• Welcome to the WDWMAGIC.COM Forums!
    Please take a look around, and feel free to sign up and join the community.You can use your Twitter or Facebook account to sign up, or register directly.

News New Changes Coming to the Disney Look 2021

MrPromey

Well-Known Member
I thought that was to be undercover?? Along the same lines of having plainclothes police

It was to make security seem less intimidating. The change, I'd assume, is similar although not as extreme as the TSA agents changes after 911.

Do you remember what these people in the airports used to look like?

Here, they wore business casual with a uniform smock to identify them. They didn't even look like security - just airport staff at the checkpoint locations.

Today, they look like a government police (or military) force with similar training and authority even though nothing could be father from the truth... but looking more intimidating has the desired effect of making people more willing to comply.

In the past when uniformed security at Disney was more about helping lost children get back to their parents the small-town-good humor look worked for them - they wanted to appear overly friendly and approachable.

Now, when they want to look through your bag and not have you make a stink about it, that more approachable friendly look doesn't work quite so well.
 
Last edited:

Gringrinngghost

Well-Known Member
Modern sunglasses have been allowed for some time under the Disney look because there is a safety and comfort aspect that has value over what the show or role would demand. So we say it's OK for a Big Thunder Cast Member to wear sunglasses, even if it doesn't fit with the role of a 1890s prospector.
Disney is one of the few parks that doesn't limit sunglasses frames to 3 colors.
1618431452545.png


Even the 2016 Disney look didn't have it
1618431739941.png


Edit things might have changed since the first referenced handbook, but disney has been more liberal even in this use.
 

wdrive

Well-Known Member
That's a bit on the cynical side. If i were in casting, and had an otherwise perfect candidate in front of me, I would think it silly to have to tell them no based solely on a small tattoo or piecing they have. As these things become more common in society, it's going to be harder and harder to say no to otherwise good people and that's something that would weigh on me aside from any financial decisions.

You wouldn’t have to tell them no, just ask if they were comfortable covering their tattoo or removing their piercing.
 

denyuntilcaught

Well-Known Member
No. You’re taking my words and telling me my intentions when I said them.

I wasn’t taught that pointing with 2 fingers was done because it was rude in some cultures. I was taught that pointing with 2 fingers or the extended hand was a small detail because it appears more welcoming than pointing with one finger. That’s why I compared it to the “Disney Look” - it’s all the small details that make the “Disney Difference.”

Also.. I don’t think tattoos are offensive at all.
To be clear, I wasn't implying you specifically. Just the royal "you" - many others in this thread. :)

And agree that details make the difference, but again many - not you - are creating this false equivalency that is a frank and desperate attempt to discourage inclusivity.
 

lazyboy97o

Well-Known Member
Ah clearly you haven't gone that deep into the Disney Look changes yet...




Modern sunglasses have been allowed for some time under the Disney look because there is a safety and comfort aspect that has value over what the show or role would demand. So we say it's OK for a Big Thunder Cast Member to wear sunglasses, even if it doesn't fit with the role of a 1890s prospector. We say it's OK for them to wear a radio or a plastic poncho. So why draw the line at a tattoo?

You're right to point out though that the sunglasses are still somewhat controlled by the Disney Look as to which ones can and cannot be worn, but I'd wager to think you'd agree that an outright ban on sunglasses would be non-sensical. So how are tattoos different? Why can tattoos not follow the same "appropriateness" test?
Ban sunglasses? No. Better align them with costumes? Absolutely. Heck, seeing as you can buy a decent pair for $20, I’d say a simple neutral pair of sunglasses could just be issued with one’s name tag. I don’t think you should be wearing a variety of personal affects be it sunglasses or necklaces or body art. I see it as a costume, a designed part of the show.

Radios? I’d definitely prefer they be selected, styled and obscured to work with the costumes and context. Ponchos? I’d prefer designed raincoats. I have an unhealthy ire towards those water bottle holders. I’m the guy who doesn’t like branded napkins because they break the immersion. I like Galaxy’s Edge having unique name tags and costume separates that can be mixed and matched. Why not let people express themselves through wider costume options?

I’ve asked you this before, is a Br’er Rabbit tattoo something you consider appropriate? Guns? The Redhead? A Jungle Cruise tattoo that features elements now being removed? This isn’t meant as a gotcha but they’re examples of things that people do get as tattoos and depending on whether Disney is having their cake or eating it at that particular moment determines whether or not it is appropriate.
 

