Do you have adblock enabled?
 
If you can read this, either the style sheet didn't load or you have an older browser that doesn't support style sheets. Try clearing your browser cache and refreshing the page.

(Tampa Bay Online)   Disney should quit indoctrinating children with its pro-gay agenda and get back to its traditional family value roots, like evil stepmothers and Song of the South   (tbo.com ) divider line
    More: Unlikely, Disney Co., Robert Iger, Michael Eisner, Disney XD  
•       •       •

1605 clicks; posted to Politics » on 14 Aug 2014 at 1:13 PM (1 year ago)   |   Favorite    |   share:  Share on Twitter share via Email Share on Facebook   more»



189 Comments   (+0 »)
   
View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest

Archived thread
 
2014-08-14 11:55:04 AM  
I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.
 
2014-08-14 12:12:19 PM  

DeaH: I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.


Really? I stopped at the headline.

Anytime someone says "gay agenda" I immediately tune them out for being bigoted morons. Nothing worthwhile can come after that.
 
2014-08-14 12:14:25 PM  
That was, uh, something.

Douglas:  Try more oxygen, less WND.
 
2014-08-14 12:17:00 PM  

Huh. Looks like TBO has pulled TFA.

MacKinnon's "WAHHHH", via Google Cache:

In many ways, the Walt Disney Co. is an exceptional business model. I can't think of a corporation that produces more smiles on the faces of children and adults than the company created by animator Walt Disney in the 1920s.

For the majority of people, everyday life can be a struggle, and the magic of Disney makes those struggles more bearable. Disney shows and movies gave me a much-needed escape when I was a child growing up in poverty. And as an adult, I have enjoyed the company's parks and ships.

That said, since at least 1984, many believe the company has also been in the business of advancing a left-leaning agenda. While some on the left have gone out of their way to smear his memory and name, Walt Disney the man was conservative in nature, and anyone who remembers "The Wonderful World of Disney" knows he created wholesome entertainment.

Beginning with the takeover of the company by Michael Eisner in 1984 and continuing under the leadership of Robert Iger since 2005, it can be argued that Disney has been working overtime to redefine "family values."

Back in the late 1990s when I worked with former Sen. Bob Dole, I had the pleasure to interact with Iger. He was professional, respectful and could not have been more kind or considerate. Since taking over, he has only made the company more profitable. But beyond his fiscal responsibility to shareholders, does Iger have an even greater responsibility to impressionable children?

Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.

The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Disney also pushes the gay agenda by introducing openly gay characters and couples on its children's programing. Again, that is their right, but should they be in the business of entertaining children or indoctrinating them?

Beyond its pro-gay agenda, which now includes halting funding to the Boy Scouts of America, Disney also leans left in its politics. Once again, that is their right. But going back to their children's programming, Michelle Obama has become a fixture on seemingly every Disney Channel show or Disney commercial, with President Barack Obama also incorporated in as many ways as possible.

Last year, Disney reportedly had revenue of more than $45 billion and a net income of more than $6 billion, so there is a good chance Iger and his team don't care if half the nation is troubled that Disney's children's programming is shilling for the Obama White House or any other liberal cause. They have made the corporate decision to push their adult ideology upon children ages 2 to 12, and who's to stop them?

While those who cherish traditional values may not like it, the left controls most of the media, entertainment and "education" in our country. As such, it allows them to re-educate our youth whenever the mood strikes them.

The Disney Co. does much good and brightens the lives of millions around the world, especially children. Because of that, I wish they had stayed in the business of entertaining those children and left the indoctrination to someone else.
 
2014-08-14 12:19:58 PM  

abb3w: Huh. Looks like TBO has pulled TFA.


First the takeover of Disney and now this.

The gaygenda is getting stronger every day...
 
2014-08-14 12:34:32 PM  

DeaH: I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.


I followed a rainbow once. At the end of it, I saw a guy with some skittles being blown by a leprechaun.

So yes, Rainbows are responsible for gaydom.
 
2014-08-14 12:58:35 PM  
What was the gay agenda again?
 
2014-08-14 01:08:57 PM  
 
2014-08-14 01:14:57 PM  

abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible.


i knew god was one of them gays
 
2014-08-14 01:17:28 PM  
The Tampon Tribune should change theirs. It's been stinking for a while now.
 
2014-08-14 01:17:33 PM  
www.witnessesuntome.com

with Mimosas after
 
2014-08-14 01:19:48 PM  
I prefer the Armature-Gay Agenda.  They do it because they love it, not just for the money.
 
2014-08-14 01:20:47 PM  
Look at what's happened because of Disney's gay agenda!

media-cache-ak0.pinimg.com
 
2014-08-14 01:20:57 PM  
companies SHOULD stay out of politics.

except of course when I agree with a company's politics, like Hobby Lobby or W.W. Bridal Boutique.  because then it's a matter of Free Speech and Freedom of Religion and StopOppressingMe.

but all those other companies should shut the fark up.
 
2014-08-14 01:22:31 PM  
Wait... Are the colors of the "gay pride flag" different fro regular rainbow colors? I'm confused.
 
2014-08-14 01:23:23 PM  
content9.flixster.com
 
2014-08-14 01:24:58 PM  
Is the link to the article working for everyone? It worked this morning, but now all I get is a list of articles by MacKinnon. Maybe the paper pulled it?
 
2014-08-14 01:26:28 PM  
But beyond his fiscal responsibility to shareholders, does Iger have an even greater responsibility to impressionable children?


WHOA here!  I'm shocked that a Tampa paper would let such an overt and blatant communist blast the glorious capitalistic free market like this.  Everyone should boycott this obviously red commie loving paper.

I can't believe this drivel is allowed to be published in this day and age!
 
2014-08-14 01:26:51 PM  

Kanemano: [www.witnessesuntome.com image 850x624]

with Mimosas after


Mimosas after 2pm? Honey, those happened during brunch at noon.
 
2014-08-14 01:27:08 PM  
Hey! I like Song of the South!

If you think tarbaby and Unca Remus are racist, that just shows you are racist!

i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-14 01:28:17 PM  
"Mandalay!  I've come aflame again!"
 
2014-08-14 01:28:56 PM  

DeaH: I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.


I stopped at the point when I landed on a page that just listed other stories.

abb3w: Huh. Looks like TBO has pulled TFA.

MacKinnon's "WAHHHH", via Google Cache:In many ways, the Walt Disney Co. is an exceptional business model. I can't think of a corporation that produces more smiles on the faces of children and adults than the company created by animator Walt Disney in the 1920s.

For the majority of people, everyday life can be a struggle, and the magic of Disney makes those struggles more bearable. Disney shows and movies gave me a much-needed escape when I was a child growing up in poverty. And as an adult, I have enjoyed the company's parks and ships.

That said, since at least 1984, many believe the company has also been in the business of advancing a left-leaning agenda. While some on the left have gone out of their way to smear his memory and name, Walt Disney the man was conservative in nature, and anyone who remembers "The Wonderful World of Disney" knows he created wholesome entertainment.

Beginning with the takeover of the company by Michael Eisner in 1984 and continuing under the leadership of Robert Iger since 2005, it can be argued that Disney has been working overtime to redefine "family values."

Back in the late 1990s when I worked with former Sen. Bob Dole, I had the pleasure to interact with Iger. He was professional, respectful and could not have been more kind or considerate. Since taking over, he has only made the company more profitable. But beyond his fiscal responsibility to shareholders, does Iger have an even greater responsibility to impressionable children?

Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.

The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many ...


And I owe you a hooker and some blow for posting this. Thank you!
 
2014-08-14 01:29:17 PM  
abb3w: via Google Cache:
(...)
The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible.


Well, we should blame the Big Guy who started the trend.
1.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-08-14 01:31:31 PM  
I guess this is just the next logical step in "homosexuality isn't something that you're just born with", because apparently Disney is now making kids turn gay by watching their shows. Have you ever heard Mickey Mouse's voice? He's gay as a $3 bill. Thanks Disney!

At least they're not crying about the "Witchcraft" crap any more, because if a Disney movie turns your child to the dark arts, then maybe your Jesus isn't as awesome as you think he is.
 
2014-08-14 01:33:13 PM  
graphicnovel.umwblogs.org
 
2014-08-14 01:34:14 PM  
The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible.

How DARE they use pink, red, orange, yellow, green, turquoise, blue or purple in their goddamn shows!! Why, if black and white TV was good enough for John Wayne and Ronald Reagan, why should we add COLORS?

Y'all know it's the gays who invented color, right? They are the entire reason that Communism rose, did you know that? Without red, we wouldn't HAVE Reds. Same with the Nazis, they used red, too, and look where THAT got us.

Farking gays and their colors...
 
2014-08-14 01:34:23 PM  
Again?  Still?  This has been one of the Catholic League's and Southern Baptists' rants for at least 30 years now.

Still isn't true either.  And so what if it was?
 
2014-08-14 01:34:45 PM  
Once again, conservatives think about homosex way more than actual gays do. They see gay everywhere. Actual gays have actual lives in which homosex is only a small part. Conservatives are in straitjackets screaming "gays! gays! gays!".
 
2014-08-14 01:35:23 PM  
Parents of small children are typically in their 20's and 30's.

This cohort is strongly supportive of gay rights.

Disney is VERY good at producing content that young children enjoy and their parents don't mind them watching.

Disney isn't going to go out of their way to make an overtly pro-gay movie, but there's no way in hell they're going to make an anti-gay one.
 
2014-08-14 01:36:42 PM  
I think anyone who has ever watched Calum Worthy do his job portraying the character "Dez" on the Disney show "Austin & Ally" knows Disney has a pro-gay agenda.

