Splash Mountain re-theme announced

[hokielutz]

Of course the alt-right will have that interpretation but I think we know better than to listen to those folks.

Interpretation is correct... you are interpreting the counter petition as an alt-right call to action... when others interpret the change as an over-reaction by the corporation to appease a very small group that would've moved onto their next target if Disney execs kept mum.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Right. Reading isn’t a good thing, not if it could possibly come from something you don’t agree with.

We aren’t going to see eye to eye here. I think Rachel Maddow’s show is trash, but I watch it, because I don’t stay in a bubble, I know other people are watching it, and I want to know what they’re seeing.
Again, different strokes.

I read articles from many different sources with various leanings. The NYP is not among them for a reason.

 

[21stamps]

I read it. These two paragraphs sum up the author's argument:

But when national institutions bow (or kneel) to the street fighters’ demands, it should tell us that something else is going on. We aren’t dealing with a Maoist or Marxist revolt, even if some protagonists spout hard-leftish rhetoric. Rather, what’s playing out is a counter-revolution of the neoliberal class — academe, media, large corporations, ‘experts’, Big Tech — against the nationalist revolution launched in 2016. The supposed insurgents and the elites are marching in the streets together, taking the knee together.​

​

They do not seek a radically new arrangement, but a return to the pre-Trump, pre-Brexit status quo ante which was working out very well for them. It was, of course, working out less well for the working class of all races, who bore the brunt of their preferred policy mix: open borders, free trade without limits, an aggressive cultural liberalism that corroded tradition and community, technocratic ‘global governance’ that neutered democracy and politics as such.​

But how does any of this relate to Splash Mountain?

It’s all the same thing. This entire movement and the people bowing to it... I don’t believe there’s a bit of sincerity there.
If there was, then wouldn’t we have heard from at least one person who was bothered by Splash in the first place? We likely won’t, because that’s not why the change is coming.

 

[hokielutz]

I'd continue messing with you, but as I am sure you are aware, these will be deleted in short order.

Best of luck Che

Phil has been deleted a number of times earlier in this discussion while it was under news and rumors. He's got a free pass here to get as political as he desires... excluding hate speech. Just ignore @Phil12

 

[kong1802]

Right. Reading isn’t a good thing, not if it could possibly come from something you don’t agree with.

We aren’t going to see eye to eye here. I think Rachel Maddow’s show is trash, but I watch it, because I don’t stay in a bubble, I know other people are watching it, and I want to know what they’re seeing.
Again, different strokes.

I mean do you have an opinion piece from Breitbart I could read....

Really would like to get their thoughts on the matter....

 

[Chi84]

Petition aside, do you really think Disney’s decision had nothing to do with current climate and backlash?

I think it has a lot to do with the timing of it. From what I understand, Disney was planning a re-theme for some time. The current sociopolitical climate gave them an opportunity to roll it out to some positive publicity for being inclusive. I don't think very many people were overtly offended by Splash Mountain - some, like me, didn't care much for it based on the fact that it seemed so outdated. But even though I wasn't offended by the theme, I can certainly see the reason Disney would want to distance itself from it in the current climate and embrace a more inclusive theme that current guests can more easily relate to.

 

[kong1802]

Right. Reading isn’t a good thing, not if it could possibly come from something you don’t agree with.

We aren’t going to see eye to eye here. I think Rachel Maddow’s show is trash, but I watch it, because I don’t stay in a bubble, I know other people are watching it, and I want to know what they’re seeing.
Again, different strokes.

Don't get all mad because people called out the author from your twitter headlining article as being from an illegitimate and biased source. It's ok, really it is.

But back to the thread.........

 

[Rich Brownn]

The truth is the same number of guests upset with this is the same number of guests that were upset with the Frozen ride - practically nobody. Its just us hard cores

 

[ImperfectPixie]

Then you should know what an op-ed is

I absolutely do. And I don't want to read the opinion of anyone willing to be associated with such a garbage source.

