News Disney transforms Magic Kingdom's famous purple wall to celebrate PRIDE Month at Walt Disney World and will donate merch profits to support LGBTQIA+

[Sir_Cliff]

Oh, boy. Let's talk about pronouns.

Per usual, it's not simple.

Nobody in 1969 "had pronouns" in the context currently being used. Nobody in 2005 "had pronouns" like that. If someone had surgery in the last 20 years and became a she, then it's almost certain they used the pronoun "she." They didn't just pick one. It matched their gender.

Gay men (at least of a certain age) very, very often casually refer to each other as "she." That's not a chosen pronoun. It's familial. One guy talking to another guy about their mutual friend: "Oh, girl...you know she did the walk of shame dis mornin'!" Very common. Doesn't mean anything. They also often referred to their boyfriends (long-term or one-night) as "husbands." Underground cultures make up their own norms.

Today, as of *very* recently, people are picking pronouns. Fine. Don't expect me to remember your pronoun if I don't know you very well. (I probably won't remember your name until we've met several times LOL.) Don't get mad at me for accidentally calling you he when you want to be they. That's not fair to the vast majority of the population who are unaware unless you are wearing a pronoun name tag. I can barely remember Sam Smith and one of the former Disney actresses are now "they." Good for them. Seriously, whatever makes you happy. But I'll probably refer to Sam as "he" when talking with friends and probably "they" if I ever met them in person. That's just being realistic.

It's like getting mad at someone who says Merry Christmas and you used to celebrate Christmas but you don't anymore. Understanding goes both ways.

There is a difference between someone who says, "I will not respect your pronouns" vs. someone who makes a mistake, and no 80 year old woman should be held to the standard of Gen Z if she is making an honest mistake or forgot or whatever.

Get angry when people are trying to hurt you, not when they accidentally hurt you.

And don't Z-splain to me things you have only read about that I lived through.

I often encourage young people to watch TV shows from the 70's and 80's to get an idea and some perspective on what was "acceptable" back then. These things didn't age well, but they were definitely "norms." Watch Bo Duke talk about women. Watch the n-word being used by a white woman in the "North And South" miniseries (and many other shows - the point being it was not 100% forbidden yet.) Watch Judy Garland as a young teenager in blackface in a film where she was just doing what she was told and nobody objected. It was wrong, but it was also socially acceptable at the time. And we cannot go back and convict people of things they did wrong based on today's standards.

What I don't understand is we were taught that kind of empathy for racist grandparents who were "from a different time," but younger people today seem to prefer purity tests - which are tests they *will* eventually fail themselves, by the standards of future generations.

Where is the wisdom in that?

I do get your point here, but I do wonder how much these purity tests are really an issue. Social media and the mainstream media seem to be on a feedback loop elevating people on the extremes of all debates and, in the former case, gathering them together to make them seem a larger group than they really are. So, I guess my question is whether many people out there on the ground are really getting angry at people who make a sincere effort to remember their pronouns but sometimes slip up?

Again, I get your point as even if it is a small minority there can be real world consequences in terms of people being singled out for denunciation or harassment if they have made mistakes or hold certain views. Still, I just think Twitter in particular is really distorting our picture of the world in part because it provides the struggling traditional media easy access to stories about debates and controversies without actually having to go out and do reporting.

The angst around college-age people being political purists seems particularly like something that's not worth worrying about as that's what that period of your life is for! Overall, I think it's a positive that people stake out positions often from extreme ends of the spectrum as that introduces new ideas into the public discussion that ultimately push things forward.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I do get your point here, but I do wonder how much these purity tests are really an issue. Social media and the mainstream media seem to be on a feedback loop elevating people on the extremes of all debates and, in the former case, gathering them together to make them seem a larger group than they really are. So, I guess my question is whether many people out there on the ground are really getting angry at people who make a sincere effort to remember their pronouns but sometimes slip up?