And for that, hundreds of thousands of troubled, conflicted teens are probably grateful.

"Hey, that's ME on the TV screen!"
 
2014-08-14 01:39:07 PM  

Mikey1969: How DARE they use pink, red, orange, yellow, green, turquoise, blue or purple in their goddamn shows!! Why, if black and white TV was good enough for John Wayne and Ronald Reagan, why should we add COLORS?


No, no, no. Pint and turquoise are fine. The gay flag is the colors of the rainbow. Red, Orange, Yellow, Green, Blue, Indigo, and Violet - those are the bad colors. The really scarey part is that the American flag is already two-thirds gay! That's why White is so important. It keeps the gay away.
 
2014-08-14 01:39:14 PM  

abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.


Yeah. Before this insidious plan, there were NEVER rainbows on kid's stuff, and certainly not outside of Disney!
3.bp.blogspot.com
3.bp.blogspot.com

I don't think there's much question that Disney today leans left, but seriously, if that's your best argument about indoctrination, you don't have an argument.
 
2014-08-14 01:41:44 PM  

Kanemano: [www.witnessesuntome.com image 850x624]

with Mimosas Cosmopolitans after

ftfy

You know how I know you're not gay?

;)
 
2014-08-14 01:45:03 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-14 01:47:40 PM  

abb3w: MacKinnon's "WAHHHH", via Google Cache:


When are these idiots gonna learn...nothing disappears from the internet...
 
2014-08-14 01:49:26 PM  

Kanemano: [www.witnessesuntome.com image 850x624]

with Mimosas after


That is hilarious and you have been favorited.
 
2014-08-14 01:50:00 PM  
You guys want to know what the REAL gay agenda is?


It consists entirely of acting like a worthless imbecile until you're 27, then arranging to live with your sister for 2 years while you start school, in exchange for being nanny to her new daughter. 5 1/2 years later, you need to only be paying the internet bill as you are STILL going to school.

At least that is my brother in law's agenda.Goddamn leech. I really don't think he has much more of an agenda, except to hit the Pride Festival each year. Everything else is pretty much a play it by ear thing...
 
2014-08-14 01:51:16 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Yeah. Before this insidious plan, there were NEVER rainbows on kid's stuff, and certainly not outside of Disney!
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 425x319]
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x210]

I don't think there's much question that Disney today leans left, but seriously, if that's your best argument about indoctrination, you don't have an argument.


Plus, the 'former executive' is freaking vague as all get out. Disney is a gigantic corporation. For all we know, this former executive could have worked for ESPN or Miramax and have zero knowledge of the animation or Disney Channel stuff.

Plus, the company apparently went to hell when the Jews took over.
 
2014-08-14 01:51:50 PM  
Bart Simpson: If there's anything fairy tales have taught us is that first wives are perfect and second wives are horrible.
Homer Simpson: Just the opposite of real life.
 
2014-08-14 01:53:05 PM  

scottydoesntknow: DeaH: I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.

Really? I stopped at the headline.

Anytime someone says "gay agenda" I immediately tune them out for being bigoted morons. Nothing worthwhile can come after that.


Gay agenda:

Step 48: Ensure that when anyone hear's the term "gay agenda", they immediately tune it out

As you were citizen.  Your leather chaps will be shipped to you shortly (step 59).
 
2014-08-14 01:54:39 PM  
Wat Disney characters are openly gay?
Feels like I'm missing something.
 
2014-08-14 01:56:19 PM  

FirstNationalBastard: DeaH: I stopped at, "Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda." Because the colors of the rainbow will turn your kids gay. That's the argument. Really.

I followed a rainbow once. At the end of it, I saw a guy with some skittles being blown by a leprechaun.

So yes, Rainbows are responsible for gaydom.


As I was raised Catholic and I remember when the rainbow use to be a wholesome symbol of how God flooded the entire world in anger and almost entirely drowned every person and creature on earth.  Now it is just a sick and twisted representation of love and tolerance of diversity.  Disgusting.
 
2014-08-14 01:59:10 PM  
Stop laughing, guys. It's real.

Watching Pocahontas made me a Powatan indian. Since that day I paint with all the colors of the wind.
Which are totally gay, BTW.
 
2014-08-14 01:59:26 PM  

dstrick44: Wat Disney characters are openly gay?


Gaston was clearly in love with a man... himself.
 
2014-08-14 02:04:33 PM  

abb3w: While some on the left have gone out of their way to smear his memory and name,


How dare they smear a racist and anti-Semite!

// he may have been no more racist or anti-Semitic than his peers, but at best that's damning with faint praise
// and his peers weren't inviting Nazi propagandists over for tea
 
2014-08-14 02:04:34 PM  
The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible.

31.media.tumblr.com
Apparently, they've been doing it for a while.
Sneaky bastards- using ALL THE COLORS!
Whatever happened to this Family-Friendly Disney?
4.bp.blogspot.com
 
2014-08-14 02:07:08 PM  
Seriously, if I were a parent, I wouldn't even let my kids watch Disney.
 
2014-08-14 02:07:20 PM  
I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?
 
2014-08-14 02:11:04 PM  

ladodger34: Plus, the 'former executive' is freaking vague as all get out. Disney is a gigantic corporation. For all we know, this former executive could have worked for ESPN or Miramax and have zero knowledge of the animation or Disney Channel stuff.


Yeah, the home of super-macho, tight-pants, butt-slapping, body-grinding, ball-catching football and the studio that made Chasing Amy. Definitely no gay agenda at THOSE places!

Chexmix, homolibs.
 
2014-08-14 02:11:34 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.


img3.wikia.nocookie.net
 
2014-08-14 02:13:34 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies.


Who cares about that?
 
2014-08-14 02:15:42 PM  

skozlaw: BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

[img3.wikia.nocookie.net image 350x350]


Posted while I was still looking up the same images!

He might be called the exception that proves the rule, perhaps. I would also add Rafiki (he's definitely the savannah's priest figure).
 
2014-08-14 02:15:48 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?
 
2014-08-14 02:17:25 PM  

real_headhoncho: What was the gay agenda again?


to explain it i'll need a theater, chorus line, live orchestra and lots of fabulous costumes
 
2014-08-14 02:18:03 PM  

qorkfiend: I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?


The villain from Hunchback was a government official that justified his actions religiously, I think. There've probably also been a couple of buffoonish ones here and there I imagine...

/we're probably being trolled
 
2014-08-14 02:18:35 PM  

JayCab: skozlaw: BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

[img3.wikia.nocookie.net image 350x350]

Posted while I was still looking up the same images!

He might be called the exception that proves the rule, perhaps. I would also add Rafiki (he's definitely the savannah's priest figure).


*shrugs*

It's bait, what do you expect?
 
2014-08-14 02:20:57 PM  
Disney is not much pro-gay, as they are anti anti-gay.

Personally, I wouldn't describe myself as pro-gay. Just willing to punch anti-gays in the mouth.
 
2014-08-14 02:21:33 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


why would your mind even go there?

THEY MAKE CHILDREN'S MOVIES.  IF YOU WANT YOUR KID TO 'LEARN ABOUT GOD' OR WHATEVER OTHER DIETY TAKE THEM TO THE RELIGIOUS PLACE OF YOUR CHOICE.

Disney is not beholden to put any religious figure in a good, or bad light.  Most of the 'religious' figures are sidelines in a story, not major characters, and who the fark cares how they are portrayed?  Outside of you, apparently.

Children's movies are for entertainment.  If you want children under your care and tutelage to see religious figures in only a good light, don't rent disney movies, and for fark's sake don't let them read the news on any given day.

This is a really dumb thing to even try to converse about.  Movies are entertainment, not religion.
 
2014-08-14 02:22:02 PM  

real_headhoncho: What was the gay agenda again?


Public acceptance of homosexual relationships
 
2014-08-14 02:22:13 PM  
Looking at this tards list of articles, it seems he slurps up Big Derp on a daily basis. "Oooga booga the liberal agenda!"

Yeah that agenda is just heinous. Civil rights, health care. Government that spends tax dollars at home instead of invading useless desert shiatholes for Cheney and his cronies.

I mean, my personal agenda is different. And it mostly involves pointing out constantly all the ways that conservatives are basically the source of all evil in the world, doing and saying things that even Sauron would consider distasteful. Wrap yourselves in a flag and carry and cross while spewing hate and vitriol and xenophobic insanity. It's the conservative agenda of war and death and Jesus that's destroying America. So I consider it my personal duty to shiat on them at any/every opportunity. And I'm currently researching PAC start ups, so I can recruit others to my cause and drive the source of all evil(conservatards) into the tiny little Coventry reservations surrounded by energy field fences, where they can only hurt themselves.
 
2014-08-14 02:23:49 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


img.fark.net

And to the larger point, most literature tends to throw priests to the wolves.  Unless the story is being written by a priest, they tend not to come out well.  For instance, go read Chaucer's Canterbury Tales.  He pretty much marches down the line of religious authorities and kicks them in the balls repeatedly, both in the frame story and the tales themselves (even the fact that the pilgrims are such shameless assmunches could be construed as saying the priests are doing such a bad job that the pilgrims are complete fark-ups; so tales, frame, and meta).  Dante shoved so many Popes in the Inferno they should have referred to the Third Mitre of Hell.

Hell, when you come down to it, the foundational book of Christianity is hilariously anti-priest.  I don't think any Gospel can go more than 4 verses without biatchslapping a priest.  Paul spends most of the rest of the NT complaining churches are being bad (which implies the leaders are piss-poor).  And even the OT has enough corrupt clerics to scare the living daylights out of a harem of altar boys.  In fact, you ought to get your fiver back.  Plunk The Good Book down in front of your buddy, and dare him to find more positive priestly depictions than Disney.  He's gonna owe you.
 
