PDA

View Full Version : Attractions changed due to "political correctness"



Pages : [1] 2

80S ERA
10-10-2001, 10:28 AM
I know this thread has been covered in some way, but I decided to combine all of it into 1 subject.

As a high-profile company, the Disney company has to be sensitive in what types of messages in their attractions could be perceived as communicating. With that said, there are a number of attractions that had to change due to a sensitive group or groups complaints.

Some of them are:
1. Pirates - the scene where pirates were chasing women around balconies had to be modified to give the appearance that the pirates were stealing food instead of chasing the women.
2. Gunshot in Jungle Cruise - eliminated
3. Superstar Limo - totally redesigned after Princess Di tragedy

I find it odd that individuals could find the pirate scene offensive and yet there is a portion of the attraction where "wenches" are being auctioned off. You know, the scene where the pirates are yelling,"We want the redhead! We want the readhead!"

Not that I find it offensive to me personally, but just amazed that some people will complain about anything.

Anyone have any info on what triggered the change in inccident #1 above?

Mass Nerder
10-10-2001, 11:20 AM
I agree 100%. It's almost laughable. Ya know, I always thought Disneyland was a place to go where you could escape the every-day world of today.....and that includes politcaly correct crap. It make me mad.

Alex S.
10-10-2001, 11:57 AM
If it doesn't diminish the show, why is it wrong to avoid elements that will offend somebody? Take half the things that are blindly labelled "political correctness" and substitute the term "politeness". Either works.

Concerning the Pirates change. You're right that it is strange that they changed that bit but left the far more mysoginistic bit in. Isn't it possible that the Imagineers are telling the truth when they say that they just wanted to change the joke?

Yes, pirates likely chased women. But they also likely raped them, maybe we can show that. Some of them probably said "******" a lot; can't we please get that put in?

Pirates is not history, Pirates is entertainment. If the show fails to entertain a portion of the audience I fail to see the "political correctness" of making changes that will make them happier (without reducing the enjoyment of everybody else).

3894
10-10-2001, 12:05 PM
Originally posted by Alex Stroup


Yes, pirates likely chased women. But they also likely raped them, maybe we can show that.


Isn't the suggestion of rape exactly the point of the pirates chasing the women? What else will they do with them once they inevitably catch them?

POC does a brilliant job of skirting around cruelty - the jailhouse dog gag, for example.

Ghoulish Delight
10-10-2001, 12:41 PM
I too always laugh about the continued existence of the wench auction. Maybe they were worried that the pirates in the chasing scene had not yet purchased their bride, so Disney didn't want to advocate shop lifting. :D

A couple other notes. I grew up with un-p.c. pirates. Guess what, I don't chase women attempting to rape them. Fantasy is fantasy. I think the world is over sensitive. But that's just my opinion.

Incidentally, as I understand it, the missing gun on Jungle Cruise is not a pc issue. They disappeared shortly after the incident on Tom Sawyer's Island with the rifles. The first time I rode and noticed them gone, I asked the CM what was up. As you may or may not know, those were real guns. They were loaded with blanks and, for extra safty, the muzzles were capped. That's why they never sounded like a stupid cap gun. Well, it had been no big deal, but due to the many recent saftey issues, state inspectors had started going through the park nitpicking things they hadn't before, the existence of an almost functioning gun being one of those. Not wanting to replace them with terrible cap guns, and not wanting to spend the time/cash to research a suitable replacement to simulate the sound, they axed the guns all together.

Of course, that could just be their official cover story, but it sounds plausible to me.

80S ERA
10-10-2001, 12:42 PM
Originally posted by Alex Stroup
Yes, pirates likely chased women. But they also likely raped them, maybe we can show that. Some of them probably said "******" a lot; can't we please get that put in?


LOL:D

Never thought of it that way. But it just supports my point that if a guest were to look hard enough, they could be offended at just about anything...

Heck, I'm going to go down to City Hall today and tell them that the drunks in POC promotes alcohol drinking! ;)

Cadaverous Pallor
10-10-2001, 12:50 PM
Pirates chase women, to rape them. Bad, take it out.

Pirates sell women, to....rape them! What do you think will happen once they DO get the redhead? Maybe she wants to have sex with these guys....she looks like she wants it, doesn't she? :p

Pirates steal things and burn down the town......what happened to all the people? They probably killed them, or chased them out.....how HORRIBLE!

Pirates shoot at each other while they are drunk. Not only are they intoxicated in public, but they have unlicensed firearms!!!

An amazing amount of offenses against our "civilized" society! How dare they tell it like it is! They should have shown pirates having tea parties or giving toys to children in need!

