IASW Introducing Dolls in Wheelchairs

kingdead

Well-Known Member
Fair question! If, though, you are trying to corner me into confessing that I somehow find disability to be an "acceptable" identity but have an aversion to recognition of others, I should say you are wrong. I am instead referring to the backslap-free manner in which this was implemented, and I'm getting closer to why it seems different.

Other changes were made in response to perceived wrongs. First some public criticism (often warranted, I might add) is lodged against this or that outdated, offensive attraction feature, and then Disney rushes, embarrassed, to remedy the problem with fanfare. In this case, there was no initial outcry, as far as I know, regarding insufficient inclusivity, yet an oversight was quietly noticed and corrected.

Now, the Jungle Cruise revisions—totally deserved, way overdue, and well done—were brought about with some fanfare but are nonetheless unobjectionable, so maybe I'm not any closer to an answer after all.

Perhaps it's a matter of to whom Disney is responding when making such changes. Perhaps some changes are made after sincere evaluations of the attractions, while others seem only to be made (insincerely?) in response to broader politics beyond Disney.

Again, just a feeling. If anyone's read this far into the post, thanks for letting me think it through.
I've found that people generally get upset when the change means that whatever they were enjoying in the past as innocent fun was really "sinful" in some way--racist, sexist, phobic. The natural response is to defend yourself against an accusation, right?

However, the change to Small World doesn't mean that the old ride was bad, it's just better now. You don't need to do any soul-searching if you enjoyed the ride before the change, and nobody is going to tut-tut you about it.
 

BuddyThomas

Well-Known Member
Again... I'm pointing out the phony ways that people congratulate themselves, and make present themselves as wonderful to other people.
I could care less about wheelchairs in the ride in and of themselves.
I haven't ridden It's a Small World since the early 90's.
But I laugh at people who believe they are wonderful because some of the dolls will be seated in wheelchairs.
It's useless virtue signalling.
Where are the burn victims, amputees, chemo patients, dialysis machines?
You need to get a grip. Your above post and your previous posts on this subject are totally ridiculous. I wonder if you would be saying all this garbage if you were posting under your real name instead of hiding behind a name of your choosing and a picture that is not you. Would you be proud to post stuff like this?
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
It's selective.
It's hypocritical.

So are purity tests.
But I laugh at people who believe they are wonderful because some of the dolls will be seated in wheelchairs.
It's useless virtue signalling.
Where are the burn victims, amputees, chemo patients, dialysis machines?
Do they picture amputees on parking spots for the handicapped?

No.

What image is used?

A person in a wheelchair.

This has, for better or worse, become the default universal symbol for differently-abled people.

So it makes sense that adding two kids in wheelchairs to iasw *represents* all differently-abled people.
 

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
So are purity tests.

Do they picture amputees on parking spots for the handicapped?

No.

What image is used?

A person in a wheelchair.

This has, for better or worse, become the default universal symbol for differently-abled people.

So it makes sense that adding two kids in wheelchairs to iasw *represents* all differently-abled people.
So, these wheelchair kids represent all disabilities?
That's their purpose?
Kids with other problems that don't require see these wheelchairs, and see their representation?
Because "representation" is what everything is about these days, isn't it?
The whole premise is ridiculous.
 

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
You need to get a grip. Your above post and your previous posts on this subject are totally ridiculous. I wonder if you would be saying all this garbage if you were posting under your real name instead of hiding behind a name of your choosing and a picture that is not you. Would you be proud to post stuff like this?
I would say this to anyone in person.
I''d use my real name, but internet whacko's being what they are, I choose not to.
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
So, these wheelchair kids represent all disabilities?
That's their purpose?
Kids with other problems that don't require see these wheelchairs, and see their representation?
Because "representation" is what everything is about these days, isn't it?
The whole premise is ridiculous.
I’m guessing you don’t have a disability or a child with a disability.

Listen to those that do.
 

Angel Ariel

Well-Known Member
So, these wheelchair kids represent all disabilities?
That's their purpose?
Kids with other problems that don't require see these wheelchairs, and see their representation?
Because "representation" is what everything is about these days, isn't it?
The whole premise is ridiculous.
I can’t speak for all kids with disabilities, but my disabled kid? Yes, she does.

You don’t get to speak for her.
 

Castle Cake Apologist

Well-Known Member
Obviously the Avatar doll. Cmon man, how does ‘your’ response add to the conversation? It’s clear all you want to do here is cause issues and/or get people riled up to stroke your own pride & ego.