2014-08-14 02:23:55 PM  

whidbey: BojanglesPaladin: There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies.

Who cares about that?


EVERYTHING is about religion to some people. Everything. It's either for it or it's against it.

Why hasn't Disney addressed any of my personal hobbies?! They're biased against them, obviously!
 
2014-08-14 02:24:21 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


I can't think of one. The old baboon from the lion king? Rafiki? Not a lot of priests in cartoons
 
2014-08-14 02:24:34 PM  
Dammit, skozlaw
 
2014-08-14 02:25:38 PM  

qorkfiend: BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?

I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?


Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

www.oddfilms.com
 
2014-08-14 02:27:16 PM  

JayCab: The villain from Hunchback was a government official that justified his actions religiously, I think. There've probably also been a couple of buffoonish ones here and there I imagine...


Claude Frollo was a complete and absolute bastard in the original story. He stabbed the Captain of the archers in the back in a jealous rage, allowed Quasimodo to be tortured in public, and attempted to curse Esmerelda as a demon because he was angry that he had the hots for her before laughing at her hanging on the gallows.

There's also Cardinal Richelieu, another guy who was a complete dick in the original story and who has a relatively controversial history in reality, as well.

Religious Disney villains are villainous because they were villains from their base stories, but acknowledging that reality doesn't sound as good as whining about persecution, I guess.
 
2014-08-14 02:27:58 PM  

Stile4aly: qorkfiend: BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?

I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?

Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

[www.oddfilms.com image 450x291]


The Hunchback bishop.

so it is 50/50 for Disney.  Still better than how the Bible depicts them.
 
2014-08-14 02:33:38 PM  

dstrick44: Wat Disney characters are openly gay?
Feels like I'm missing something.


Not openly, but certain villains (ex. Ratcliffe) read as fops or dandies, and it's VERY hard to tell that trope apart from the sterotypes of camp gay.
 
2014-08-14 02:34:31 PM  

neongoats: Looking at this tards list of articles, it seems he slurps up Big Derp on a daily basis. "Oooga booga the liberal agenda!"

Yeah that agenda is just heinous. Civil rights, health care. Government that spends tax dollars at home instead of invading useless desert shiatholes for Cheney and his cronies.

I mean, my personal agenda is different. And it mostly involves pointing out constantly all the ways that conservatives are basically the source of all evil in the world, doing and saying things that even Sauron would consider distasteful. Wrap yourselves in a flag and carry and cross while spewing hate and vitriol and xenophobic insanity. It's the conservative agenda of war and death and Jesus that's destroying America. So I consider it my personal duty to shiat on them at any/every opportunity. And I'm currently researching PAC start ups, so I can recruit others to my cause and drive the source of all evil(conservatards) into the tiny little Coventry reservations surrounded by energy field fences, where they can only hurt themselves.


been thinking along the same lines myself. i believe it is time for us to end the culture war wwii style, so what's the psychological equivalent of dropping a couple nukes on conservatives. i'm so sick of their nonsense i'm eager to find a way to carry out the genocide of a political ideology
 
2014-08-14 02:36:00 PM  

Satan's Bunny Slippers: Disney is not beholden to put any religious figure in a good, or bad light.


I have not said that Disney has an obligation to portray ANYONE, but thank you for wasting pixels on a point not being made.

It was pointed out to me, and my Weeners was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.

At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.

I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.
 
2014-08-14 02:37:29 PM  
Also worth noting that the discussion was not limited to animated only. Disney did a ton of live-action movies for kids.
 
2014-08-14 02:39:51 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


Well, you lost the bet, you tell us.

I can't think of any significant characters except Friar Tuck and Claude Frollo. And isn't Frollo Victor Hugo's responsibility?

This argument seems poorly thought out, even for you.


Stile4aly: Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

[www.oddfilms.com image 450x291]


That's his knee.
 
2014-08-14 02:40:22 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Also worth noting that the discussion was not limited to animated only. Disney did a ton of live-action movies for kids.


I've given two animated and one live action example. Two examples are based on stories other people wrote long before Disney remade them and in which the religious figures were the antagonists from the start and one of them portrayed the religious figure as a very compassionate and kindly person.

It's YOUR turn to support YOUR thesis.
 
2014-08-14 02:40:53 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Satan's Bunny Slippers: Disney is not beholden to put any religious figure in a good, or bad light.

I have not said that Disney has an obligation to portray ANYONE, but thank you for wasting pixels on a point not being made.

It was pointed out to me, and my Weeners was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.

At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.

I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.


I'll ask again.


Why does it matter?
 
2014-08-14 02:41:40 PM  

Hickory-smoked: Stile4aly: Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

[www.oddfilms.com image 450x291]


That's his knee.


You're no fun.
 
2014-08-14 02:41:54 PM  

phalamir: Stile4aly: qorkfiend: BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?

I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?

Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

[www.oddfilms.com image 450x291]

The Hunchback bishop.

so it is 50/50 for Disney.  Still better than how the Bible depicts them.


They intentionally changed Frollo from an archdecon to a judge to avoid accusations the movie was anti-Christian. Then again his motivations ("she must be in league with the devil for giving me a funny feeling in my pants!") stay the same and he's still always at the church so I can imagine your confusion. He's actually not as much of a villain in the book in that he actually did have compassion for Quasimodo, but then again his decision to put Esmeralda to death as a direct response to spurning his advances also struck me as colder in the book too.
 
2014-08-14 02:42:06 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Satan's Bunny Slippers: Disney is not beholden to put any religious figure in a good, or bad light.

I have not said that Disney has an obligation to portray ANYONE, but thank you for wasting pixels on a point not being made.

It was pointed out to me, and my Weeners was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.

At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.

I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.


Which would be great if it were at all relevant to the topic at hand and not your bizarre derailing of the thread with some whisper of an anti-priest anti-religious agenda that you can't even hold up. Disney isn't even limited to its animation studio so any point you want to make about there being some kind of conspiracy in its films that were all written and directed by different people is complete and utter nonsense. No one was going over the script and saying "hey let's shiat on the christians" like in your dreams where you're persecuted for your dumb farking beliefs.

Shut the fark up.
 
2014-08-14 02:42:27 PM  

qorkfiend: BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?

I'm honestly having a tough time coming up with any clerical figures other than Friar Tuck and Rafiki. Did you have someone specific in mind?


There was the one from Hunchback of Notre Dame who had the song about people burning in hellfire.

/that's the only one I can think of that's depicted negatively
//your god is supposed to be omnipotent
///it doesn't need you to whiteknight it over cartoon movies intended for children
 
2014-08-14 02:43:03 PM  

abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.


Because "rainbow" can only mean "gay", apparantly...

abb3w: Disney also pushes the gay agenda by introducing openly gay characters and couples on its children's programing. Again, that is their right, but should they be in the business of entertaining children or indoctrinating them?


Because children NEVER run into openly gay people, ever.

abb3w: Beyond its pro-gay agenda, which now includes halting funding to the Boy Scouts of America, Disney also leans left in its politics. Once again, that is their right. But going back to their children's programming, Michelle Obama has become a fixture on seemingly every Disney Channel show or Disney commercial, with President Barack Obama also incorporated in as many ways as possible.


I don't watch Disney, but I smell some grade D (for derp) bullshiat here.

Man, that guy sounds like a loon.  I don't know if I should thank you or hit you now, and that's a really odd feeling.
 
2014-08-14 02:46:12 PM  

skozlaw: It's YOUR turn to support YOUR thesis.


Not my thesis. I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.

Satan's Bunny Slippers: Why does it matter?


For you it doesn't, so there is no need for you to concern yourself with it I guess.

moothemagiccow: Which would be great if it were at all relevant to the topic at hand


Yeah a thread about how Disney insidiously inserts subliminal depictions into their product should not discuss disproving those allegations.

Or are you the thread police, and we will get a ticket if we stop talking about the gheys for a minute? No one asked you to post.
 
2014-08-14 02:47:34 PM  
BojanglesPaladin: once again I have tried to derail a thread and got my ass called out on it.
 
2014-08-14 02:49:32 PM  

The My Little Pony Killer: ///it doesn't need you to whiteknight it over cartoon movies intended for children


Again, thank you for demonstrating how poor you are at reading.

I had a guy hit me with a long list of poor or negative depictions of men of the cloth in Disney films, many small, many trivial, and the only positive I could think of to counter was Friar Tuck from half a century ago and even then he was a gluton and a buffoon, though at least a good hearted one.

I figure Farkers in the aggregate have more knowledge than me, so I'm asking for any better examples than the one positive I could think of.
 
2014-08-14 02:52:25 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Not my thesis. I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.


Just as /b/ is not your personal army, fark is not your personal research staff.

BojanglesPaladin: No one asked you to post.


Same to you, buddy.
 
2014-08-14 02:53:43 PM  

Hickory-smoked: BojanglesPaladin: Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?

Well, you lost the bet, you tell us.

I can't think of any significant characters except Friar Tuck and Claude Frollo. And isn't Frollo Victor Hugo's responsibility?

This argument seems poorly thought out, even for you.


Stile4aly: Let's not forget the horny priest in Little Mermaid.

[www.oddfilms.com image 450x291]

That's his knee.


that's what she said
 
2014-08-14 02:53:56 PM  

friday13: Just as /b/ is not your personal army, fark is not your personal research staff.


Thank you for your input.
 
2014-08-14 02:53:59 PM  

Mikey1969: You guys want to know what the REAL gay agenda is?


