Jasmine's new look

Ol' Br'er Fox

Ol' Br'er Fox

Member
So, I read through the entire thread, and I feel like I might have a controversial opinion here:
The outfit isn't that bad. Sure, she didn't wear an outfit like that in the movies, but it's still not that huge of an issue in my eyes. If they made it more like the purple outfit she wore, I guess that'd be better, but it's still not the worst thing in the world.
 
SorcererMC

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
Disney_TX_Guy said:
Here is a video of Aladdin and Jasmine in their new outfits together.

Click to expand...


That's a good video. Context matters. And the fact that she can twirl around in it - girls are going to love it.
Aladdin/ Prince Ali's cape on the other hand...(they even joke about it in the video)
. no capes.jpg
 
SpaceMountain77

SpaceMountain77

Well-Known Member
egg said:
Her costume was bound to change, I guess. For multiple reasons. Some misguided reasons, some which I can agree with.

My biggest problem is that if you dress a young adult in something that the character they're portraying hasn't worn before... are they that character? What makes that person Jasmine? The fact that they're of the same ethnicity, and, well, are wearing blue and gold clothing?

And as for someone not too familiar with Jasmine and Disney princesses in general, would they recognize her? How much more difficult is it now for a young child to recognize and identify that park character? When they look back in pictures 50 years from now, will it be harder to tell who that is?

I really don't know. I'm not a young child, I'm too familiar with the characters, and I don't know how the characters are marketed and such today. And I don't know how popular Jasmine will be in 50 years. I just wonder.
Click to expand...

This thoughtfully written post is entirely on point. Through its movies, Disney establishes an archetype for each of its characters. When colors, fabrics, textures, and accessories deviate significantly from the archetype, these characters become adults in generic costumes.

To me, Mulan is now a Chinese woman in somewhat period-appropriate dress.
 
SorcererMC

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
SpaceMountain77 said:
This thoughtfully written post is entirely on point. Through its movies, Disney establishes an archetype for each of its characters. When colors, fabrics, textures, and accessories deviate significantly from the archetype, these characters become adults in generic costumes.

To me, Mulan is now a Chinese woman in somewhat period-appropriate dress.
Click to expand...

The 'problem' with the Aladdin film (look up the 'brutally honest' poster) and with Jasmine in particular is that she's not an archetype, she's a stereotype - and a well-established one at that. Disney does not have the luxury of ignoring this issue in today's age of social media; they have a responsibility about the images that they present as socially acceptable, especially to young girls, aka their target audience and the correlated paying consumers. Times have changed, folks...(and they're about to change even more).

I think that the costume designer was given a directive/ set of parameters and I dare say that both the Mulan and Jasmine makeovers are an appropriate solution, and I understand why TWDC would go in this direction (ie to move away from cultural caricature). The colors and fabric of Jasmine's new look does not deviate significantly - it's still turquoise (although a lighter shade) with gold details and it has the sheer veiling quality. It matches the formal gowns and royal look of the other princesses, as she should.
 
SpaceMountain77

SpaceMountain77

Well-Known Member
SorcererMC said:
The 'problem' with the Aladdin film (look up the 'brutally honest' poster) and with Jasmine in particular is that she's not an archetype, she's a stereotype - and a well-established one at that. Disney does not have the luxury of ignoring this issue in today's age of social media; they have a responsibility about the images that they present as socially acceptable, especially to young girls, aka their target audience and the correlated paying consumers. Times have changed, folks...(and they're about to change even more).

I think that the costume designer was given a directive/ set of parameters and I dare say that both the Mulan and Jasmine makeovers are an appropriate solution, and I understand why TWDC would go in this direction (ie to move away from cultural caricature). The colors and fabric of Jasmine's new look does not deviate significantly - it's still turquoise (although a lighter shade) with gold details and it has the sheer veiling quality. It matches the formal gowns and royal look of the other princesses, as she should.
Click to expand...

For better or worse, Disney movies drive the concepts and categorizes that individuals form. Guests have a mental image of each Disney character. If Aurora's dress were suddenly changed to green, to avoid pink and blue gender stereotypes, would she still be Aurora?
 
SorcererMC

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
SpaceMountain77 said:
For better or worse, Disney movies drive the concepts and categorizes that individuals form. Guests have a mental image of each Disney character. If Aurora's dress were suddenly changed to green, to avoid pink and blue gender stereotypes, would she still be Aurora?
Click to expand...

If Aurora's dress were the green/beige one that she wears in the scene where she meets Prince Philip, it would be no problem (although it is too casual). Aurora, Cinderella, Merida, Snow White, Ariel - all come from the traditional European fairytale. Consider that Disney designed both Tangled and Frozen in a way that would appeal to both girls and boys, and not just be 'another princess movie' = wild success. And it contributes to gender stereotypes being neutralized, where in boys want to dress up as Elsa and play the lead and that's normal and not eyebrow-raising.

