Disney (in the form of a lesser-known company called FreeForm, owned by Disney) has responded to the #NotMyAriel that is going around now. I have their response here...
An open letter to the Poor, Unfortunate Souls:#TheLittleMermaid #Ariel #MyAriel pic.twitter.com/XYJSXKt2BU— Freeform (@FreeformTV) July 6, 2019
OK, let me say this, the "poor, unfortunate souls" could be just a jab at Ursula's song. But still it's a very unprofessional way to respond to the people who buy the tickets and merchandise put out by the company. I know if I had ever said anything like that to a customer of UMG, my supervisor would have had my ass on a platter! I would not have ever dared talk to a customer like that! Even if they are hostile to you, you still have to respond professionally. And as for the insert note they enclosed, well, let's break it down a bit...
OK, so how come Aladdin had to become woke with "cultural appropriation", with crap actors, but The Little Mermaid doesn't have to. They have to follow modern cultural norms in the case of Ariel. I just cannot wait to see who plays Prince Eric.
The original writer of this story was around in the 19th century, from 1805 to 1875. I really could not find the demographics for African immigrants in Denmark for that time period. But I did find a couple charts that go back to 2014. This is what I found...
The bottom (gray) line shows non-western immigrants in Denmark and for the past 5 years, the numbers have remained under 50,000. But that's since 2014. Well, according to this article, 2015 saw the largest immigration of Africans to Denmark. The story "The Little Mermaid" was written and published in 1837. You can imagine there were almost no immigrants of African descent in 1837. Not enough to constitute a story anyways. So while yes, there are black people in Denmark, it is rare, and it is too new.
Yes, but they are almost never pretty. Who wants to see a dark-skinned, red-haired Ariel??? I would think to bear the title "princess" one would have to be pretty. The purpose for it is reproduction.
I don't think anyone is denying how talented and gorgeous Halle Bailey is. I'm not. But the original Disney character Ariel has now been known, and marketed, with the same appearance for YEARS now. It'd be like me now marketing Katrina who has looked like this since 1999...
It doesn't make sense. If you are going to change the whole appearance of the character, you might as well make it a whole different character, and a whole different story. But I guess that's too hard for the young brains of today's Disney producers to grasp. And face it, your goal isn't really all about Halle Bailey being "inspired"! Your goal is to cave into the dumb, woke, SJW-libtard propaganda!
Anyways, let's move on...
Oh boy! And I have news for you...about YOU! You lost my respect with the release of the Lion "King" back in 1994, with your erroneous portrayal of hyenas being cowardly, evil scavengers and lions being "all good" beasts. But with this remark, you've lost me completely. I will NEVER buy tickets for, watch, or purchase, stream any Disney media ever again in my lifetime! Like I said, if I had ever treated a customer to UMG the same way you are treating your customers now, my supervisor would have had my ass! I'd have been canned. Even now, with my supervisor retiring, I would never talk to the customers the way you just did! I maintain the original terms of service for my company. Why don't you? Or is this how Disney has always been?
Something to ponder.
No comments:
Post a Comment