It consists entirely of acting like a worthless imbecile until you're 27, then arranging to live with your sister for 2 years while you start school, in exchange for being nanny to her new daughter. 5 1/2 years later, you need to only be paying the internet bill as you are STILL going to school.

At least that is my brother in law's agenda.Goddamn leech. I really don't think he has much more of an agenda, except to hit the Pride Festival each year. Everything else is pretty much a play it by ear thing...


This Onion article is for you.

Homosexuality Only Thing Parents Can Accept About Son
 http://www.theonion.com/articles/homosexuality-only-thing-parents-c an- accept-about,36622/
 
2014-08-14 02:54:00 PM  

moothemagiccow: BojanglesPaladin: Satan's Bunny Slippers: Disney is not beholden to put any religious figure in a good, or bad light.

I have not said that Disney has an obligation to portray ANYONE, but thank you for wasting pixels on a point not being made.

It was pointed out to me, and my Weeners was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.

At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.

I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.

Which would be great if it were at all relevant to the topic at hand and not your bizarre derailing of the thread with some whisper of an anti-priest anti-religious agenda that you can't even hold up. Disney isn't even limited to its animation studio so any point you want to make about there being some kind of conspiracy in its films that were all written and directed by different people is complete and utter nonsense. No one was going over the script and saying "hey let's shiat on the christians" like in your dreams where you're persecuted for your dumb farking beliefs.

Shut the fark up.


The idea of anti-clerical bias also assumes that Disney is somehow being more anti-clerical than the general background noise.  Otherwise it isn't a bias, because it isn't leaning away from the norm. So to have an anti-clerical bias, Disney would have to show more bad priests than the general culture. But the Bible spends way more of its time blasting priests than Disney does even depicting priests at all (and we've pretty much shown that Disney's output is at worst statistically neutral with depicting priests).  By BJPal's reasoning, Disney is more pro-clerical than Christianity.
 
2014-08-14 02:57:51 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I don't think there's much question that Disney today leans left


How so? Admittedly I pay very little attention to Disney's exploits but they have always seemed entirely apolitical.
 
2014-08-14 03:00:33 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Not my thesis. I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.


In other words, you're trolling and disrupting things just to be a dick.

You should really consider honest employment as an alternative way to fill your time. It can be quite rewarding.
 
2014-08-14 03:00:40 PM  

phalamir: By BJPal's reasoning, Disney is more pro-clerical than Christianity.


Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias.

What was pointed out to me is that they mostly don't depict people of any faith, but when they do, it is usually in a somewhat negative light.

I still suspect that's a cherry-picked view, but don't have any info to DISPROVE it. The Googles and the Bings are not much help, as they are distracted by depictions of gheys, wimmens and minorities.
 
2014-08-14 03:02:02 PM  

skozlaw: In other words, you're trolling and disrupting things just to be a dick


You are free to post about Disney and they gheys all you want. I did above. Then I got bored and asked about a somewhat related topic. You are not required to participate.
 
2014-08-14 03:05:12 PM  
One change that did happen not too long ago with Disney is that they made the Disney Channel one that focused on girls and made Disney XD to focus on boys.
 
2014-08-14 03:07:39 PM  

skozlaw: Claude Frollo


phalamir: The Hunchback bishop.


The My Little Pony Killer: There was the one from Hunchback of Notre Dame who had the song about people burning in hellfire.


he was actually changed from an archdeacon (which is how he was portrayed in the original novel) to a judge. he was certainly religious, but the actual religious figure portrayed was archdeacon of the church - the guy who confronted frollo in the beginning and made him raise quasimodo
 
2014-08-14 03:08:49 PM  
csb time (and this time it's even kinda sorta on topic): growing up my parents loved taking us to disney world, i think i've been somewhere in the neighborhood of 15 times. anyway several years ago when my younger sister was like 7 our disney trip happened to coincide with gay days at the park. we were surrounded by both kinds of lesbians and lots of dudes in sparkly red shirts (red was apparently the chosen color that year) and my parents handled it surprisingly well. they've unfortunately trended more towards the tea party side of things since oh about jan 21, 2009, despite the fact that they were so horrified by the bush admin that they voted for obama. anyway, years later it turns out that my sister also happens to be a lesbian, though she hasn't come out to mom and dad explicitly yet (but really i can't see how they can't have picked up on the signs yet) and i can understand why she hasn't told them, as fox news seems to be on their tv at all times these days. but i just know that as soon as she does tell them my dad is going to think back to that disney trip and decide that was what turned her gay, and since he planned the trip it will all be his own fault. if it wasn't family it would be deliciously schadenfreudy. however since it is family i'm a bit apprehensive to see how it all plays out. absolute worst case scenario she can always crash with mrs i state your name and myself.
 
2014-08-14 03:10:03 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Or are you the thread police, and we will get a ticket if we stop talking about the gheys for a minute? No one asked you to post.


The difference is we're asking you not to post.
 
2014-08-14 03:10:55 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias.


In Victor Hugo's original text, Frollo was a church official - archdeacon of the Notre Dame cathedral. In the film version, he was turned into a judge - a secular government official, whose preoccupation with the gypsy lay in his view of them as "agents of moral decay" as opposed to deviants of the Church. The Gospel According to Disney said "Disney executives would have no part of Hugo's intent to criticise the church and its leaders for their failure to defend the poor and the powerless" and it was "too controversial". However, in an effort to be as faithful to the text as possible, "the animators did their best to subvert this order from above" by using his visual design to show he was a priest.
 
2014-08-14 03:11:52 PM  

Hickory-smoked: Well, you lost the bet, you tell us.

I can't think of any significant characters except Friar Tuck and Claude Frollo. And isn't Frollo Victor Hugo's responsibility?

This argument seems poorly thought out, even for you.


I for one am shocked by the idea of a cartoon character looking buffoonish.  Portraying traditional authority figures in more humanistic terms as having similar foibles and problems as the common man is something that goes beyond common decency.  Surely Disney never portrayed a judge, politician or police officer with such disrespect before.  If only there was a quick way of searching examples of his previous cartoons to prove my point.
 
2014-08-14 03:17:01 PM  
Thank you for the broken link.

This is like those old people who deal with email without a computer. Their friend prints out the email on a printer, connected to a "computer." The friend then puts the emails in an envelope, addresses it, and mails it, with proper postage, to the recipient.

This newspaper is a fabulous printout of the freeper index for the day.

Liberals must be code for educated white people who don't work in the financial trades.
 
2014-08-14 03:19:07 PM  

mrshowrules: Surely Disney never portrayed a judge, politician or police officer with such disrespect before.


Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.

But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayors to corrupt English governors to diabolical cardinals and viziers, Disney movies DO kinda do that.

Doesn't mean it's an indoctrination conspiracy though. No one wants to watch a movie about the obedient hall monitor who does his duty.
 
2014-08-14 03:21:08 PM  

moothemagiccow: The difference is we're asking you not to post


That's why Drew gave you an ignore option. You are free to use it. I will not be offended. But I am happy to discuss the topic of Disney's purported indoctrination of children on more than just the gheys. You do not need to participate, and are free to have a discussion about rainbow flags for as long as you like. I already did all that.
 
2014-08-14 03:25:12 PM  

Huck And Molly Ziegler: I think anyone who has ever watched Calum Worthy do his job portraying the character "Dez" on the Disney show "Austin & Ally" knows Disney has a pro-gay agenda.

And for that, hundreds of thousands of troubled, conflicted teens are probably grateful.

"Hey, that's ME on the TV screen!"


That's still pro-business agenda. Those confused young children will be thankful for having a character to identify with. And then they will grow up, get married, adopt or find some other way to have a child of their own and then "Oh Disney stuff, I loved that when I was a kid, I'll get some for mine."

Sometimes doing the right thing can make you farkloads of money.
 
2014-08-14 03:26:03 PM  
"If you don't hate something, especially as vehemently as me, obviously you love it and want to gay marry it."

Has the right really sunk to this intellectual low?
 
2014-08-14 03:26:53 PM  

12349876: Mikey1969: You guys want to know what the REAL gay agenda is?


It consists entirely of acting like a worthless imbecile until you're 27, then arranging to live with your sister for 2 years while you start school, in exchange for being nanny to her new daughter. 5 1/2 years later, you need to only be paying the internet bill as you are STILL going to school.

At least that is my brother in law's agenda.Goddamn leech. I really don't think he has much more of an agenda, except to hit the Pride Festival each year. Everything else is pretty much a play it by ear thing...

This Onion article is for you.

Homosexuality Only Thing Parents Can Accept About Son
 http://www.theonion.com/articles/homosexuality-only-thing-parents-c an- accept-about,36622/


Absolutely hilarious. AND spot-on. I award you... The NBA!!
(I ran out of Internets)
 
2014-08-14 03:49:09 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: mrshowrules: Surely Disney never portrayed a judge, politician or police officer with such disrespect before.

Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.

But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayors to corrupt English governors to diabolical cardinals and viziers, Disney movies DO kinda do that.

Doesn't mean it's an indoctrination conspiracy though. No one wants to watch a movie about the obedient hall monitor who does his duty.


Disney was not even close to original in that sense.  That dramatic/comedic theme is as old as the hills.
 
2014-08-14 03:52:35 PM  
s25.postimg.org
 
2014-08-14 03:56:12 PM  
I ran across this little nugget:

"In the more than thirty-five animated features Disney has released since Snow White in 1937, there is scarcely a mention of God as conceived in the Christian and Jewish faiths shared by most people in the Western world and many beyond. Disney's decision to exclude or excise traditional religion from animated features was in part personal - he was raised by a rigidly fundamentalist father - and in part commercial, designed to keep the product saleable in a worldwide market."
 
