Pete's Rant Today: Political Correctness

[Tiggerette]

JimmyV mentioned, "I think there is a difference between 'political correctness' and 'adjusting to today's norms'." I agree with this assessment. There are many other non-Disney "hot button" topics, similar to the Washington football team name that provide opportunity to reflect on our collective history as a nation, specifically about our current cultural-norms that are incongruous to the cultural norms of another time.
I believe another podcast touched on whether Disney is an acceptable place to have those discursive opportunities with your family, friends and so on. Personally, I don't know if it's worth-while to make a value judgment on the "should" of a place/time. I think each of us would have a different threshold of what is egregious, as well as the where and whenever of that appropriate place and time. I do think opportunities of "cultural incongruity" allow us to consider other ideas, for at least the exercise of walking in another's shoes, to better understand how diverse this world is, certainly become more aware, and perhaps better co-inhabitants of this planet. I'm glad there was a portion of the podcast set aside to reflect and discuss. It's given me more to ponder. Thank you. -krista "Tigger-ette"


As an aside on gender dynamics: a certain department store has an amazing line of Star Wars clothes for children sizes under 7x. Some of the most thoughtful, interesting and high quality graphic design work I've seen. There were close to 20- 25 different designs between t-shirt, sweatshirts and pajamas. It's squarely in the "boys section" of this store. The "girls section" had 8 designs by another licensed company, which were far less interesting. At least twice a year, I hear about girls being told by their peers that they can't like Star Wars, because it's for boys. I hear this from the girls themselves while at charity events. Merchandising and store placement reinforce this. At a card store, if I want a birthday card for a girl with a Stormtrooper on it, I have to change the gender written on the card (Son, nephew, grandson). That's my personal hot button/rant topic in addition to the great lack of merchandise of female superhero characters as compared to male superheroes. That's about marketing. Black Widow is a strong lead on the animated Disney XD Avengers Assemble, but one would never know it by the merchandise. The same is true for Hera and Sabine on the animated Disney XD Star Wars Rebels.
( Carefully stepping off the rather off-topic rant box.) Cheers!

 

[*NikkiBell*]

Thanks for your support you gorgeous humans!! It means a lot to me, please know that!

The reason I posted it there and not here is because it didn't have anything to do with the podcast, so I figured it would be breaking the rules to post here where my friends are.

Maybe we need a community sub-forum here?

The podcast forum is a community based area. There isn't anything that is off topic, per say, because it is the community of listeners. There would not have been anything wrong with posting your request here.

 

[WebmasterMike]

The podcast forum is a community based area. There isn't anything that is off topic, per say, because it is the community of listeners. There would not have been anything wrong with posting your request here.

What Nikki said!

 

[Princess Jes]

I hadn't really thought of it this way, but now that I think about it, I think you may be on to something. Although the scene with the gorillas who pillage the camp site don't seem to draw any undue attention. Maybe some realistic howler monkeys throwing objects wouldn't be seen as racist. But as soon as the monkeys get too anthropomorphic, then it would cause a firestorm.

In any event, I think that Pete did a great job. That said, I have to admit that I do find the spear chucking "natives" to be a bit over the top. They are a direct replica of what Disney built at DLR, and that was build in the '50's. So what we have in 2015 is a carryover from 1955 sensitivities. And things were a whole lot different then. (And the same could be said for 1971). Sometimes, I think that a test for political correctness should be: "If we were starting from scratch, and a certain thing didn't yet exist, would we create it today?" When I talk to people who try to defend the use of the name "Redskins" for the Washington football team, and I ask them that question, they all have to concede that, no, that name and mascot would never even get suggested let alone approved by the NFL ownership today. So if that is the case, then why perpetuate it? If one were designing the Jungle Cruise today, would the Imagineers include spear chucking natives? I suppose it is debatable, but I personally doubt it. I think there is a difference between "political correctness" and "adjusting to today's norms". Perhaps the difference is a very fine line. But I associate the former with cowering to the demands of an overly sensitive sliver of the population and the latter with conforming to more mainstream societal ideals. 99% of what Pete talked about was right on. But I think that the spear throwers probably cross the line from "an image that is offensive to an overly sensitive sliver of the population" to "an image that would never have been implemented today if the attraction were being designed from scratch". It wouldn't pain me to see that go.