Well, this didn't age well, considering @Captain Neo's even-worse-than-anybody-could-have-imagined clarification on what he meant. Guess he wasn't "obviously" talking about the Na'vi doll).

Why do we need handicapped dolls???? its called fantasyland its an idealized world hence a fantasy. In an idealized world nobody would be handicapped
 
Last edited:

Castle Cake Apologist

Well-Known Member
I would say this to anyone in person.
I''d use my real name, but internet whacko's being what they are, I choose not to.

b8edcfd6dd79720249b61853c178e8dca5-surejan.rsquare.w700.jpg
 

Chi84

Premium Member
So, these wheelchair kids represent all disabilities?
That's their purpose?
Kids with other problems that don't require see these wheelchairs, and see their representation?
Because "representation" is what everything is about these days, isn't it?
The whole premise is ridiculous.
There are people posting here who have children with disabilities who dispute this. Are you saying they aren't being honest or sincere or do you think their experience with this is not the norm?

Or do you think it's more important to stop what you perceive is a trend toward too much representation?
 

Tony the Tigger

Well-Known Member
So, these wheelchair kids represent all disabilities?
That's their purpose?
Kids with other problems that don't require see these wheelchairs, and see their representation?
Because "representation" is what everything is about these days, isn't it?
The whole premise is ridiculous.
Show me where I said “that’s their purpose.” I choose my words carefully. Read them carefully or not at all.

Find something important to complain about.
 

LittleBuford

Well-Known Member
I've found that people generally get upset when the change means that whatever they were enjoying in the past as innocent fun was really "sinful" in some way--racist, sexist, phobic. The natural response is to defend yourself against an accusation, right?

However, the change to Small World doesn't mean that the old ride was bad, it's just better now. You don't need to do any soul-searching if you enjoyed the ride before the change, and nobody is going to tut-tut you about it.
This is insightful. I would add, however, that one needn’t feel guilty or shamed when circumstances compel some sort of reconsideration or self-reflection. I loved the old auction scene in Pirates and didn’t really think about the issues it raised until Disney made the decision to change it. Looking at it again, I’m kind of shocked that it was created in the first place—imagine the reaction today from people of all political stripes if a family theme park designed a scene depicting the sale of captured women into sexual servitude. Also surprising is my previous failure to see anything amiss, though rather than feel bad about it, I welcome the fact that learning is a lifelong process. I have seen the fruits of this process in my own lifetime—gay marriage was almost unthinkable a few short decades ago—and would hate to live in a world where such shifts took longer to come about than they already do.

It’s all too easy to be complacent and accept the world as you find it; progress can only occur when you’re willing to question what you think you know and consider things from other perspectives.
 

thomas998

Well-Known Member
Disney is not bleeding money.

Stock price is not directly related to revenue/profits or for that matter even a companies success.
You really are clueless aren't you. The share price is a direct reflection of how a company is doing, and when Disney missed their earnings by nearly 50% it was really beyond bleeding it was as if someone cut their jugular.
 

peter11435

Well-Known Member
You really are clueless aren't you. The share price is a direct reflection of how a company is doing, and when Disney missed their earnings by nearly 50% it was really beyond bleeding it was as if someone cut their jugular.
Clearly you’re the one that is clueless and has no idea how the stock market works. There is no direct connection between share price and revenue/profit/success. They are related… yes, but not directly connected. Disney is not bleeding. They aren’t loosing money. The fact that analysts wanted their profits to be higher doesn't mean there profits didn’t exist.
 

Californian Elitist

Well-Known Member
Well a great example of it is how corporation focus on hiring blacks to show how diverse they are. They often ignore other minorities and only try to focus on blacks... On paper when they say how diverse they are by boasting about the percent of minorities they have it might look fine and dandy, but when you dig deeper and realize their minority group is only black and ignores Hispanics, Native Americans, Asians and every other group and they only focus on going to black colleges for recruiting their diversity representation... Well yes that highlights what BS it is when a company does one thing to represent a much wider group. I suspect if you looked at the people with handicaps that go to Disney that wheelchair might not actually even be the largest one... but because it is one of the easiest ones to use that people won't miss they used it... Pretty much the reason some companies focus on hiring blacks to signal how diverse they are... god knows some Native American or Hispanic might not look enough like a minority to show the world how diverse they are.
Please write “black people” and not “blacks.” The latter has historically negative connotations and can be offensive.
 

Register on WDWMAGIC. This sidebar will go away, and you'll see fewer ads.

Back
Top Bottom