Ok, enough sarcasm for one thread. PC is a bunch of hooey. If there's only one thing I honor in this world, it's TRUTH. It'd be one thing if the ride was originally designed without the chasing scene. Heck, it'd be another thing if they a)took out the bride auction as well as the chasing or b)closed the whole ride down. At least then, they would be consistently saying "we think children shouldn't see such things." But just changing the part that was easy to change to make a show for the PC patrol is lame.

Cadaverous Pallor
10-10-2001, 12:52 PM
Oh, and I heard that the old Jungle Cruise guns were actual guns that were capped and had blanks in them. When they realized that this was dangerous they took them out and didn't replace them. I think this was more a financial decision than anything.

80S ERA
10-10-2001, 01:11 PM
Originally posted by Cadaverous Pallor
Pirates chase women, to rape them. Bad, take it out.

Pirates sell women, to....rape them! What do you think will happen once they DO get the redhead? Maybe she wants to have sex with these guys....she looks like she wants it, doesn't she? :p

Pirates steal things and burn down the town......what happened to all the people? They probably killed them, or chased them out.....how HORRIBLE!

Pirates shoot at each other while they are drunk. Not only are they intoxicated in public, but they have unlicensed firearms!!!

An amazing amount of offenses against our "civilized" society! How dare they tell it like it is! They should have shown pirates having tea parties or giving toys to children in need!


And what do you think they are doing to do with the dog at the end? Pet it?

BiggJakeMoney
10-10-2001, 01:30 PM
Yes, they will pet the dog. And in the end, instead of shooting eachother from across the room, the pirates will sit down to coffee and have a friendly debate about the objectification of women in today's society.:D

-BJM

EandCDad
10-10-2001, 02:37 PM
Originally posted by Alex Stroup


Pirates is not history, Pirates is entertainment. If the show fails to entertain a portion of the audience I fail to see the "political correctness" of making changes that will make them happier (without reducing the enjoyment of everybody else).

I'm a fan of change on some of these rides because they tend to get stale. I like the fact that the Jungle Cruise skippers have to come up with something funny to say or do in the Hippo pool because they can't just shoot their guns. I didn't mind the POC scene because it was new and I had seen the old one about 50 times. No problem with change here.

However, how big does the portion of the offended audience have to be? I can find someone who could be offended by more on the jungle cruise, POC, Splash Mountain, Big Thunder, Snow White, Peter Pan than has been changed. I can see how they could change those without "reducing the enjoyment" but should they? Should one person being offended require a change? How about 100? Is it a percentage? I'm always leery of the "slippery slope" argument but your logic taken to its extreme would require the removal of American flags in DL since they offended our buddy Mandrake. I can enjoy DL without them, can't I?

Cadaverous Pallor
10-10-2001, 03:06 PM
Just to save face, I need to mention that while I was writing my long post (above) Ghoulish Delight and 80's ERA posted....and then I added my second post without checking if anyone else had posted....hence the duplication of info about Jungle Cruise.

To make matter worse, Ghoulish Delight is my one and only fiance! I feel so bad. :)

Crispy
10-10-2001, 03:13 PM
I just have to say that all of you at DL got a much better rehab of the wench chasing scene that pirates at Walt Disney World. They, they just changed it so all the wenches are chasing the pirates with brooms..... however, there are two pirates that just look out of place. The two pirates are carrying a treasure chest, one in the front and one in the back. Here's what's odd..... they are running in circles. it kinda makes sense to be chasing someone in circles.... but why would two pirates pick up a treasure chest and run in circles with it. Just curious if anyone has seen Pirates at Disneyland Paris (it blows the American versions away!) In the chase room there are two animatronic pirates that sword fight with each other. VERY impressive!

Mr. Crispy

MickeyD
10-10-2001, 03:17 PM
Originally posted by Cadaverous Pallor
To make matter worse, Ghoulish Delight is my one and only fiance! I feel so bad. :)

Sorry, off topic, but welcome to Ghoulish Delight. Ya know, you would have made it easier to figure out if you had followed the example of Napstosgirl and registered as CadaverousPallorsman. ;) You guys are too subtle. (I forget exactly what they say) they practice their terror with "Ghoulish Delight" and your "Cadaverous Pallor" betrays an aura of forboding. Are you guys friends with Welcome Foolish Mortals? :D

Alex S.
10-10-2001, 03:32 PM
Ok, you list all the myriad ways Disney has changed elements of various rides; then you assign the motivation of "stupid political correctness run amok."

Then you are able to point out all the myriad ways in which Disney continues to be politically incorrect.

If it is horribly politically correct, why does Disney only change minor elements rather than the big ones that everybody agrees could easily be viewed as offensive?

Maybe they are just changing show elements, updating gags, and trying to keep things fresh. Coincidentally, that is what the Imagineers frequently tell us when asked by a show element was changed.

Still, I would like someone to explain to me why it is "political correctness" and not "politeness" when something is changed to accommodate people's feelings (without compromising the overall experience).