2014-08-14 03:59:03 PM  

Grungehamster: dstrick44: Wat Disney characters are openly gay?
Feels like I'm missing something.

Not openly, but certain villains (ex. Ratcliffe) read as fops or dandies, and it's VERY hard to tell that trope apart from the sterotypes of camp gay.


I have no gaydar. I just don't see it.
 
2014-08-14 04:08:03 PM  

mrshowrules: Disney was not even close to original in that sense. That dramatic/comedic theme is as old as the hills.


Agreed. My point is that regardless of whether others have done it, Disney does it. And therefore it is likely a true statement to say that Disney disproportionally depicts authority and establishment figures in a negative light (I have not done a detailed analysis of this, but I believe it is certainly true in the post "9 old men" Disney.

Whether Aladin, Pocahontas, Mulan, The Emporer's New Groove, Hercules, etc. They tend to rigorously use a formula involving a downtrodden upstart rebelling against the expectations of the establishment. Which is not novel or unique, and frankly makes for a more interesting story most of the time.

However, exceptions are not uncommon. Frozen, for instance, involves the travails of the ruling family sisters. It may be true[er] in the last few decades than it used to be. Can't find any of that in Winnie the Pooh and Lady and the Tramp and so on. So I think it's hard to say there is a concerted effort to push a certain specific ideology, though I think there is a cohesive worldview in Disney movies of the last two decades that is a little different from the movies prior to the 90s.

In any event, all that singing and dancing in every modern Disney movie is pretty damn gay.
 
2014-08-14 04:08:27 PM  

abb3w: Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.


"A former streetwalker from East St. Louis told me that Douglas Mackinnon takes direct aim at a stuffed panda bear upon ejaculation after having been ferociously pegged by her. She continued to tell me that Mr. Mackinnon seeks to indoctrinate the pubescent kids in his neighborhood by giving them candy, before using cattle prods to force them to ejaculate over a vast array of stuffed animals, porcelain dolls, and 70s-era TV show-themed lunchboxes."

What? It's ever bit as substantive as what this silly little f*cknugget wrote.
 
2014-08-14 04:13:00 PM  

dickfreckle: abb3w: Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.

"A former streetwalker from East St. Louis told me that Douglas Mackinnon takes direct aim at a stuffed panda bear upon ejaculation after having been ferociously pegged by her. She continued to tell me that Mr. Mackinnon seeks to indoctrinate the pubescent kids in his neighborhood by giving them candy, before using cattle prods to force them to ejaculate over a vast array of stuffed animals, porcelain dolls, and 70s-era TV show-themed lunchboxes."

What? It's ever bit as substantive as what this silly little f*cknugget wrote.


Fark needs a "eeeewww" button next to "smart" and "funny".
 
2014-08-14 04:16:35 PM  
It's funny that conservatives now think the President of the United States appearing on the Disney Channel is proof of a secret left-wing bias.

He's the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.
 
2014-08-14 04:17:36 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: In any event, all that singing and dancing in every modern Disney movie is pretty damn gay.


That's more about focusing on girls than any gay agenda.  You can go to Disney XD, the channel aimed at boys, to get away from the singing and dancing.
 
2014-08-14 04:22:18 PM  

12349876: That's more about focusing on girls than any gay agenda.


You can also say that Disney has a pronounced bias toward female protagonists :)

12349876: You can go to Disney XD, the channel aimed at boys, to get away from the singing and dancing.


Ugh. Why would I want to do that? Have you SEEN anything on Disney Television lately? No thanks. I can't make it more than 10 minutes.

Probably because of Disney's insidious conspiracy of subliminally convincing children that inane blather crapfests with 5 second cuts, terrible acting, abysmal dialog and moronic endlessly recycled and regurgitated plots is legitimate entertainment.

Those bastards.
 
2014-08-14 04:23:03 PM  

Confabulat: He's the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.


Exactly. WTF is he doing on children's television?
 
2014-08-14 04:23:13 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Whether Aladin, Pocahontas, Mulan, The Emporer's New Groove, Hercules, etc. They tend to rigorously use a formula involving a downtrodden upstart rebelling against the expectations of the establishment. Which is not novel or unique, and frankly makes for a more interesting story most of the time.


In fairness, the downtrodden upstart rebel is often joined in their rebellion by a person of privilege (Princess Jasmine, Pocahontas, Lady) who is also rebelling against the expectations of society.
 
2014-08-14 04:26:24 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: He's the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Exactly. WTF is he doing on children's television?


Ask this guy.

tothewire.files.wordpress.com
 
2014-08-14 04:28:04 PM  
Wholesome children's television:

img.fark.net

Proof of secret liberal agenda:

encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com
 
2014-08-14 04:32:00 PM  

qorkfiend: BojanglesPaladin: Whether Aladin, Pocahontas, Mulan, The Emporer's New Groove, Hercules, etc. They tend to rigorously use a formula involving a downtrodden upstart rebelling against the expectations of the establishment. Which is not novel or unique, and frankly makes for a more interesting story most of the time.

In fairness, the downtrodden upstart rebel is often joined in their rebellion by a person of privilege (Princess Jasmine, Pocahontas, Lady) who is also rebelling against the expectations of society.


Almost as though Disney is capitalizing (literally) on a cultural value that honors free thought and independence, as well as encouraging children to examine (and if necessary, alter or discard) the rigid strictures that prevent personal growth in children - but also in adults.

We snark a lot about the "Independent Thought Alarms" all over schools, etc; but the fact is that our mythology LURVES apple-cart-upsetters.
 
2014-08-14 04:37:19 PM  
Pro-gay?  You're thinking of the Teletubbies, goo-goo....their rainbow colors, and the purple one with
the purse....it's not a "magic bag"; that's Felix the Cat - the purple one carries a purse.
 
2014-08-14 04:46:28 PM  

Confabulat: Ask this guy.


Citing Sesame Street doesn't have much to do with Disney BTW. Public Television is a whole different thing.

Not to mention the fact that Sesame Street has a long history of featuring first ladies, regardless of party going back to even Barbara Bush and Hillary. It's practically an official function of the Office of the First Lady.

But hey, Maybe you know this stuff better. How many times has Michelle appeared on Disney TV? How many times did Laura Bush? About the same? One more than the other?
 
2014-08-14 04:50:43 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: mrshowrules: Surely Disney never portrayed a judge, politician or police officer with such disrespect before.

Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.

But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayors to corrupt English governors to diabolical cardinals and viziers, Disney movies DO kinda do that.

Doesn't mean it's an indoctrination conspiracy though. No one wants to watch a movie about the obedient hall monitor who does his duty.


You mean a film company with an intended audience of children often portrays any authority figure, religious or not, as a buffoon, incompetent, or outright evil?????


GUYS! BJP JUST FIGURED OUT THE MOST AMAZING THING EVAH!!!!
 
2014-08-14 04:54:43 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: Ask this guy.

Citing Sesame Street doesn't have much to do with Disney BTW. Public Television is a whole different thing.

Not to mention the fact that Sesame Street has a long history of featuring first ladies, regardless of party going back to even Barbara Bush and Hillary. It's practically an official function of the Office of the First Lady.

But hey, Maybe you know this stuff better. How many times has Michelle appeared on Disney TV? How many times did Laura Bush? About the same? One more than the other?


How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.

But that was wholesome, right?

You don't seem very smart.
 
2014-08-14 04:56:28 PM  
Let's face it, if you are offended the President or the First Lady appears on kids' TV, I have to question your patriotism.
 
2014-08-14 04:59:35 PM  

dstrick44: Grungehamster: dstrick44: Wat Disney characters are openly gay?
Feels like I'm missing something.

Not openly, but certain villains (ex. Ratcliffe) read as fops or dandies, and it's VERY hard to tell that trope apart from the sterotypes of camp gay.

I have no gaydar. I just don't see it.


There is a whole "Needs More Gay" episode about how many people see some of the villains (Scar, Ratcliffe, Ursula, etc.) coded as being gay, but it's very hard to tell where the gay tropes start and other traditional villain elements end (ex. Scar's "I shall practice my curtsy" or "you're weird", "you have no idea"; could be seen as him just being a smarmy bastich or could be hinting at him showing a queer side... though the whole "deleted scene of him trying to make Nala his queen" thing really undercuts that example).

Unrelated, but the best thing in "Need More Gay" is when the host first brings up "bi-erasure" the song "Always" starts to play. "No, that's gay Erasure. Very, VERY gay Erasure."
 
2014-08-14 05:04:48 PM  
This is what we did for fun before Photoshop:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_nsibhl1vco
 
2014-08-14 05:05:59 PM  

Confabulat: Let's face it, if you are offended the President or the First Lady appears on kids' TV, I have to question your patriotism.


I'm also having some trouble coming up with a substantive difference between the President appearing on kids' TV versus something like, say, reading a children's book to a class.
 
2014-08-14 05:14:13 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.


www.thehunchblog.com



Frolo and Tuck also sprang to mind; plus Tim Curry's scenery-chewing Richelieu, in the non-animated stuff.
 
2014-08-14 05:15:07 PM  

Confabulat: How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.But that was wholesome, right?You don't seem very smart.


Smart enough to not be confused about the points I have made. I said the President doesn't really belong on children's television in a conversation about Disney TV.

To which you responded by posting pictures of first ladies on non-Disney programs.

But hey, carry on. Maybe you should go see how many times recent Presidents have appeared on Disney TV since that was the question? Is there any bias or disparity in exposing precious snowflakes to CERTAIN presidents?
 
2014-08-14 05:19:41 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.But that was wholesome, right?You don't seem very smart.

Smart enough to not be confused about the points I have made. I said the President doesn't really belong on children's television in a conversation about Disney TV.

