StarWarsGirl
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
Ah yes, the generation that spends all their days inventing and laughing at memes on the internet can't take jokes. Sure.
-
Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.
News New Changes Coming to the Disney Look 2021
- Thread starter castlecake2.0
- Start date
TrainsOfDisney
Well-Known Member
I’m fine with that. I’ll be at the Rose & Crown if you change your mind.
better to get rid of them after decades of service so Disney can be “more inclusive.”
Here is the updated Look Book, which goes more in-depth on what will be allowed -
For example, here is what is said about Tattoos -
"TATTOOS
Visible tattoos are permitted, with the exception of placement on the face, head or neck. Tattoos must be no larger than the Cast Member’s hand when fully extended with the fingers held together.
Undergarments, which include matching fabric tattoo sleeves, are permitted for coverage of larger tattoos on the arms.
Tattoos that depict nudity, offensive or inappropriate language or images, or violate Company policies (including policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, disability or any other protected category) are not permitted."
For example, here is what is said about Tattoos -
"TATTOOS
Visible tattoos are permitted, with the exception of placement on the face, head or neck. Tattoos must be no larger than the Cast Member’s hand when fully extended with the fingers held together.
Undergarments, which include matching fabric tattoo sleeves, are permitted for coverage of larger tattoos on the arms.
Tattoos that depict nudity, offensive or inappropriate language or images, or violate Company policies (including policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, disability or any other protected category) are not permitted."
disneygeek90
Well-Known Member
Per the link DCBaker sent, here's some clarification on the tattoos. Are y'all gonna chill yet?
Visible tattoos are permitted, with the exception of placement on the face, head or neck. Tattoos must be no larger than the Cast Member’s hand when fully extended with the fingers held together.
Undergarments, which include matching fabric tattoo sleeves, are permitted for coverage of larger tattoos on the arms.
Tattoos that depict nudity, offensive or inappropriate language or images, or violate Company policies (including policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, disability or any other protected category) are not permitted.
Visible tattoos are permitted, with the exception of placement on the face, head or neck. Tattoos must be no larger than the Cast Member’s hand when fully extended with the fingers held together.
Undergarments, which include matching fabric tattoo sleeves, are permitted for coverage of larger tattoos on the arms.
Tattoos that depict nudity, offensive or inappropriate language or images, or violate Company policies (including policies prohibiting discrimination and harassment based on race, color, religion, sex, sexual orientation, gender identity, national origin, ancestry, age, disability or any other protected category) are not permitted.
Sirwalterraleigh
Premium Member
Hmmmm...wonder what this could mean? 
Make sure not to complain about CEO and executive compensation next time they decide to trim the fat then. Because you know at least in the companies I've worked for they compartmentalize budgets and don't move them around that way.
StarWarsGirl
Well-Known Member
- In the Parks
- No
The Disney look policy was written originally in the 1950s for their employees then. Due to segregation, I doubt many of them, if any, were any race other than white.
So yes, the policy was written by white people for white people. I don't know what part of that statement is racist so much as factual.
lazyboy97o
Well-Known Member
Disneyland was not segregated.
Seriously? Yeesh.
TalkingHead
Well-Known Member
No body disfigurement, so Joe Rohde still can't work in the parks. Better luck next time, bud.
Mouse Trap
Well-Known Member
Not as many as you would think. I'm willing to bet the entire partnership was less than a $1MM/yr deal based on what exists at other companies.
disneygeek90
Well-Known Member
I forgot that Disney is so magical not even racial discrimination existed inside the gates.
HarperRose
Well-Known Member
This new announcement won't change that.
Chi84
Premium Member
Some people can't (or won't) distinguish between "racial" and "racist."
Piebald
Well-Known Member
Will they allow girls to come in with dreamcatcher tattoos? those can be offensive.
In all seriousness people are probably prematurely freaking out about this. My CPA friend has a tattoo on her ankle and can now breathe easier because in her Financial Manager position she does not need to cover up the little elephant on her ankle every day with a sock or makeup. This doesnt necessarily mean Travis Barker will be your next Peter Pan, people.
In all seriousness people are probably prematurely freaking out about this. My CPA friend has a tattoo on her ankle and can now breathe easier because in her Financial Manager position she does not need to cover up the little elephant on her ankle every day with a sock or makeup. This doesnt necessarily mean Travis Barker will be your next Peter Pan, people.
Last edited:
Remind me where Walt Disney segregated his parks or his company? Remind me when TWDC Imposed hiring restrictions for POC or openly discriminated against specific races or gender? Quite frankly I resent the the implication of racist motivations where there wasn't.
HarperRose
Well-Known Member
I hope she sued.
Is this really the argument you want to grasp on to?