"Tiana’s concept art is so gorgeous. It’s funny that Disney didn’t put more effort into her hair when they were so proud of their work on Rapunzel and Merida’s hair…I’d wonder why but it’s probably the same reason that the one black princess is the princess that’s a frog for 85% of the movie"
So, you think that Disney is racist, and are so racist that they think that black people can’t have loose hair? Uh, no. Rapunzel’s hair is a HUGE part of her story and character development, of course they’d work hard on that. Merida’s hair was a huge factor of her in the advertisements, and is kind of a metaphor for her wild personality. As for Tiana, I doubt, I so highly doubt that her hair is up for most of the movie because Disney is racist. Tiana keeping her hair up shows her personality too, her hard-working personality, as it shows that she doesn’t want loose hair in her eyes or hair falling in her food when she cooks. And also, Merida and Rapunzel are CGI, and CGI hair usually has way more detail than 2D hair.
Finally, I still get annoyed when people hate on how Tiana is a frog for most of the movie. I honestly don’t see the racism in that, and I think it’s as good a story for their first black heroine as any.
Black hair (particularly black women’s hair) is stigmatized in Western society as dirty, or unkempt. Most ethnic styles of hair are frowned upon, such as Afros, twists, braids, puffs, and dreadlocks. This is subliminally carried into Princess and the Frog with the artists choosing (operative term) to keep Tiana’s hair back or up during her few minutes as a human on screen. There’s honestly no reason she could not have had her hair down, especially near the end.
And while computer animation can give you more details (one of the major pros of the medium), that doesn’t magic away the fact that the animators didn’t want to animate Tiana’s hair beyond a few bobs of her ponytail. Detail is not the issue here. Past Disney women whose hair also did not factor into the plots of their stories had very competently animated hair. And those were all hand-drawn.
So the medium has nothing to do with competent animation.
And I guess it’s good enough that the first black heroine (and only one as far as Disney is concerned) is not even human for nearly 85% of the her movie? Yeah, because that’s a respectful portrayal of a black woman: to have her be a frog for the majority of her film. And that’s especially memorable compared to her white counterparts whose screen time is never compromised and are able to keep their humanity throughout them.
INVISIBLE DIVERSITY IS NOT REAL DIVERSITY.
Tiana has the most lazily animated hair of any disney princess. It’s in a bun, it stays in the bun. No movement, no body whatsoever. Any disney heroine, period. And to suggest that that doesn’t have anything to do behind the stigma surrounding black hair then you aren’t paying attention.
Also, if you do a Google image search for “natural hair updos” or “natural hair styles” you will see plenty of options that would keep Tiana’s hair out of the way when she’s cooking.
maybe i’m a goddamn bleeding heart hippie liberal but i’m totally down with paying an extra .50 cents for a thing of fries if the person who makes me those fries doesn’t have to work 3 jobs just to survive.
Source: Truths You Won’t Believe
Debunking more lies and racist misinformation about black men. Stop the ignorance and start to question why these myths exist in the first place, if not to demonize black men and promote the image of us as inherently criminal and violent and incapable of being educated.
This coupled with the recent realization that black women are the most educated group…
It seems like there is this always present “when is the ‘black community’ going to pull themselves up from the bootstraps” question that floats around everywhere I go. Yet on micro and macro levels black excellence and success is only growing exponentially with each year - despite racism, institutional barriers, lack of privilege, colorblind ideologies and rampant gentrification.
Now imagine the gains we’d be able to make if people were willing to have these conversations and actually think critically about our society and culture
Sunset & Seward, Hollywood
ANNE FRANK WAS BI
HOW DID NO ONE EVER TELL ME THIS
I FEEL FUCKING ROBBED
"The average prison sentence for men who kill their intimate partners is 2 to 6 years. Women who kill their partners are sentenced, on average, 15 to 17 years. A pair of Maryland cases vividly illustrates this inequality in sentencing. In one case, a judge in Baltimore County, Maryland sentenced Kenneth Peacock to 18 months for killing his unfaithful wife. The very next day, another judge in the same county sentenced Patricia Ann Hawkins to three years in prison for killing her abusive husband. Significantly, the prosecutor in the Peacock case requested a sentence twice as long as the one imposed, while the prosecutor in the Hawkins case requested one-third of the sentence imposed.”
“As many as 90% of the women in prison today  for killing men had been battered by those men.”
~ The Michigan Women’s Justice & Clemency Project
try and tell me sexism isn’t real
Hold the fucking phoneSo about that one song in Chicago
“The very first time I saw you Harry, I recognised you immediately. Not by your scar, by your eyes. They’re your mother Lily’s. Oh yes, I knew her. Your mother was there for me at a time when no one else was. Not only was she a singularly gifted witch, she was also an uncommonly kind woman. She had a way of seeing the beauty in others, even, and perhaps most especially, when that person couldn’t see it in themselves. Your father, James, however, had a certain, shall we say, talent for trouble. A talent, rumour has it, he passed onto you. You’re more like them than you know, Harry. In time you’ll come to see just how much.”
if you search my first and last name and university of minnesota the fifth result down is for my involvement in the queer student cultural center and that’s really fucking weird because that information is so readily accessible yet i know my dad would never see it?
When [an abusive man] tells me that he became abusive because he lost control of himself, I ask him why he didn’t do something even worse. For example, I might say, “You called her a fucking whore, you grabbed the phone out of her hand and whipped it across the room, and then you gave her a shove and she fell down. There she was at your feet where it would have been easy to kick her in the head. Now, you have just finished telling me that you were ‘totally out of control’ at that time, but you didn’t kick her. What stopped you?” And the client can always give me a reason. Here are some common explanations:
"I wouldn’t want to cause her a serious injury."
“I realized one of the children was watching.”
“I was afraid someone would call the police.”
“I could kill her if I did that.”
“The fight was getting loud, and I was afraid the neighbors would hear.”
And the most frequent response of all:
"Jesus, I wouldn’t do that. I would never do something like that to her.”
The response that I almost never heard — I remember hearing it twice in the fifteen years — was: “I don’t know.”
These ready answers strip the cover off of my clients’ loss of control excuse. While a man is on an abusive rampage, verbally or physically, his mind maintains awareness of a number of questions: “Am I doing something that other people could find out about, so it could make me look bad? Am I doing anything that could get me in legal trouble? Could I get hurt myself? Am I doing anything that I myself consider too cruel, gross, or violent?”
A critical insight seeped into me from working with my first few dozen clients: An abuser almost never does anything that he himself considers morally unacceptable. He may hide what he does because he thinks other people would disagree with it, but he feels justified inside. I can’t remember a client ever having said to me: “There’s no way I can defend what I did. It was just totally wrong.” He invariably has a reason that he considers good enough. In short, an abuser’s core problem is that he has a distorted sense of right and wrong.
I sometimes ask my clients the following question: “How many of you have ever felt angry enough at your mother to get the urge to call her a bitch?” Typically half or more of the group members raise their hands. Then I ask, “How many of you have ever acted on that urge?” All the hands fly down, and the men cast appalled gazes on me, as if I had just asked whether they sell drugs outside elementary schools. So then I ask, “Well, why haven’t you?” The same answer shoots out from the men each time I do this exercise: “But you can’t treat your mother like that, no matter how angry you are! You just don’t do that!”
The unspoken remainder of this statement, which we can fill in for my clients, is: “But you can treat your wife or girlfriend like that, as long as you have a good enough reason. That’s different.” In other words, the abuser’s problem lies above all in his belief that controlling or abusing his female partner is justifiable…."