To which you responded by posting pictures of first ladies on non-Disney programs.

But hey, carry on. Maybe you should go see how many times recent Presidents have appeared on Disney TV since that was the question? Is there any bias or disparity in exposing precious snowflakes to CERTAIN presidents?


The original comment said "children's television", not "Disney", so comments referencing Sesame Street aren't exactly inappropriate.
 
2014-08-14 05:22:39 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.But that was wholesome, right?You don't seem very smart.

Smart enough to not be confused about the points I have made. I said the President doesn't really belong on children's television in a conversation about Disney TV.

To which you responded by posting pictures of first ladies on non-Disney programs.

But hey, carry on. Maybe you should go see how many times recent Presidents have appeared on Disney TV since that was the question? Is there any bias or disparity in exposing precious snowflakes to CERTAIN presidents?


Ha, narrow your lousy argument down to nonsense.

Grow up. So you get offended seeing the President on kids' TV? You probably were President of your school's Reagan-sponsored Just Say No Club, I bet.

You seem like you need more kids' TV. I don't think you're ready to talk like an adult.
 
2014-08-14 05:23:19 PM  

qorkfiend: The original comment said "children's television", not "Disney", so comments referencing Sesame Street aren't exactly inappropriate.


True. Those are the words used in that particular post. I know, because I used them. In a conversation about Disney television on a thread about Disney.

Also, First Lady =/= President.

So his counterpoint about "OMFG! The Disney TV has Obama all over it!" addressed neither Disney TV nor the President.

But you knew that.
 
2014-08-14 05:23:45 PM  
SOME PRESIDENTS ARE EVIL AND SHOULD NOT BE ON KIDS TV UNLESS THEY AGREE WITH ME
 
2014-08-14 05:24:34 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: qorkfiend: The original comment said "children's television", not "Disney", so comments referencing Sesame Street aren't exactly inappropriate.

True. Those are the words used in that particular post. I know, because I used them. In a conversation about Disney television on a thread about Disney.

Also, First Lady =/= President.

So his counterpoint about "OMFG! The Disney TV has Obama all over it!" addressed neither Disney TV nor the President.

But you knew that.


I was addressing the actual article (which complained about Michelle Obama).
 
2014-08-14 05:27:18 PM  
Besides, Disney is one of the greatest success stories of free market capitalism I can think of.
 
2014-08-14 05:29:31 PM  

Confabulat: So you get offended seeing the President on kids' TV?


Who said I was offended? I'm simply saying that there is no need for the President to be on children's programming. You can agree or disagree.

Confabulat: You probably were President of your school's Reagan-sponsored Just Say No Club, I bet.


You seem to have been really traumatized by the Just Say No thing. Show me on the doll where Barb touched you.
(I'm too old to have had any direct experience with it)

Confabulat: You seem like you need more kids' TV. I don't think you're ready to talk like an adult


Ah. So that's what you are left with. How very... mature of you. You COULD have chosen to educate yourself on the very topics you are discussing and share your findings in a civil discussion, instead you opted for.. well, whatever it is you think you are doing here.

Also, you seem to be more than a little confused about what side I am on when it comes to Disney's nefarious plans to corrupt our childrens. Might want to try reading more carefully, but I'm sure they cover that in the later grades.
 
2014-08-14 05:33:16 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: So you get offended seeing the President on kids' TV?

Who said I was offended? I'm simply saying that there is no need for the President to be on children's programming. You can agree or disagree.

Confabulat: You probably were President of your school's Reagan-sponsored Just Say No Club, I bet.

You seem to have been really traumatized by the Just Say No thing. Show me on the doll where Barb touched you.
(I'm too old to have had any direct experience with it)

Confabulat: You seem like you need more kids' TV. I don't think you're ready to talk like an adult

Ah. So that's what you are left with. How very... mature of you. You COULD have chosen to educate yourself on the very topics you are discussing and share your findings in a civil discussion, instead you opted for.. well, whatever it is you think you are doing here.

Also, you seem to be more than a little confused about what side I am on when it comes to Disney's nefarious plans to corrupt our childrens. Might want to try reading more carefully, but I'm sure they cover that in the later grades.


Ha I don't think careful reading of your posts is going to make me smarter and will surely cause me to lose a few IQ points.

So what if Obama put 10,000 clubs in schools to push a certain agenda? What would be your reaction?

Cause you sucked that shiat up in the 80s.

And I don't think the President "needs" to be on kids' TV, but he's the damn President. He's going to show up. It's like you semi-retarded old men only recognize the ones you want. Why is that? Is Obama not your President?

Be specific.
 
2014-08-14 05:33:45 PM  

Confabulat: I was addressing the actual article (which complained about Michelle Obama).


No you weren't.

Here: I'll show you your own post:
2014-08-14 04:16:35 PM
Confabulat: It's funny that conservatives now think the President of the United States appearing on the Disney Channel is proof of a secret left-wing bias. He's the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.


Maybe you should take a deep breath and stop posting for a sec? I'm really not trying to pick on you, but seriously.
 
2014-08-14 05:33:48 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: qorkfiend: The original comment said "children's television", not "Disney", so comments referencing Sesame Street aren't exactly inappropriate.

True. Those are the words used in that particular post. I know, because I used them. In a conversation about Disney television on a thread about Disney.

Also, First Lady =/= President.

So his counterpoint about "OMFG! The Disney TV has Obama all over it!" addressed neither Disney TV nor the President.

But you knew that.


I did. I'm simply pointing out that Sesame Street is the first thing almost everyone thinks of when they hear the phrase "children's television".

But you knew that.
 
2014-08-14 05:35:03 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Show me on the doll where Barb touched you.


By the way, that was Nancy, not Barb. How old are you exactly?
 
2014-08-14 05:37:01 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: I was addressing the actual article (which complained about Michelle Obama).

No you weren't.

Here: I'll show you your own post:
2014-08-14 04:16:35 PM
Confabulat: It's funny that conservatives now think the President of the United States appearing on the Disney Channel is proof of a secret left-wing bias. He's the PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES.

Maybe you should take a deep breath and stop posting for a sec? I'm really not trying to pick on you, but seriously.


Oh grow the hell up and talk like a real adult. I don't care about the brand name. I was talking about kids' TV. You're the one obsessing over minutae. How long in American history has there even BEEN a Disney TV? I didn't have it as a kid.
 
2014-08-14 05:37:48 PM  

Confabulat: So what if Obama put 10,000 clubs in schools to push a certain agenda? What would be your reaction?


Hadn't thought about it, since that's not what we are discussing, but if I had to guess, I'd say about the same as it was for the President's fitness Club, or the Just Say No stuff, or Michelle's 'Let's all eat Healthy' thing.

Why? YOU seem to see some big difference depending on who is doing it.

Any chance you can get back to the topic at hand?

Confabulat: And I don't think the President "needs" to be on kids' TV, but he's the damn President. He's going to show up.


LOL. Yeah. Sometimes, the President of the United states accidentally walks through a studio taping of a Children's show. Happens all the time.
 
2014-08-14 05:39:38 PM  

Confabulat: You're the one obsessing over minutae.


Behold, you have figured out half of his schtick.
 
2014-08-14 05:41:02 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Any chance you can get back to the topic at hand?


Step 1: Threadjack
Step 2: Complain about other people getting off topic
Step 3: ????
Step 4: Profit! Troll moar
 
2014-08-14 05:41:51 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: So what if Obama put 10,000 clubs in schools to push a certain agenda? What would be your reaction?

Hadn't thought about it, since that's not what we are discussing, but if I had to guess, I'd say about the same as it was for the President's fitness Club, or the Just Say No stuff, or Michelle's 'Let's all eat Healthy' thing.

Why? YOU seem to see some big difference depending on who is doing it.

Any chance you can get back to the topic at hand?

Confabulat: And I don't think the President "needs" to be on kids' TV, but he's the damn President. He's going to show up.

LOL. Yeah. Sometimes, the President of the United states accidentally walks through a studio taping of a Children's show. Happens all the time.


sigh. you are not a smart man. I can't argue philosophy with a rock.
 
2014-08-14 05:43:21 PM  

Confabulat: Oh grow the hell up and talk like a real adult.


That's your reaction to being called out for a straight up "untruth"?

It seems like you are getting mad because you feel foolish, and that's understandable, but all I've done is correct you when you were incorrect.

I would suggest that maybe you would have better results if you took a deep breath and paused to consider your words more carefully before posting because you are kinda all over the place, you are blatantly contradicting your own statements, and getting yourself caught in your own lies, and just hurling invective and insults. It's unbecoming.

And for what? You are currently arguing against positions that aren't even being taken, and you are attacking people for the opposite of what they are saying. Basically you are flailing and you look a little silly. Calm down. Smooth your shirt. Re-read from the top and take another crack at it when you are thinking clearly.

I am happy to have a conversation, but if you are just going to flail around yelling at people, well.. that's just kinda dull.
 
2014-08-14 05:46:21 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: Oh grow the hell up and talk like a real adult.

That's your reaction to being called out for a straight up "untruth"?

It seems like you are getting mad because you feel foolish, and that's understandable, but all I've done is correct you when you were incorrect.

I would suggest that maybe you would have better results if you took a deep breath and paused to consider your words more carefully before posting because you are kinda all over the place, you are blatantly contradicting your own statements, and getting yourself caught in your own lies, and just hurling invective and insults. It's unbecoming.

And for what? You are currently arguing against positions that aren't even being taken, and you are attacking people for the opposite of what they are saying. Basically you are flailing and you look a little silly. Calm down. Smooth your shirt. Re-read from the top and take another crack at it when you are thinking clearly.