This is my argument, but for cancel culture, which I don’t believe to be a thing in the way that people talk about it now, as if it’s something new that millennials and Gen Z have made up recently. It’s not. What it is is social media and the internet in general, but mainly social media. Social media allows for the opinions of millions to be shared at lightning speed, at any time, in any place. We as people are constantly reading these opinions and people are getting in trouble for things that they do in person, post online, etc. The thing is, people getting in trouble for saying or doing the wrong thing has literally always been a thing. The opinions/backlash against these people feel like “cancel culture” because we’re taking in so much at once, thanks to social media, therefore making it feel like society has made a complete switch and “everyone” wants people to be “cancelled.” That’s not it at all. Get off of Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc, or just stop reading comments, and it likely won’t feel that way.

The research I did for my thesis, which centered around reading and teaching Lolita in college courses in the midst of “cancel culture,” confirmed my suspicions about “cancel culture” and it not really being this phenomenon that people believe it to be. I surveyed current college students and the vast majority of them agreed that the book was appropriate for reading, despite the very sensitive material. Society was WAY more sensitive decades and centuries ago. One could literally be fined and sent to prison for writing “obscene” content. As badly written as the book is, Fifty Shades of Grey wouldn’t have gotten away with publication during the 50s and backwards from that decade. I can think of plenty of books, movies, magazines, etc. that wouldn’t have happened. People literally thought superheroes were gay and turned children gay back then. There has never been a better time to express oneself.

Sorry for my long post, but I find this topic very interesting to think about and discuss.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

This is my argument, but for cancel culture, which I don’t believe to be a thing in the way that people talk about it now, as if it’s something new that millennials and Gen Z have made up recently. It’s not. What it is is social media and the internet in general, but mainly social media. Social media allows for the opinions of millions to be shared at lightning speed, at any time, in any place. We as people are constantly reading these opinions and people are getting in trouble for things that they do in person, post online, etc. The thing is, people getting in trouble for saying or doing the wrong thing has literally always been a thing. The opinions/backlash against these people feel like “cancel culture” because we’re taking in so much at once, thanks to social media, therefore making it feel like society has made a complete switch and “everyone” wants people to be “cancelled.” That’s not it at all. Get off of Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc, or just stop reading comments, and it likely won’t feel that way.

The research I did for my thesis, which centered around reading and teaching Lolita in college courses in the midst of “cancel culture,” confirmed my suspicions about “cancel culture” and it not really being this phenomenon that people believe it to be. I surveyed current college students and the vast majority of them agreed that the book was appropriate for reading, despite the very sensitive material. Society was WAY more sensitive decades and centuries ago. One could literally be fined and sent to prison for writing “obscene” content. As badly written as the book is, Fifty Shades of Grey wouldn’t have gotten away with publication during the 50s and backwards from that decade. I can think of plenty of books, movies, magazines, etc. that wouldn’t have happened. People literally thought superheroes were gay and turned children gay back then. There has never been a better time to express oneself.

Sorry for my long post, but I find this topic very interesting to think about and discuss.

I guess I have the completely incorrect idea concerning what "cancel culture" is. My take was cancel culture seemed to have a lot to do with blanking out or cancelling anything historical that does not fit into today's way of thinking. People are protesting and having any statues put up well over 100 years ago torn down because the person in the statue happened to be a slave owner or some other bad thing that we don't agree with nowadays. They want text books rewritten to remove anything that doesn't agree with how we think today. That sort of thing is what I thought cancel culture is. Cancelling history and anything else that we don't agree with nowadays. If we forget our history, we are doomed to repeat it. I most definitely apologize if I offend anyone as that is certainly not my intention at all. With multiple members of my family as part of the LGBTQIA+ community, I fully support and respect everyone.

 

[Californian Elitist]

I guess I have the completely incorrect idea concerning what "cancel culture" is. My take was cancel culture seemed to have a lot to do with blanking out or cancelling anything historical that does not fit into today's way of thinking. People are protesting and having any statues put up well over 100 years ago torn down because the person in the statue happened to be a slave owner or some other bad thing that we don't agree with nowadays. They want text books rewritten to remove anything that doesn't agree with how we think today. That sort of thing is what I thought cancel culture is. Cancelling history and anything else that we don't agree with nowadays. If we forget our history, we are doomed to repeat it. I most definitely apologize if I offend anyone as that is certainly not my intention at all. With multiple members of my family as part of the LGBTQIA+ community, I fully support and respect everyone.