EandCDad
10-10-2001, 03:58 PM
Originally posted by Alex Stroup
Ok, you list all the myriad ways Disney has changed elements of various rides; then you assign the motivation of "stupid political correctness run amok."

<SNIP>
Still, I would like someone to explain to me why it is "political correctness" and not "politeness" when something is changed to accommodate people's feelings (without compromising the overall experience).

I don't know who the "you" refers to in your post. Are you referring to one person or the whole group? Just curious.

"Political Correctness" seems to be based on offending politically motivated sensibilities. You could substitute the word with politeness in some cases. However, if someone has a different political sensibility (say hunting vs. non hunting) then making a change so as not to offend the non hunting group could be termed "political correctness."

It seems the word has taken on such a negative conotation that no one wants to associate any decision they support with the phrase "Political Correctness."

Do you ever see anything you would term "PC?" Also, how "polite" do we have to be? If one person is offended? How about 10? 20? 2000? 200,000?

I agree with you that some changes are probably made to keep the show fresh and it gets misconstrued as a PC decision.

Sheila
10-10-2001, 04:39 PM
I just have to interject some actual facts into this discussion. It has been stated over and over by those in the know that the changes to POC had ABSOLUTELY NOTHING to do with political correctness.

This is one of those old wives tales that gets repeated so much, people start believing. The reason behind this myth is because a public relations person (who had nothing to do with the rehab) spouted off that "political correctness" was the reason behind the rehab and the inaccurate story stuck.

The Imagineers were (as mentioned earlier in this thread) just freshening up the ride with some new gags.

I hope we can put this story to rest, please. :)

BTW, toy rifles and guns are still sold in WDW in the Pirates of the Caribbean exit shop.

Sheila

Morrigoon
10-10-2001, 05:48 PM
Good thing too, Sheila, because I'm more offended by the current chase scene as an overweight person than I was by the old scene as a woman. I found the fat woman at the end chasing the men far funnier than her chasing food, when there are two single men present.

The new chase scene, for whatever motivation it was changed, is still stupid. It's NOT funny. The old scene was.

merlinjones
10-10-2001, 09:03 PM
>>Still, I would like someone to explain to me why it is "political correctness" and not "politeness" when something is changed to accommodate people's feelings (without compromising the overall experience).<<

Having spent many years developing creative material in the entertainment industry, I found the dictates of the "political correctness" movement to destroy creativity before it could happen.

Reason?: Extreme behavior is the stuff of drama, caricature, satire, comedy, myth, cartoons... general theatricality. When you begin to censor actions of characters or thematics based on potential offense to anyone in a broad market (let alone narrowcasting to the "enlightened"), there are so many contingencies that you quickly start to lose a broad section of possibilty (and authenticity) in storytelling.

The larger your house of rules, the more every product begins to look the same as fewer and fewer storytelling/character elements become acceptable to management types.

This "politeness" doesn't even work to the advantage of the special interest group. Women were once the center of Hollywood storytelling. Now actresses complain there are no good parts. Is it a "phallocentric" culture problem or an old boys network lockout? Not in my view. It just became too difficult to write broadly entertaining stories about women when development and production and marketing executives limited female character behavior to such a narrow band of appropriateness. In the past fifteen years or so, it has been very difficult for a woman to be anything on film other than powerful, sassy and independant at the start of the film and at the end. Where's the dramatic arc possibility? No where. For a long time, women were not allowed to be temptresses, villains, airheads, manipulative, sexual, envious, devisive, dominating or any thing associated with past negative stereotyping - - even if they learned a positive lesson. Consequently, such past women's role triumphs as Scarlett O'Hara, Blanche DuBois, Jezebel, Deliliah, Virginia Woolf, Mrs. Robinson etc. ceased to be a possibility. Yet men could be scoundrels, villains, sexual, manipulative, etc - - the whole range of emotion. So it just became easier to avoid writing about women at all except in the most narrow of ways. Hence no big female stars. No big female roles.

Political Correctness in its earnestness to paint a new world picture, simply paints pretty lies. The material lies flat and dead on the floor, as it no longer reflects or comments on real life and experience. Satire and caricature and relatability become far more scarce as political positions are taken with characters instead of honest paths of reflection.

Look at the difference between Star Trek and Star Trek the Next Generation. Which show reflects our real lives more closely? The first is about flesh and blood characters, blown up to cartoon proportions, the second is about lifeless waxworks setting an example. I can't think of a future more horrible than that of the Next Generation, completely deviod of humor, individuality and passion. Polite it is.. and completely bloodless.