Does the latter not feed the former though?
Over the top political correctness becomes mainstream and therefore becomes what would be considered acceptable. Something to consider also.

The podcast forum is a community based area. There isn't anything that is off topic, per say, because it is the community of listeners. There would not have been anything wrong with posting your request here.

What Nikki said!

Thanks guys, though I'm sure you can see my line of thinking on why I posted it there and not here. Generally the forums have rules against that stuff, but now I know, all is well!

 

[JenM]

As an aside on gender dynamics: a certain department store has an amazing line of Star Wars clothes for children sizes under 7x. Some of the most thoughtful, interesting and high quality graphic design work I've seen. There were close to 20- 25 different designs between t-shirt, sweatshirts and pajamas. It's squarely in the "boys section" of this store. The "girls section" had 8 designs by another licensed company, which were far less interesting. At least twice a year, I hear about girls being told by their peers that they can't like Star Wars, because it's for boys. I hear this from the girls themselves while at charity events. Merchandising and store placement reinforce this. At a card store, if I want a birthday card for a girl with a Stormtrooper on it, I have to change the gender written on the card (Son, nephew, grandson). That's my personal hot button/rant topic in addition to the great lack of merchandise of female superhero characters as compared to male superheroes. That's about marketing. Black Widow is a strong lead on the animated Disney XD Avengers Assemble, but one would never know it by the merchandise. The same is true for Hera and Sabine on the animated Disney XD Star Wars Rebels.
( Carefully stepping off the rather off-topic rant box.) Cheers!

That’s a big deal for me too. When Avengers: Age of Ultron opened this summer, I took pictures of the huge Avengers display at the Disney Store in Times Square because they had absolutely NOTHING with Black Widow on it. It was ridiculous. I posted it on Twitter, and it was re-tweeted more than 50 times and MTV used it in an article about the lack of female superhero merchandise. I did ask a cast member why Black Widow was left off of everything, and he told me it was because “this stuff is really for boys."

Disney has been TERRIBLE in that regard. All of their Guardians of the Galaxy merch left Gamora off of the group shots on the t-shirts. And she was the first character my nephew asked for an action figure of when he saw the movie. Black Widow’s been completely left off of nearly all the Avengers stuff too. Even Hawkeye has a bow & arrow playset. And nobody likes Hawkeye.

Star Wars has been the same thing. They left Princess Leia off of all of the Star Wars merch when it started showing up in the stores, and told a parent via Twitter that they didn’t have any plans to include her in their Star Wars collection.

It does sound like they’re slowly but surely getting the message - after the Leia thing, a #WeWantLeia campaign started via Twitter and they did say there would be more Leia merchandise coming (there’s a Leia costume there now). I just bought Avengers water bottles for my nephews at the Disney Store recently because they FINALLY included Black Widow on it. I thanked them for that at the register, and the cast members told me I wasn’t the first one to tell them that.

But they need to get better. My nephew LOVED Inside Out. It’s his favorite movie right now. But when I go to the Disney Store, the only shirts and PJs that have all of the characters on it are for girls. The bedsheets on their website are for girls. Even the ‘headquarters’ playset is pink. It wasn’t pink in the movie. I have no idea why they decided this movie was just for girls.

When Target announced they were taking the gendered signs down from the toy and bedding sections, I was thrilled. As a little girl who loved everything Star Wars, I hated stores trying to tell me that was just for boys. I heard people complain about Target and say we should just “walk our (bleep) over to the boys section" if we want a shirt. But that’s what I’ve been doing, and I’m tired of it. The only Star Wars t-shirt I had when I was a kid was a boys shirt. I’m sick of going into the guys section for Star Wars and Marvel t-shirts that don’t really fit. Thanks to sites like HerUniverse and WeLoveFine, I’m finally getting NICE geek shirts that I love, and the stores should follow suit.

There’s no reason this stuff should be so strictly gendered in stores. Everyone should be allowed to enjoy it if they want.

 

[JimmyV]

Does the latter not feed the former though?
Over the top political correctness becomes mainstream and therefore becomes what would be considered acceptable. Something to consider.