You’re right, that’s cancel culture as well. Cancel culture has many faces. But even the example of removing statues doesn’t actually remove the person that statue is associated with from history, and therefore they can’t actually be “cancelled.”

I’m personally unbothered by statues coming down, though I’m fully aware of the bigger picture and what that could mean when that happens. The thing is, one can’t actually cancel history. People can take down statues of Confederate soldiers, colonizers, slave owners, etc all they want, but doing so will never erase the these people from history. It’s impossible. They already existed in the timeline (I kinda sound like the TVA from Loki right now) and we can’t erase their contributions to history. Robert E. Lee still existed, despite a statue of him likely being torn down. Same with Christopher Columbus and many others.

I’m my opinion, it’s more of a problem when educators, people who write history books, etc. literally teach and write revisionist history that omits important information or blatantly lies to make a certain party look good. For example, that Texas history book that claimed that Africans arrived to the US as immigrant “workers” to work on plantations.

EDIT: I forgot to mention, even the removal of statues has always been a thing as well. Didn’t the American rebels remove a statue of King George III in the 18th century prior to the start of the American Revolution?

 

[Midwest Elitist]

You’re right, that’s cancel culture as well. Cancel culture has many faces. But even the example of removing statues doesn’t actually remove the person that statue is associated with from history, and therefore they can’t actually be “cancelled.”

I’m personally unbothered by statues coming down, though I’m fully aware of the bigger picture and what that could mean when that happens. The thing is, one can’t actually cancel history. People can take down statues of Confederate soldiers, colonizers, slave owners, etc all they want, but doing so will never erase the these people from history. It’s impossible. They already existed in the timeline (I kinda sound like the TVA from Loki right now) and we can’t erase their contributions to history. Robert E. Lee still existed, despite a statue of him likely being torn down. Same with Christopher Columbus and many others.

I’m my opinion, it’s more of a problem when educators, people who write history books, etc. literally teach and write revisionist history that omits important information or blatantly lies to make a certain party look good. For example, that Texas history book that claimed that Africans arrived to the US as immigrant “workers” to work on plantations.

A lot of those statues were put up DECADES after the civil war as a way to harass black people. But like my other positions on similar topics, I don't support the "burn it all down" approach. Put them in a museum.

 

[correcaminos]

I guess I have the completely incorrect idea concerning what "cancel culture" is. My take was cancel culture seemed to have a lot to do with blanking out or cancelling anything historical that does not fit into today's way of thinking. People are protesting and having any statues put up well over 100 years ago torn down because the person in the statue happened to be a slave owner or some other bad thing that we don't agree with nowadays. They want text books rewritten to remove anything that doesn't agree with how we think today. That sort of thing is what I thought cancel culture is. Cancelling history and anything else that we don't agree with nowadays. If we forget our history, we are doomed to repeat it. I most definitely apologize if I offend anyone as that is certainly not my intention at all. With multiple members of my family as part of the LGBTQIA+ community, I fully support and respect everyone.

Cancel culture has been about canceling a brand, public figure, or company after they do something that majority feels is bad (whatever that may be). It's been around for ages though (people have tried to cancel games that were considered witch craft and such even when I was a kid). I have never heard it used for history. Removing whitewashed historical figures is not cancel culture. Wanting corrected history that gives credit where credit is due and being honest about history and how it wasn't as pretty as it seemed is definitely NOT cancel culture.

 

[Disney Analyst]

I’d add that I also don’t see cancel culture as being as big as many say.

If anything I think we live in a time of consequence culture. People are actually facing consequences for their actions.