Political Correctness is a fascist lie and it kills art.

slaakker
10-10-2001, 09:35 PM
I don't know what everyone is worried about. Those pirates have been chasing those women for as long as I can remember. I don't think they will be caught any time soon.:D

In the immortal words of Sgt. Hulka... "Lighten up Frances". LOL

Nigel2
10-10-2001, 09:44 PM
I want to see the pirates also sing "A pirate I was meant to be"

If you know the words sing along.

tabacco
10-10-2001, 11:30 PM
trim the sails and roam the sea

[ Let's go defeat that evil pirate ]

We know he's sure to lose,
cuz we know just where to fire it.

We're theivin' balladeers,
a gang of cutthroat mugs.
To fight us off you won't need guns,
just jolly good earplugs.

A pirate I was meant to be...


/me omits the rest out of laziness :)

EandCDad
10-11-2001, 06:13 AM
Originally posted by Morrigoon
I found the fat woman at the end chasing the men far funnier than her chasing food, when there are two single men present.


Sometimes I see something so many times that I sort of fail to notice it anymore, so I could be wrong about this and I apologize if I am. Isn't the last woman chasing the Pirates out of her kitchen with a rolling pin. That is, she doesn't seem to be chasing them to get the food so she can eat it, she seems to be trying to get rid of the Pirates. As a "person of girth" I wasn't offended by that scene.

3894
10-11-2001, 06:27 AM
Originally posted by merlinjones
>>

Women were once the center of Hollywood storytelling. Now actresses complain there are no good parts. Is it a "phallocentric" culture problem or an old boys network lockout? Not in my view. It just became too difficult to write broadly entertaining stories about women when development and production and marketing executives limited female character behavior to such a narrow band of appropriateness. In the past fifteen years or so, it has been very difficult for a woman to be anything on film other than powerful, sassy and independant at the start of the film and at the end. Where's the dramatic arc possibility? No where. For a long time, women were not allowed to be temptresses, villains, airheads, manipulative, sexual, envious, devisive, dominating or any thing associated with past negative stereotyping - - even if they learned a positive lesson. Consequently, such past women's role triumphs as Scarlett O'Hara, Blanche DuBois, Jezebel, Deliliah, Virginia Woolf, Mrs. Robinson etc. ceased to be a possibility. Yet men could be scoundrels, villains, sexual, manipulative, etc - - the whole range of emotion. So it just became easier to avoid writing about women at all except in the most narrow of ways. Hence no big female stars. No big female roles.


It also has to do with ageism, doesn't it? During Hollywood's Golden Age, we had lots of big female stars of a certain age making great films. Is there any current female lead over 40 working regularly (and not as a character actress)? And where are the Cary Grant - Deborah Kerr pairings instead of the Richard Gere-much younger woman?

merlinjones
10-11-2001, 07:42 AM
>>It also has to do with ageism, doesn't it? During Hollywood's Golden Age, we had lots of big female stars of a certain age making great films. Is there any current female lead over 40 working regularly (and not as a character actress)? And where are the Cary Grant - Deborah Kerr pairings instead of the Richard Gere-much younger woman?<<

Ageism is certainly a problem in defining women's roles (I think the sometimes gross older man/younger woman thing - - most Douglass or Hoffman pictures - - is a cultural familiarity in the power circles of filmakers, but alien to most people), but age is just step one in narrowly defining the typical Hollywood female character. After the age and beauty restriction, there is the need for her to be sassy, independant, near-bitchy, strong, wise, articulate, uncompromising, passively dominant, only peripherally sexual, politically correct and generally superior in accepted behavior to any male character - - sort of like a middle aged feminist (the film executives) in an anorexic hot young chick suit. How realistic is this image... and how offputting in its lack of connection to the real world for the typical filmgoer? Idealism is one thing, marketing image another.

But those lusty, broadly defined Golden Age actresses (Vivien Leigh, Bette Davis, Rosalind Russell, Judy Garland, Elizabeth Taylor, Kathryn Hepburn, Deborah Kerr, Julie Andrews, Doris Day, Grace Kelly... even Jane Fonda and Goldie Hawn) were not old at the time of their intitial success, but also in their 20's-40's. Comparing those careers with that of today's women, only a few (Jodie Foster, Sigourney Weaver - - and those are going back a ways) have had a wide and interesting variety of roles. Even our biggest female lead, Julia Roberts, is very narrowly defined in commercial terms. Can you imagine her playing Scarlett, Jezebel or Mrs. Robinson? Her agents would never allow it, production, dvelopment and marketing executives would never allow it.

If an older woman is simply squeezed into a miniskirt like Rene Russo to play the same narrow role, it might as well be a younger woman - - there is no real character to play. TV is even worse. Can you tell the differences in any of the actresses or characters on any of those lawyer/doctor/social-worker/politician dramas? They are like clones, an image for marketing of what women in film perceive themselves to be rather than reflections or caricatures of real life.

Any wonder that someone would rather see lusty, charming male leads of any age act however they want... good or evil or misguided? This is the stuff of drama and entertainment.

Political correctness harms everyone in its limitations, even those that perpetuate it.