offended and post off-topic stuff. Jeez.

[–] liscarkat (18410) 5 years ago

Modern-day feminists are caught up in dementia about "the patriarchy", a mental disorder that absolves them of responsibility for their idiotic ravings. Have pity on the poor little things.