You can’t just get away with any comment these days and then say “oh I’m just kidding”.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

I’m my opinion, it’s more of a problem when educators, people who write history books, etc. literally teach and write revisionist history that omits important information or blatantly lies to make a certain party look good. For example, that Texas history book that claimed that Africans arrived to the US as immigrant “workers” to work on plantations.

That's the part that I do have a problem with as well.

EDIT: I forgot to mention, even the removal of statues has always been a thing as well. Didn’t the American rebels remove a statue of King George III in the 18th century prior to the start of the American Revolution?

Most likely.

 

[Californian Elitist]

A lot of those statues were put up DECADES after the civil war as a way to harass black people. But like my other positions on similar topics, I don't support the "burn it all down" approach. Put them in a museum.

That’s a fact, yes. Can’t forget that.

 

[LuvtheGoof]

Thanks to all for broadening my knowledge today!

 

[Californian Elitist]

I’d add that I also don’t see cancel culture as being as big as many say.

If anything I think we live in a time of consequence culture. People are actually facing consequences for their actions.

You can’t just get away with any comment these days and then say “oh I’m just kidding”.

Exactly. Part of that has to do with changes in society and what is no longer tolerated. My mom went to high school in the 70s. She said her human anatomy teacher told her that she didn’t have to come to class because he was going to give her an “A,” regardless. However, he requested that on the days she decided to come to class, to wear a skirt or a dress, cross her legs, and sit in the front of the class, where he could see her. My mom, being the teenager she was, never questioned his behavior and happily obliged. It was never reported, but I have a strong belief that her teacher wouldn’t have been fired even if she did report it.

It’s also important to note that “cancelling” something or someone can be temporary, meaning there was backlash for a couple of weeks, then people no longer cared and that person of thing was able to continue on.

 

[correcaminos]

A lot of those statues were put up DECADES after the civil war as a way to harass black people. But like my other positions on similar topics, I don't support the "burn it all down" approach. Put them in a museum.

To a point I agree. There are only so many of the same figure statues one needs if you know what I mean. Simply removing something that started as a way to harass or invoke fear towards others, isn't a bad idea in my eyes. I'm not for erasing history, just correcting it. I don't want to go too off topic with a personal story, but some of us grew up knowing a more real version of history only to have to fill out other answers when it came to grades for school.

 

[SaucyBoy]

If cancel culture was truly a "thing" Chris Brown wouldn't still have a career after beating the shiz out of Rihanna

There's a difference between getting "cancelled"and getting rightfully called out for dumb actions.

 

[Californian Elitist]

If cancel culture was truly a "thing" Chris Brown wouldn't still have a career after beating the shiz out of Rihanna

There's a difference between getting "cancelled"and getting rightfully called out for dumb actions.

He is thriving, isn’t he? I certainly thought his career was over when that happened.

 

[BuddyThomas]

If cancel culture was truly a "thing" Chris Brown wouldn't still have a career after beating the shiz out of Rihanna

There's a difference between getting "cancelled"and getting rightfully called out for dumb actions.

Actually, he has a new album from Sony Music coming out....wait for it....wait for it....wait for it.....TOMORROW. Doesn't sound too cancelled to me.

 

[Disney Analyst]

He is thriving, isn’t he? I certainly thought his career was over when that happened.

It’s really disgusting. Of all people who should have been ruined…

Kathy Griffin faced a worse fate for her (very stupid) photo.

 

[TrojanUSC]

The irony of "cancel culture" is the same people harping about it are the same people who are happy saying "go woke go broke" about Disney, meaning "let's cancel them for expressing an opinion we don't care for."

 

[Sir_Cliff]

This is my argument, but for cancel culture, which I don’t believe to be a thing in the way that people talk about it now, as if it’s something new that millennials and Gen Z have made up recently. It’s not. What it is is social media and the internet in general, but mainly social media. Social media allows for the opinions of millions to be shared at lightning speed, at any time, in any place. We as people are constantly reading these opinions and people are getting in trouble for things that they do in person, post online, etc. The thing is, people getting in trouble for saying or doing the wrong thing has literally always been a thing. The opinions/backlash against these people feel like “cancel culture” because we’re taking in so much at once, thanks to social media, therefore making it feel like society has made a complete switch and “everyone” wants people to be “cancelled.” That’s not it at all. Get off of Twitter, Instagram, TikTok, etc, or just stop reading comments, and it likely won’t feel that way.