I completely agree with you where you say that Disney movies drive the concepts and categorizes that individual's form, that there is a 'mental image' of the character. That's exactly why this matters! It is the 'mental image' of Jasmine that requires the adjustment...I think that once the initial 'shock' wears off, that this look be fine. I only did the most basic of research about the related cultural issues, and it didn't take much for me to see that Disney was once behind the curve, but if the comments in this thread are any indication, they are now ahead of the curve. It's a smart move, and I'm on board with it.
 
Raineman

Raineman

Well-Known Member
SorcererMC said:
If Aurora's dress were the green/beige one that she wears in the scene where she meets Prince Philip, it would be no problem (although it is too casual). Aurora, Cinderella, Merida, Snow White, Ariel - all come from the traditional European fairytale. Consider that Disney designed both Tangled and Frozen in a way that would appeal to both girls and boys, and not just be 'another princess movie' = wild success. And it contributes to gender stereotypes being neutralized, where in boys want to dress up as Elsa and play the lead and that's normal and not eyebrow-raising.

I completely agree with you where you say that Disney movies drive the concepts and categorizes that individual's form, that there is a 'mental image' of the character. That's exactly why this matters! It is the 'mental image' of Jasmine that requires the adjustment...I think that once the initial 'shock' wears off, that this look be fine. I only did the most basic of research about the related cultural issues, and it didn't take much for me to see that Disney was once behind the curve, but if the comments in this thread are any indication, they are now ahead of the curve. It's a smart move, and I'm on board with it.
Click to expand...
I'm not really opposed to the change itself-I'm more concerned about the actual reasoning behind the change, and what effects it will have longterm. Is this going to snowball into a rash of changes that are unnecessary? If you look at Tinkerbell and Ariel, they both show as much or nearly as much skin as Jasmine did, and Tink's dress is pretty short-are these costumes now deemed unacceptable? Why are we worried about how a character at WDW is dressed, to "protect" our children, and at the same time allow them to be deluged with much more inappropriate material on TV, in movies, on YouTube, etc. I would be much more concerned at my daughter watching a Miley Cyrus concert than meeting Jasmine in her old costume.
 
andysol

andysol

Well-Known Member
mousehockey37 said:
How about Tarzan? He comes out on occasion for training and such, and you guessed it... it's a loin cloth... C'mon Disney, you can let a guy dress like an ape man wearing nothing but a rag over his stuff, but Jasmine's a problem?

Guess the offended people liked looking at Tarzan's total package, lol, so that was A-OK in their eyes...
Click to expand...
Right. People (namely, adult women) can't wait to have their pics with Tarzan. It's the typical double standard. 30-40 year old moms are socially allowed to gush over 16 year old Taylor Lautner when Twilight comes out. But men aren't socially allowed to find a 20 something year old girl in a mid-rift attractive? If anyone get's handsy, boot them from the park. Marilyn Monroe sure didn't have a problem walking up to me flirting while I was exiting the park last week at Universal. Thats after she took a pic with ~10 college guys.
It's make-believe people. It's ok.

castevious said:
It's a different type of offense. It's not that we see more skin, it's that in the area where Aladdin takes place, women are expected to cover up their bodies. I don't get the need for change, but that is the key reason for it.
Click to expand...
Except it's a fictional land in a flippin' cartoon with a genie and human-like monkey and magic and flying carpet and a bird that can have full blown conversations and a tiger that walks around the palace not ripping people's throats out. I mean, we all know that Arendale is a real country, because it's in the world showcase. But until there is an Agrabah pavilion, it's fictional.
 
SorcererMC

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
Raineman said:
I'm not really opposed to the change itself-I'm more concerned about the actual reasoning behind the change, and what effects it will have longterm. Is this going to snowball into a rash of changes that are unnecessary? If you look at Tinkerbell and Ariel, they both show as much or nearly as much skin as Jasmine did, and Tink's dress is pretty short-are these costumes now deemed unacceptable? Why are we worried about how a character at WDW is dressed, to "protect" our children, and at the same time allow them to be deluged with much more inappropriate material on TV, in movies, on YouTube, etc. I would be much more concerned at my daughter watching a Miley Cyrus concert than meeting Jasmine in her old costume.
Click to expand...

I understand that concern, in terms of, is it a slippery slope? I think the reasoning behind it is two-fold; both b/c of the 'princesses as role models' aspect, but also the Jasmine's origin as an 'Arabian' in a broad sense, each apply in this case. I think it has more to do with the 'belly-dancer' attire than her bare midriff. I think 2014 was the tipping point. I don't think it will go beyond this change b/c I think someone said that Jasmine was the last princess makeover; Tinkerbell isn't considered a princess.