 

[kong1802]

I absolutely do. And I don't want to read the opinion of anyone willing to be associated with such a garbage source.

I mean, as soon as you know where the author edits (or co edits), the credibility is shot. Why waste time?

I do love reading people who have credibility though. Sometimes their opinions can be thought provoking.

 

[ImperfectPixie]

There’s a lot of opinion articles that I ether don’t want to read, or don’t have time to read. I just don’t usually make a huge deal as to why I wouldn’t read it, I would just scroll by.
Weird that some people are so invested in comments about an article that they won’t read. Lol oh well

Weird that someone is so invested with making sure others read a link they posted.

 

[21stamps]

The truth is the same number of guests upset with this is the same number of guests that were upset with the Frozen ride - practically nobody. Its just us hard cores

I’m more curious about who was disturbed by it in the first place. I don’t think there is going to be some huge backlash against WDW for the change, I’ll still go regardless.. I just find it so hard to believe that people were upset in the first place..as in people who actually were on the ride, or at Disney at all.

 

[LittleBuford]

It’s all the same thing. This entire movement and the people bowing to it... I don’t believe there’s a bit of sincerity there.
If there was, then wouldn’t we have heard from at least one person who was bothered by Splash in the first place? We likely won’t, because that’s not why the change is coming.

In a strange way, you're agreeing with me, because I too don't believe that a large percentage of people are bothered by the ride as it currently stands. Disney isn't changing the theme to appease "the mob" (as has repeatedly been claimed here), but for strategic reasons that are geared for the long term while also responding to the current climate.

ETA: Oh, I see @Chi84 beat me to it (and said it much better than I did).

 

[21stamps]

I think it has a lot to do with the timing of it. From what I understand, Disney was planning a re-theme for some time. The current sociopolitical climate gave them an opportunity to roll it out to some positive publicity for being inclusive. I don't think very many people were overtly offended by Splash Mountain - some, like me, didn't care much for it based on the fact that it seemed so outdated. But even though I wasn't offended by the theme, I can certainly see the reason Disney would want to distance itself from it in the current climate and embrace a more inclusive theme that current guests can more easily relate to.

Do you feel that it’s a bit disingenuous given that so much of the attractions are linked to stories that contain offensive story lines? That’s why I have so much skepticism over Disney here.

My main concerns (over the change itself) are -
“Ugh, a princess in Frontierland” “Will Tom Sawyer survive?” and “Will Zip ah Dee Doo da go away?”
The latter two can’t be answered right now.

 

[21stamps]

In a strange way, you're agreeing with me, because I too don't believe that a large percentage of people are bothered by the ride as it currently stands. Disney isn't changing the theme to appease "the mob" (as has repeatedly been claimed here), but for strategic reasons that are geared for the long term while also responding to the current climate.

ETA: Oh, I see @Chi84 beat me to it (and said it much better than I did).

I’m not agreeing though. There was a petition for it. I don’t believe the petition was the sole reason, I think a big part of it was that they wanted to put on a show, to take advantage of a due-to-climate positive press regarding the change.

What I have a hard time believing, is that any of the social media mob was actually bothered by the ride in the first place, as far as first-hand bothered, not hashtag bothered. Sounds like we do agree on that part.

 

[LittleBuford]

I mean, as soon as you know where the author edits (or co edits), the credibility is shot. Why waste time?

I do love reading people who have credibility though. Sometimes their opinions can be thought provoking.

I looked into the author and found this doozy:

"But conservative Christians can’t afford these luxuries. Progressives understand that culture war means discrediting their opponents and weakening or destroying their institutions. Conservatives should approach the culture war with a similar realism. Civility and decency are secondary values. They regulate compliance with an established order and orthodoxy. We should seek to use these values to enforce our order and our orthodoxy, not pretend that they could ever be neutral. To recognize that enmity is real is its own kind of moral duty."