Not really. The latter, (mainstream views), cannot feed the former, (over the top political correctness). Once something becomes mainstream, by definition it cannot simultaneously be radical. It only works the other way around. But radical thinking can indeed become mainstream thinking. See MLK.

 

[Princess Jes]

Not really. The latter, (mainstream views), cannot feed the former, (over the top political correctness). Once something becomes mainstream, by definition it cannot simultaneously be radical. It only works the other way around. But radical thinking can indeed become mainstream thinking. See MLK.

That was my point, one can feed the other, however, I meant the former feeding the latter. Id just woken up :-(
Note to self: don't post when you can barely open your eyes! Lol

 

[andyman8]

I thought Pete also touched on something very interesting in passing; he talked about how even the podcast crew (much like politicians, media personalities, etc...) cannot usually say fully what they actually think out of fear of being attacked by people (usually anonymously on the internet I might add) who say they were offended. It's a real shame when people in a country that was designed to thrive on arguments and discussion cannot have that open discussion without fear of someone twisting their intent to have some prejudicial meaning. Don't get me wrong, I am all for political correctiveness as an effort to try to make people feel included, but I think there is a significant difference between calling all Mexicans rapists and the complaints these third graders have.

To me, it seems like some almost going looking to be offended or at least use it as a cop-out when they disagree with what someone says. There is a HUGE difference between being offended by and disagreeing with someone. An example: a few years back, a community leader came to speak at our local high school. He and his mother were immigrants from Haiti. He was not necessarily the best at public speaking and was clearly very, very nervous. In passing (and I'd imagine reflecting to the very difficult circumstances he had to endure), he said (keep in mind, at a school in South Florida) that "Cubans had it easy" compared to the Haitians because of the established community and wet-foot, dry-foot. While he didn't say it very eloquently and should've used the phrase "easier than Haitians," I understood what he was trying to say and sorta understood his reasoning. Afterwards, throngs of white, affluent, native U.S. citizen high schoolers come out of that presentation flipping out about how offended they were by that remark. Meanwhile, my mother (who was also in the audience and heard his remark) is an immigrant from Cuba who fled Castro and had to leave everything behind when she was a young girl, making me Latino. Neither of us truly found (nor any of the other Cubans we spoke with who were in the audience that day but they had every right to IMHO) his comments that offensive, but not to worry, we had all of these people complaining to the school and making a fuss about how "offended" they were. Look, they have every right to disagree with what he said, after all what he literally said was inaccurate but you could tell what he meant (again, he was really struggling) it slightly differently, but unless they have parents who or they themselves experienced it, in my opinion, by definition, they cannot be "offended."

So why is that distinction important? Because when someone says they disagree that allows conversation to progress where as most people stop immediately when they hear the word "offended," and in a country where debate has inspired some of the greatest feats I can think of, terminating those discussions would greatly detriment our progress. With political correctness, it started as an effort to try to have people feel included and not be chastised based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc... (i.e. no slurs, blatantly offensive stereotypes, homophobic expressions, discrimination, etc...) but has turned into an easy cop-out to shut down an argument you don't like or shut down someone you don't like.

 

[Batgirl67]

I agree with pete especially when it comes to historically accurate depictions.
How offended would people from the Congo be if they saw that there were white natives?
Is that something the white people are then taking away from them as well?

This is coming from a white female who isn't even american so I have so little to do with the issue, however, it's becoming ridiculous how offended people become and how sheltered also.

Not the same but in terms of political correctness and wrapping society in cotton wool, Pete mentioned on the show a couple of weeks ago about how Id posted on the community board asking for help, and long story short, one DISer got to the point that she found it necessary to "warn" everyone to investigate what I was asking of them because I may be in collusion with an employee from MAC cosmetics to plan a terrorist plot... Really?! Have we become so jaded and suspicious that police officers are targeting unarmed black men, the Congo scene should be "less offensive to black people" and someone asking for help to get items posted internationally is plotting to off some innocent person with a fake package of makeup?!