I am happy to have a conversation, but if you are just going to flail around yelling at people, well.. that's just kinda dull.


Trust me dude, nothing today will make me feel smarter than this conversation with you.
 
2014-08-14 05:46:42 PM  

grumpfuff: Step 1: Threadjack


I believe we are still discussing the "eeebil conspiracy of Disney to corrupt our precious snowflakes" What are you discussing?

Confabulat: sigh. you are not a smart man. I can't argue philosophy with a rock.


Oh I think the thread speaks for itself. I can at least say I know the words of my own posts, which is apparently more than you can say.

Seriously. Deep breath. Relax.

Now. Tell us why Disney TV is not disproportionally featuring President Obama?
 
2014-08-14 05:47:37 PM  
OK I POSTED SESAME STREET WHEN IT WAS ABOUT DISNEY CHANNEL.

OMG
 
2014-08-14 05:48:24 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Tell us why Disney TV is not disproportionally featuring President Obama?


I have no idea! Do you watch Disney TV? I don't. I don't even have frickin' cable. I assume you watch a lot?
 
2014-08-14 05:48:52 PM  

Confabulat: Trust me dude, nothing today will make me feel smarter than this conversation with you.


Well I'm happy you have achieved some sense of self-worth derived from your interactions on a web site forum. I think it's awesome that your own estimation of your intelligence has been increased and I'm glad I could be part of it.

With that in mind, I suggest that you NEVER go back and read your posts on this thread.
 
2014-08-14 05:49:58 PM  
Also you know, Disney owns The Muppets but not the former Children's Television Workshop but the two are pretty interrelated.

Do you have the Asperger's? You sound like you might.
 
2014-08-14 05:51:00 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: With that in mind, I suggest that you NEVER go back and read your posts on this thread.


ha your silly responses are the best reason why I would! Now if you excuse me, this thread is not about us two.
 
2014-08-14 05:55:57 PM  

abb3w: BojanglesPaladin: Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

[www.thehunchblog.com image 850x467]

Frolo and Tuck also sprang to mind; plus Tim Curry's scenery-chewing Richelieu, in the non-animated stuff.


img.fark.net

www.theblaze.com

/sorry
 
2014-08-14 05:59:52 PM  

Confabulat: Also you know, Disney owns The Muppets but not the former Children's Television Workshop but the two are pretty interrelated.


You are very smart. I want you to feel smart, so I won't point out that Sesame Street is a different property and franchise than the Muppets, kinda like Star Wars and Indiana Jones (or Howard the Duck for that matter) are "interrelated", but separate properties and franchises.

Of course they are ALL owned by Disney now.

EXCEPT for Sesame Street, which is the one you chose to cite in a thread about matters Disney.

But you are very, very smart.
 
2014-08-14 06:00:49 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: I will say this. There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:

Off the top of your head, name any Disney depiction of a priest, monk, friar, reverend, cardinal, or other 'man of the cloth'.

Now how many of them are depicted in a negative light? Evil, drunk, bafoonish, uncaring, unhelpful, etc.
Now how many are depicted in a positive light?


Firstly, it's not anti-clerical for the most part so much as anti-catholic specifically.

Secondly, most of the Disney movies are based on old German, French, and British folktales and writings, intentionally.  The bias has nothing to do with Disney, it's a historical bias from that subset of literature that's inherited by derivative works.

Thirdly, the anti-Catholic bias is... pretty legitimate, when your heroes are plucky independent do-gooders who are learning to trust their own heart and rely on the power of friendship rather than authority figures.  The Church votes a very emphatic 'no' to all of those things.
 
2014-08-14 06:02:20 PM  

Confabulat: OK I POSTED SESAME STREET WHEN IT WAS ABOUT DISNEY CHANNEL.

OMG


That damn Obama driven around in cars, flying in planes. Lincoln didn't need no car, Washington and Jefferson didn't fly in no planes.
Obama is just showing that he is a communist, Muslim, Athiest, time-traveler by doing that. Trying to show he is better than real(I mean white) Presidents.
 
2014-08-14 06:05:29 PM  

Jim_Callahan: Firstly, it's not anti-clerical for the most part so much as anti-catholic specifically.


Could you expand on this? What are some examples other than Hunchback?

See above. Walt Disney seems to have had a pretty solid ban on any direct depictions of religion.
 
2014-08-14 06:07:11 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: EXCEPT for Sesame Street, which is the one you chose to cite in a thread about matters Disney.


It was a joke, you know.

We do that on Fark.
 
2014-08-14 06:08:06 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: Step 1: Threadjack

I believe we are still discussing the "eeebil conspiracy of Disney to corrupt our precious snowflakes" What are you discussing?


You aren't discussing shiat. You're JAQing off, as usual, about some inane crap that has nothing to do with tfa, as usual.

OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

You're like the Ancient Aliens guy. "I'm not saying it's a conspiracy, but it's a conspiracy.
 
2014-08-14 06:08:35 PM  
Hell come to think of it, I submitted this (now broken) link, so I'm the reason you even had this conversation.
 
2014-08-14 06:09:01 PM  

Confabulat: It was a joke, you know.


Wow. Now you were just kidding. AFTER arguing and defending it and getting called out for flat out misrepresentation?

Truly your intellect is dizzying.
 
2014-08-14 06:10:05 PM  

grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!


Not something I actually, you know, said.
 
2014-08-14 06:14:40 PM  

qorkfiend: Confabulat: Let's face it, if you are offended the President or the First Lady appears on kids' TV, I have to question your patriotism.

I'm also having some trouble coming up with a substantive difference between the President appearing on kids' TV versus something like, say, reading a children's book to a class.


It depends on if the book is My Pet Goat.
 
2014-08-14 06:16:06 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.


Let me be clear, I acknowledged that many Disney movies DO portray authority and establishment figures in a negative light, but that's to be expected. It is a TRUE statement, but there is no "OMFG!" about it.
 
2014-08-14 06:21:42 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: How would I know? I don't watch the Disney Channel. But I also grew up in the 1980s and you couldn't shake a stick without seeing Nancy Reagan on kids' TV shouting her Just Say No bullshiat.But that was wholesome, right?You don't seem very smart.

Smart enough to not be confused about the points I have made. I said the President doesn't really belong on children's television in a conversation about Disney TV.

To which you responded by posting pictures of first ladies on non-Disney programs.

But hey, carry on. Maybe you should go see how many times recent Presidents have appeared on Disney TV since that was the question? Is there any bias or disparity in exposing precious snowflakes to CERTAIN presidents?


boomersrememberwhen.com

Does Laugh-IN count? I know I watched it as a kid.
But to answer your question, of the 5 Presidents who could possibly have appeared on the Disney Channel, only the most recent (arguably, the most media-savvy and certainly the most Kenyan) has.
 
2014-08-14 06:25:18 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.


No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.
 
2014-08-14 08:52:38 PM  

grumpfuff: BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: OMG KIDS MOVIES PORTRAY AUTHORITY FIGURES AS JERKS!

Not something I actually, you know, said.

No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.


... without providing any specific examples.
 
2014-08-14 09:15:27 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: abb3w: The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Yeah. Before this insidious plan, there were NEVER rainbows on kid's stuff, and certainly not outside of Disney!
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 425x319]
[3.bp.blogspot.com image 320x210]

I don't think there's much question that Disney today leans left, but seriously, if that's your best argument about indoctrination, you don't have an argument.


Rainbow Brite can def. give you the gay. But i knew this as a straight male and took precautions

/ewwww girls stuff.
 
2014-08-14 09:32:25 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: Confabulat: It was a joke, you know.

Wow. Now you were just kidding. AFTER arguing and defending it and getting called out for flat out misrepresentation?

Truly your intellect is dizzying.


wow I just came back to this thread. The best joke is you don't recognize one when you see one.

Thanks for playing!
 
2014-08-14 09:33:09 PM  
Wow people still get trolled by BJP?
 
2014-08-14 09:41:28 PM  
I'm gonna post it again cause it's not a bad joke really.

Confabulat:
Wholesome children's television:

img.fark.net

Proof of secret liberal agenda:


img.fark.net

Now (and this is the exciting part) tell me how you didn't realize that was a joke.

Be specific, as always.
 
2014-08-14 09:43:29 PM  

Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?


Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.
 
2014-08-14 10:39:09 PM  

Confabulat: Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?

Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.


You have to remember, these days "getting trolled by" == "responded to."

inmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg
 
2014-08-15 03:37:02 AM  

grumpfuff: Confabulat: Fart_Machine: Wow people still get trolled by BJP?

Am I supposed to know the names of these people?

Why would I do that?

I take everyone on Fark at face value. I think trolls were a cute thing in like 2003. In 2014, who does that except the mentally ill or dimwitted?

And no, I don't know the names of any of you. I don't bother or care to read that.

You have to remember, these days "getting trolled by" == "responded to."

inmydaytrollingmeantsomething.jpg


Did right-wingers really get that dumb over a decade? OMG we are all doomed. Good. I'm getting old and burn the whole farker down anyway
 
2014-08-15 07:13:23 AM  

abb3w: Huh. Looks like TBO has pulled TFA.

MacKinnon's "WAHHHH", via Google Cache:In many ways, the Walt Disney Co. is an exceptional business model. I can't think of a corporation that produces more smiles on the faces of children and adults than the company created by animator Walt Disney in the 1920s.

For the majority of people, everyday life can be a struggle, and the magic of Disney makes those struggles more bearable. Disney shows and movies gave me a much-needed escape when I was a child growing up in poverty. And as an adult, I have enjoyed the company's parks and ships.