The research I did for my thesis, which centered around reading and teaching Lolita in college courses in the midst of “cancel culture,” confirmed my suspicions about “cancel culture” and it not really being this phenomenon that people believe it to be. I surveyed current college students and the vast majority of them agreed that the book was appropriate for reading, despite the very sensitive material. Society was WAY more sensitive decades and centuries ago. One could literally be fined and sent to prison for writing “obscene” content. As badly written as the book is, Fifty Shades of Grey wouldn’t have gotten away with publication during the 50s and backwards from that decade. I can think of plenty of books, movies, magazines, etc. that wouldn’t have happened. People literally thought superheroes were gay and turned children gay back then. There has never been a better time to express oneself.

Sorry for my long post, but I find this topic very interesting to think about and discuss.

Very well put and I agree 100% with all of this!

Another thing with the rise of social media and the internet is that everything seems to have rapidly sped up in that people get information more or less instantly, they have a venue to react instantly, and then people expect an instant resolution. In the past it seemed like controversies would play out over weeks or months, but now they seem to be able to flare up and burn out within a day or two. I think another thing we could all do to improve our mental health is to take a beat and reflect on an issue before formulating an opinion rather than just firing off the first reaction that pops into our head.

You do also make the great point that far more topics were off-limits in the not-too-distant past than are today. There has been some change in what kind of speech will cause a negative reaction, but it's not like everyone was living in a free speech paradise even in the 1980s and 1990s and nowadays more topics are off limits for discussion. Sure, you can't be as racist or homophobic as you could back then without being called out on it, but we can all talk and read more freely about so many more topics today than we could a few decades ago, let alone in the 1950s and 1960s.

 

[Californian Elitist]

Very well put and I agree 100% with all of this!

Another thing with the rise of social media and the internet is that everything seems to have rapidly sped up in that people get information more or less instantly, they have a venue to react instantly, and then people expect an instant resolution. In the past it seemed like controversies would play out over weeks or months, but now they seem to be able to flare up and burn out within a day or two. I think another thing we could all do to improve our mental health is to take a beat and reflect on an issue before formulating an opinion rather than just firing off the first reaction that pops into our head.

You do also make the great point that far more topics were off-limits in the not-too-distant past than are today. There has been some change in what kind of speech will cause a negative reaction, but it's not like everyone was living in a free speech paradise even in the 1980s and 1990s and nowadays more topics are off limits for discussion. Sure, you can't be as racist or homophobic as you could back then without being called out on it, but we can all talk and read more freely about so many more topics today than we could a few decades ago, let alone in the 1950s and 1960s.

All very true! We get news so much more quickly nowadays. And it’s all sorts of news from all around the world. Additionally, we are able to watch news as it’s happening. We’ve been able to do this for decades, but you can watch live news on various platforms, and, again, be exposed to many opinions and reactions at the very same time the respective news is happening. You’re also right about it fizzling out very quickly.

Social media in general has become personally upsetting and somewhat depressing. It’s not only the comments, but the content that people are producing and publishing is troubling and just not something that I find appealing or necessarily good. I think we should all consider who and what we want to follow and the type of content we want to subject ourselves to on a daily, weekly, and monthly basis. It’s one of the reasons I enjoy commenting here on the forums. For the most part, we’re here to discuss Disney, and while some outside topics and discussions creep in, it’s tolerable and we’re still mainly here to talk about Disney-related products, which is way better than watching an “influencer” copy a trend that someone else made up, or be obsessed with their physical features for clicks and views.

 

[Tony the Tigger]

He is thriving, isn’t he? I certainly thought his career was over when that happened.

I don’t sell his stuff. #stillcanceledforme