People need to calm down.
I'm 29 years old (in a month) so I'm a Gen Y, who has grown up in this acceptance era. I think our generation are potentially less religious en mass, (at least in australia my generation are far less religious than our parents generation) and therefore things like same sex marriage/marriage equality is a no brainer for many of us, love is love etc. Pete is right, we don't see colour as much as our parents did, again, they were born in the late 40's, 50's and early 60's presumably, when racism was still quite prevalent.
We have grown up in a time where females are allowed to vote and have the same rights as men, something some countries still don't have today.
We are an equal generation, so my hope is that will continue and sad as it is, as the older generations thin out, that hate will too. There will always be people who are racist, sexist, and homophobic, but I hope that my generation can control that, and not let it swing the other way as these so called 3rd graders have demonstrated.
My generation are those having kids now, let's not teach them this idiocy, but also, let's not teach them the hate either.

Hugs Jess!

 

[KingLlama]

I know this isn't politically correct, but I really wish we could deport anyone who calls them "Reesey's Pieceys" instead of "Reese's Pieces".

Again, just my two cents.

 

[Tom P.]

How about we disqualify from office any politician who cannot correctly distinguish between the words "literally" and "figuratively"? Probably wouldn't be PC, though. They must be "differently grammared people."

 

[LoodlesNoodles]

I love that Pete quoted Stephen Fry, he's one of my personal heroes!

 

[dekraut]

It is so refreshing to hear someone speak their logical, well-thought-out mind. I especially liked the part where Pete discussed how his views and political position has changed over the years. If we would all take the time to realize that our positions can change, and that a changing position doesn't make us weak, we can be more understanding and work together instead of tearing the world apart. We spend too much time shredding society, and not enough time preserving it. As a newer listener (2 years or so) I love your point of view Pete. It makes me rethink my own positions and challenge my own biases. Thanks for making us think.

 

[EmmabaRose]

I consider myself to be quite liberal, and all for PC. But even I found myself going "Oh come on!" at a lot of stuff in that letter. Personally, I can see why people would be uncomfortable with the representation used in the Jungle Cruise. But I don't think it needs to be changed. The whole set-up for that was originally created in the 50's. There is plenty of problematic media from every decade that still circulates today. The difference is that now we see it through modern eyes. We can't just erase difficult things because they make us uncomfortable. Just take it for what it is and move on.

 

[Princess Jes]

I consider myself to be quite liberal, and all for PC. But even I found myself going "Oh come on!" at a lot of stuff in that letter. Personally, I can see why people would be uncomfortable with the representation used in the Jungle Cruise. But I don't think it needs to be changed. The whole set-up for that was originally created in the 50's. There is plenty of problematic media from every decade that still circulates today. The difference is that now we see it through modern eyes. We can't just erase difficult things because they make us uncomfortable. Just take it for what it is and move on.

I'm curious: what do you find "difficult" about the scene in the jungle cruise depicting a historically accurate scene of natives from the Congo, using instruments/weapons that are historically accurate also?

If it was a scene with a field with african Americans working as slaves, maybe that would be culturally insensitive, but I think the entirety of the letter and everything it aimed statue jungle cruise is irrelevant and ridiculous.

 

[EmmabaRose]

I'm curious: what do you find "difficult" about the scene in the jungle cruise depicting a historically accurate scene of natives from the Congo, using instruments/weapons that are historically accurate also?

If it was a scene with a field with african Americans working as slaves, maybe that would be culturally insensitive, but I think the entirety of the letter and everything it aimed statue jungle cruise is irrelevant and ridiculous.

We're not actually disgareeing here. Honestly I haven't ridden it for some years now, but I'm personally not made uncomfortable by it in any way! What I meant was that some people apparently do find it difficult for whatever reason. I just think people should look at it more objectively.

I'm totally with you I think the letter was entirely silly. But I can see by re-reading my wording was confusing, so I'm sorry!

 

[choppee]

So why is that distinction important? Because when someone says they disagree that allows conversation to progress where as most people stop immediately when they hear the word "offended," and in a country where debate has inspired some of the greatest feats I can think of, terminating those discussions would greatly detriment our progress. With political correctness, it started as an effort to try to have people feel included and not be chastised based on race, religion, gender, sexual orientation, etc... (i.e. no slurs, blatantly offensive stereotypes, homophobic expressions, discrimination, etc...) but has turned into an easy cop-out to shut down an argument you don't like or shut down someone you don't like.

Well said! Very thought provoking.