I do think that parents monitor what their children are exposed to in tv, movies, YouTube for what is age-appropriate; you can't necessarily always control it, but that's why there are parental controls.... I think it's a personal decision and an important conversation that's taking place about what sorts of gender and racial images are appropriate for children. It gets to the heart of the bias and prejudice that exists in our society today and how it's perpetuated - especially for Middle Eastern cultures in this case. (Maybe that doesn't matter for people posting here? But it matters to me, even if my opinion is not popular). Disney can't control it either, but they can and do influence it.

Edit: Oh, not to mention that they are making money off of selling those images, too.
 
Last edited:
SorcererMC

SorcererMC

Well-Known Member
andysol said:
But until there is an Agrabah pavilion, it's fictional.
Click to expand...

There is the Morocco pavilion, where the meet and greet takes place - so it puts it into a real-world context. Aren't there still actual belly dancers in the restaurant and performing in the area - recently reintroduced? It's not like they got rid of them and it doesn't seem like they are going to.
 
mousehockey37

mousehockey37

Well-Known Member
andysol said:
Right. People (namely, adult women) can't wait to have their pics with Tarzan. It's the typical double standard. 30-40 year old moms are socially allowed to gush over 16 year old Taylor Lautner when Twilight comes out. But men aren't socially allowed to find a 20 something year old girl in a mid-rift attractive? If anyone get's handsy, boot them from the park. Marilyn Monroe sure didn't have a problem walking up to me flirting while I was exiting the park last week at Universal. Thats after she took a pic with ~10 college guys.
It's make-believe people. It's ok.


Except it's a fictional land in a flippin' cartoon with a genie and human-like monkey and magic and flying carpet and a bird that can have full blown conversations and a tiger that walks around the palace not ripping people's throats out. I mean, we all know that Arendale is a real country, because it's in the world showcase. But until there is an Agrabah pavilion, it's fictional.
Click to expand...

I get it's make-believe but they still are real people. I'm not in agreement with the costume change, but at the same time, these girls are real people, and should be treated like real people and talked to with dignity and respect. But just maybe instead of a knee jerk reaction with costumes, maybe Disney should send out material with all the other "Mickey Mail" you get for a vacation and have "meet and greet etiquette" guidelines... Then again, all that paper vs a costume.. Yeah, costume is cheaper.

As far as Arendelle, go search for the thread about the Norway pavilion changing.

Oh, snd there won't be an Agrabah pavilion. Why? Things surfaced in news reports that there are members of Congress that are in favor of bombing the fictional land... Lol.

I still stick with someone got offended though snd got a lawyer involved because heaven forbid, you see a character dressed the way they were in the movie, which may not conform to today's social norms.
 
Last edited:
Incomudro

Incomudro

Well-Known Member
Pixie VaVoom said:
I am actually surprised that they dodn't put "Mo Rockin" in a Burka !!
Click to expand...

As the guy who's got the Mo Rockn' girl as his avatar, let me say:
The princess makeover is ridiculous.
Disney is not a museum that needs to be accurate to society or history, nor is it some real life documentary.
Nor should it change existing characters to meet an increasingly pc world as it slides backward.
Characters should look like what they are most readily identified to look like based on the films, merchandise etc.
Why not take Gaston and drape him in some shapeless outfit that doesn't show off his physique?
Because it'd be ridiculous, and parents would have to illustrate to their kid that the person is indeed Gaston, to their child's bewilderment as to why who they are seeing barley matches what they saw in the movie.
 
righttrack

righttrack

Well-Known Member
berlioz70 said:
Jasmine's new look (same with Poca and Mulan) was redesigned with a focus on being more culturally sensitive and less with a focus on the movie. During the time frame the movie is set, royalty dressed conservatively. A women who showed skin (arms, chest, mid-drift, etc) was selling her body. This doesn't mean you have to like the look, but knowing the history here is important. Disney is trying to fix the poor research the animators did when they made the move 25 years ago.

A quick google search of "historically accurate Jasmine" will show several different fan interpretations of what Jasmine would have actually worn, here is an interesting read: Historically Accurate Jasmine
Click to expand...

I've only spot read this thread, forgive me if I say something that already has been said...

The main change I see here is that the person playing Jasmine actually seems to be Arabic. In the past, as I recall, we had tanned western girls or latinas playing this role. I think they are trying to avoid cultural appropriation here and may have changed whom is being Jasime these days. It's possible that many women with that cultural background would want to wear more modest dress. Just a thought. Don't mean to take the thread in a political direction, just seemed to me the most logical explanation.
 

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

Back
Top Bottom