Against David French-ism | Sohrab Ahmari

Though culturally conservative, French is a political liberal, which means that individual autonomy is his lodestar.

www.firstthings.com

 

[LittleBuford]

I’m not agreeing though. There was a petition for it. I don’t believe the petition was the sole reason, I think a big part of it was that they wanted to put on a show, to take advantage of a due-to-climate positive press regarding the change.

While I wouldn't frame it so cynically, we are saying much the same thing. Others are claiming that Disney's hand was forced, but I don't believe it was (and it seems you don't believe it either).

 

[Chi84]

Do you feel that it’s a bit disingenuous given that so much of the attractions are linked to stories that contain offensive story lines? That’s why I have so much skepticism over Disney here.

My main concerns (over the change itself) are -
“Ugh, a princess in Frontierland” “Will Tom Sawyer survive?” and “Will Zip ah Dee Doo da go away?”
The latter two can’t be answered right now.

Honestly, I don’t. It’s not necessary to fix everything that could possibly be viewed as objectionable in order to make one thing better. I think Splash stands out because of its association with a movie that some view as racist. I’ve never seen the movie, so I won’t comment on it. But even Disney must agree with that sentiment to some extent because I understand they have distanced themselves from the movie and had already been planning to re-do Splash.

I don’t get emotionally attached to Disney attractions although there are some I would miss. I’m not worried, though, because it’s unlikely Disney is going to start a wholesale dismantling of its attractions. Splash was already on the block. As for Tom Sawyer, he can go and take Zip ah Dee Doo da with him. Just my preference - has nothing to do with being offended.

 

[kong1802]

I looked into the author and found this doozy:

"But conservative Christians can’t afford these luxuries. Progressives understand that culture war means discrediting their opponents and weakening or destroying their institutions. Conservatives should approach the culture war with a similar realism. Civility and decency are secondary values. They regulate compliance with an established order and orthodoxy. We should seek to use these values to enforce our order and our orthodoxy, not pretend that they could ever be neutral. To recognize that enmity is real is its own kind of moral duty."

Against David French-ism | Sohrab Ahmari

Though culturally conservative, French is a political liberal, which means that individual autonomy is his lodestar.

www.firstthings.com

I hate being right sometimes...

 

[21stamps]

While I wouldn't frame it so cynically, we are saying much the same thing. Others are claiming that Disney's hand was forced, but I don't believe it was (and it seems you don't believe it either).

Yes, I don’t believe they were forced.

Honestly, I don’t. It’s not necessary to fix everything that could possibly be viewed as objectionable in order to make one thing better. I think Splash stands out because of its association with a movie that some view as racist. I’ve never seen the movie, so I won’t comment on it. But even Disney must agree with that sentiment to some extent because I understand they have distanced themselves from the movie and had already been planning to re-do Splash.

I don’t get emotionally attached to Disney attractions although there are some I would miss. I’m not worried, though, because it’s unlikely Disney is going to start a wholesale dismantling of its attractions. Splash was already on the block. As for Tom Sawyer, he can go and take Zip ah Dee Doo da with him. Just my preference - has nothing to do with being offended.

I think my thoughts are not even specifically to Splash, just that I don’t want princesses everywhere. I had a much greater love for Tom Sawyer rather than Cinderella growing up.. I love the simplicity and ‘make your own attraction’ of TSI, probably why I love the Treehouse too. I think the younger generations still need those attractions, and I think our nostalgia needs it too.

With the song itself, I feel it’s the summation of the magic of Disney. I hear it, and I think of singing it during my childhood with my siblings and parents at WDW, and home (I think I had a record with the song, I’m that old).. and I think of being at Disney as an adult with friends and/or husband singing it, and I think of being at Disney with my own child singing it. Those memories and connections are quintessential Disney, imo. Without the WDW generational/full circle experiences, then some of the magic is lost.