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
The problem is when your message becomes a distraction. I do not want to explain to my 8 year old on a vacation why a man is wearing a skirt. I accept expression, but this push for inclusion doesn't mean we should remove all boundaries.
Why would you have to explain? Unless of course you told him only women wear skirts. Do you have to explain why women wear pants? This is what I mean by inherent beliefs that women are inferior, there was a man wearing a skirt must somehow be inferior.
 

FerretAfros

Well-Known Member
Spot on and boy, people are working hard in this thread to make the point that CM's don't matter.
The point isn't that CM are not integral to the park experience. The point is that the individuality of the CMs is not important to the park experience.

From attractions, to food, to merchandise, nearly every single front-line CM is there to support the show; they're not the show themselves. As a guest, your experience should be the same, regardless of which particular CM you interact with on that particular day.

Does it matter that the person telling you to sit in row #3 has a tattoo? No, it doesn't. And that's the whole point. For the overwhelming majority of CMs you interact with, they're just a cog in the machine, intended to blend into the background and be unobtrusive.

Think of it like a marching band, where all the performers match their movements, music, and appearance to create something that's bigger than the sum of its parts. Without the individuals themselves, there’s fundamentally nothing to see. Yet If an individual decides to deviate from the plan, it draws attention to them at the expense of the whole group. Theme parks are similarly a gestalt environment, where everything works together to support a bigger mission than any single element, and allowing too much individuality will detract from the overall experience.

[Full disclosure: I'm the grump who still doesn't like seeing hometowns on the CM nametags all these years later, as they pull me from the moment, with my mind thinking of a far away location rather than the current interaction, which is particularly distracting with the quick interactions that guests often have with CMs. The imagery of a tattoo will similarly evoke distracting associative thoughts that remove me from the park experience itself.]

This doesn't mean that the CMs don't matter, or can't interact with guests in a unique and memorable way. But the harsh reality of how the parks have operated for 66 years is that the people working there aren't the reason that people visit; they're just a supporting element, meant to bridge the gap between the unpredictability of guests and the machinery of a theme park.
 
Last edited:

Rich Brownn

Well-Known Member
No. You’re taking my words and telling me my intentions when I said them.

I wasn’t taught that pointing with 2 fingers was done because it was rude in some cultures. I was taught that pointing with 2 fingers or the extended hand was a small detail because it appears more welcoming than pointing with one finger. That’s why I compared it to the “Disney Look” - it’s all the small details that make the “Disney Difference.”

Also.. I don’t think tattoos are offensive at all.
Here's the real irony. The two-finger point actually started because it looked like Disney did it. But in truth, he was actually holding a cigarette between the two fingers and it was airbrushed out in the photos. LOL
 

Amidala

Well-Known Member
try working in a steam locomotive - you have to wear long pants, long sleeve shirt, and steel toed boots for safety reasons. Add to the summer heat the fire from the firebox. Yet somehow those employees survive!!!!

Why are you trying to one up different examples of poor working conditions like it’s a win??? I think it’s a good general rule of thumb to have more empathy for underpaid overworked employees than for the policies of the multi-billion dollar companies that employ them, in all cases including the one you’ve mentioned.
 

Lilofan

Well-Known Member
Why are you trying to one up different examples of poor working conditions like it’s a win??? I think it’s a good general rule of thumb to have more empathy for underpaid overworked employees than for the policies of the multi-billion dollar companies that employ them, in all cases including the one you’ve mentioned.
If one ever works on the hot line in a kitchen during the lunch rush, it takes a special dedicated culinary specialist to successfully get through that.
 

Nubs70

Premium Member
Why are you trying to one up different examples of poor working conditions like it’s a win??? I think it’s a good general rule of thumb to have more empathy for underpaid overworked employees than for the policies of the multi-billion dollar companies that employ them, in all cases including the one you’ve mentioned.
Yes, on the way out of the parks greeted by a thank you, have a magical day, we should slip them a $5 bill. Here you go, I'm sorry your job sucks.
 

TrainChasers

Well-Known Member
Why are you trying to one up different examples of poor working conditions like it’s a win??? I think it’s a good general rule of thumb to have more empathy for underpaid overworked employees than for the policies of the multi-billion dollar companies that employ them, in all cases including the one you’ve mentioned.
I’m not trying to one up anything! I think working in the cab of a steam locomotive is one of the best jobs in the world!
 

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

Top Bottom