1.05.2009

NO





I can't even find this remotely funny. It's disgusting and there had to be someone who knew when they released this lovable children's classic that they were. and will forever be, completely in the wrong.

It's apparently based on some classic American story (and most of those are full or irony and bigotry).

Read one version of the story. (Aqui)

I want this to be an open discussion, so leavea comment(s) about it, read the previous, let me know what you think.

1 comment:

Ian said...

This "Tar Baby" was characterized as female, and on top of this blatant racism, there's added latent sexism. Like how white men ignorantly uncivilized or otherwise, would abuse colored women with them just being obediently silent and submissive, and how the men would get attached to them, and stuck "inside" them.
These white men would be "eaten" or disgraced by society or let off the hook, using whatever righteous excuse a race can to warrant the crime and dismiss it as non-such in the same breath, at the same time. Speaking of TIME, what year was this created? Disney had no cultural right.
He got angry she didn't speak, like it was his RIGHT that she had to answer.... Should i go vomit? i feel like i have to.

In "Princess and the Frog" related news, i don't feel like they would have done well, and treated the original storyline of this movie with sensitivity. Maddie, the proclaimed 1st black Disney princess, was to be a chambermaid to a white southern debutante, and turned into a frog that would have been a better alternative than the white prince she is to have fall in love with her, see her in her true nigress form. She would've been a sticky joke. I would've had to say, "Poor Tar B-... I mean poor baby..."
http://www.mythfolklore.net/3043mythfolklore/images/remus/disney_rabbit.jpg
http://community.livejournal.com/princessandfrog

無料カウンター Powered by   FIX2RENT