That said, since at least 1984, many believe the company has also been in the business of advancing a left-leaning agenda. While some on the left have gone out of their way to smear his memory and name, Walt Disney the man was conservative in nature, and anyone who remembers "The Wonderful World of Disney" knows he created wholesome entertainment.

Beginning with the takeover of the company by Michael Eisner in 1984 and continuing under the leadership of Robert Iger since 2005, it can be argued that Disney has been working overtime to redefine "family values."

Back in the late 1990s when I worked with former Sen. Bob Dole, I had the pleasure to interact with Iger. He was professional, respectful and could not have been more kind or considerate. Since taking over, he has only made the company more profitable. But beyond his fiscal responsibility to shareholders, does Iger have an even greater responsibility to impressionable children?

Disney has made no secret that it pushes a pro-gay agenda. That is most certainly its right. But where does the company draw the line? A former Disney executive I spoke with told me the company has taken direct aim at children to indoctrinate them about gay lifestyles and gay marriage through shows it airs on The Disney Channel and Disney XD.

The former executive said one of the more subtle techniques is to incorporate the colors of the gay-pride flag in as many shots as possible. The colors are woven in as a wink and nod to the gay community and show up on shirts, hats, posters, stacked cups and rings. The practice has been picked up by other children's networks and national advertisers.

Disney also pushes the gay agenda by introducing openly gay characters and couples on its children's programing. Again, that is their right, but should they be in the business of entertaining children or indoctrinating them?

Beyond its pro-gay agenda, which now includes halting funding to the Boy Scouts of America, Disney also leans left in its politics. Once again, that is their right. But going back to their children's programming, Michelle Obama has become a fixture on seemingly every Disney Channel show or Disney commercial, with President Barack Obama also incorporated in as many ways as possible.

Last year, Disney reportedly had revenue of more than $45 billion and a net income of more than $6 billion, so there is a good chance Iger and his team don't care if half the nation is troubled that Disney's children's programming is shilling for the Obama White House or any other liberal cause. They have made the corporate decision to push their adult ideology upon children ages 2 to 12, and who's to stop them?

While those who cherish traditional values may not like it, the left controls most of the media, entertainment and "education" in our country. As such, it allows them to re-educate our youth whenever the mood strikes them.

The Disney Co. does much good and brightens the lives of millions around the world, especially children. Because of that, I wish they had stayed in the business of entertaining those children and left the indoctrination to someone else.


My brain has just crashed.
 
2014-08-15 07:22:24 AM  
Mwelp, I was bored and bored cat does dumb things. Like read this thread.

My bad.


i.imgur.com

Bored, dissatisfied, and peeved cat proposes an unsatisfactory solution:

i.ytimg.com
 
2014-08-15 08:21:42 AM  

BojanglesPaladin: Ugh. Why would I want to do that? Have you SEEN anything on Disney Television lately?


Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.
 
2014-08-15 09:19:49 AM  
Herpety doo dah, derpety ay.
My oh my, what a derpety day.
Plenty of morans voting my way.
Herpety doo dah, derpety ay!

Got a chip here on my shoulder.
Don't know the truth, don't know what's actual,
Everything is counterfactual.

Herpety doo dah, derpety ay.
Voting for teatards, wonderful day!
 
2014-08-15 10:09:14 AM  
Well done Subs.

img4.wikia.nocookie.net

Good old fashioned family racism.
 
2014-08-15 10:10:24 AM  
http://mediamatters.org/mobile/blog/2014/08/14/tampa-tribune-pulls-rep ugnant-anti-gay-column/200438
 
2014-08-15 01:09:05 PM  

LucklessWonder: Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.


Exception that proves the rule?
 
2014-08-15 01:15:07 PM  

grumpfuff: No, you were just asking questions about why clerical figures, who are often authority figures in Disney movies, happen to usually be portrayed as mean.


I did not say what you say that I said.


Here is what I ACTUALLY said:

BojanglesPaladin: There is a strong case to be made that Disney has a noticeable anticlerical bias in their movies. I lost a bet with someone over this, so I'll throw it out to the Fark team:


BojanglesPaladin: It was pointed out to me, and my [initial thought] was 'bullshiat', but then I found I couldn't prove it wrong. Friar Tuck was the best I could think of and he's a bit of a gluttonous buffoon.At the time there were a number I could think of, because at the time I paid a lot more attention to Disney. I think the Rescuers, buffon priests in various weddings, etc.I'm actually just curious to see if anyone can think of more POSITIVE depictions of priests (and nuns and such) in Disney films.


So, actually the OTHER way around from what you are implying. I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.

But, well, you probably already knew that didn't you?
 
2014-08-15 02:33:12 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: So, actually the OTHER way around from what you are implying. I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.


My apologies, I forgot about your habit of nitpicking minutiae and just asking questions. You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models, I thought you were talking about the lack of positive role models. I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.
 
2014-08-15 02:49:15 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: LucklessWonder: Phineas & Ferb is pretty damned good. Even with the singing and dancing.

Exception that proves the rule?


static.comicvine.com
 
2014-08-15 02:54:12 PM  

grumpfuff: You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models...I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.


I pointed you to the first TWO (if you were paying attention to details) I know you hate things like details and actual things that have been said, but if you did you would note that that didn't happen either.

Here are some examples from the thread demonstrating your aversion to pesky details like what actually occurred:

BojanglesPaladin: I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.


BojanglesPaladin: I had a guy hit me with a long list of poor or negative depictions of men of the cloth in Disney films, many small, many trivial, and the only positive I could think of to counter was Friar Tuck from half a century ago and even then he was a gluton and a buffoon, though at least a good hearted one.I figure Farkers in the aggregate have more knowledge than me, so I'm asking for any better examples than the one positive I could think of.


BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias. What was pointed out to me is that they mostly don't depict people of any faith, but when they do, it is usually in a somewhat negative light. I still suspect that's a cherry-picked view, but don't have any info to DISPROVE it. The Googles and the Bings are not much help, as they are distracted by depictions of gheys, wimmens and minorities.

BojanglesPaladin: Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayors to corrupt English governors to diabolical cardinals and viziers, Disney movies DO kinda do that. Doesn't mean it's an indoctrination conspiracy though. No one wants to watch a movie about the obedient hall monitor who does his duty.

BojanglesPaladin: I ran across this little nugget:
"In the more than thirty-five animated features Disney has released since Snow White in 1937, there is scarcely a mention of God as conceived in the Christian and Jewish faiths shared by most people in the Western world and many beyond. Disney's decision to exclude or excise traditional religion from animated features was in part personal - he was raised by a rigidly fundamentalist father - and in part commercial, designed to keep the product saleable in a worldwide market."



So there's another SEVEN posts throughout the whole discussion very clearly and plainly spelling it out in a way that even you SHOULD be able to understand if you CHOSE to do so. Some of these were even direct responses to YOU I think.

So I can only assume you are CHOOSING not to understand. This isn't nitpicking minutea, this is your fundamental inability to differentiate between your assumptive fictionalizing filter when you read posts on Fark from what has actually, in fact, been SAID.
 
2014-08-15 03:32:07 PM  

BojanglesPaladin: grumpfuff: You see, when you spend most of the thread just asking questions about the lack of positive role models...I totally forgot that to you, since you said one sentence in the beginning of the thread, the rest of your posts are irrelevant because you can go back to that one to make a point.

I pointed you to the first TWO (if you were paying attention to details) I know you hate things like details and actual things that have been said, but if you did you would note that that didn't happen either.

Here are some examples from the thread demonstrating your aversion to pesky details like what actually occurred:

BojanglesPaladin: I failed to disprove it. I am looking for Farkers to help with a list that disproves it.

BojanglesPaladin: I had a guy hit me with a long list of poor or negative depictions of men of the cloth in Disney films, many small, many trivial, and the only positive I could think of to counter was Friar Tuck from half a century ago and even then he was a gluton and a buffoon, though at least a good hearted one.I figure Farkers in the aggregate have more knowledge than me, so I'm asking for any better examples than the one positive I could think of.
BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all, and I was arguing AGAINST the notion of an anti-clerical bias. What was pointed out to me is that they mostly don't depict people of any faith, but when they do, it is usually in a somewhat negative light. I still suspect that's a cherry-picked view, but don't have any info to DISPROVE it. The Googles and the Bings are not much help, as they are distracted by depictions of gheys, wimmens and minorities.
BojanglesPaladin: Yeah, that was kinda a corollary to his argument. That Disney systematically undermined ANY establishment figure of authority. He had a whole 'seduction of the Innocent II Electric bugaloo' thing going.But on that one issue, he may have a point. From evil Queens to inept mayo ...


You really need to get a hobby.
 
2014-08-15 07:24:05 PM  
i.imgur.com
 
2014-08-15 11:56:08 PM  
BojanglesPaladin: {breitbart edit} I was saying that there ARE more positive depictions in Disney films, and was asking for help thinking of them to provide counter-arguments against the people who say Disney is anti-religion.

BojanglesPaladin: Again, I am of the opinion that Disney meticulously avoids any clerical depictions at all,

BLACK IS DEFINITELY WHITE!! But white is actually really black!! You gotta believe me!!
 
2014-08-15 11:59:06 PM  
I'm spozed to be takin a break from all my worries.

Say, would anyone like some kittens?

www.flygirl.com
 
Displayed 189 of 189 comments

View Voting Results: Smartest and Funniest


This thread is archived, and closed to new comments.

Continue Farking
Submit a Link »
On Twitter






In Other Media


  1. Links are submitted by members of the Fark community.

  2. When community members submit a link, they also write a custom headline for the story.

  3. Other Farkers comment on the links. This is the number of comments. Click here to read them.

  4. Click here to submit a link.

Report