Move over Snow White. Make room for Disney’s first black princess. With America’s first African-American president in the White House, Disney is counting on an African-American princess to be a big hit in Hollywood. But even though The Princess and the Frog isn’t released until later this year, it is already stirring up controversy. For while Princess Tiana and many in the cartoon cast are black – the prince is not. Which has led some critics to complain that Disney has ducked the opportunity for a fairytale ending for a black prince and princess. While some have hailed Disney’s decision as a reflection of melting pot America, others say the company is sending out a mixed message. Although the black princess’s love interest in the new animated musical is called Prince Naveen of Maldonia and is voiced by a Brazilian actor, he looks more white than black in photographs from the film that Disney have released. Since Snow White and the Seven Dwarfs in 1937, all of Disney’s princesses have predominantly been white. A native Indian princess was featured in Pocahontas and Jasmine in Aladdin had a Middle Eastern appearance. The race row hasn’t yet hit the mainstream because the film’s release date isn’t until late in the year, but Internet chat rooms and blogs have been abuzz with complaints. One disappointed fan wrote (sic): 'I think it's sad that he is white because its saying that black love isn't good enough and that black men could never be princes. ‘Disney had the perfect chance to make its first black prince, but instead it decided to go the controversial route.'
Another complained (sic): ‘I am very disappointed and I wished Disney had made the prince black,(and the ironic thing is the prince in the movie is white but the evil voodoo villain is voiced by a black actor and is black).’ Since announcing their plans for the first black princess in 2006 the production of Hollywood studio's 49th animated film has been dogged by racial controversy. Originally called The Frog Princess, its heroine was to be a chambermaid called Maddy working for a spoilt white debutante in 1920s New Orleans. But the storyline sparked a backlash from critics who claimed it reinforced prejudice and demeaned black people. The princess’s original name was perceived by some to be a stereotypical ‘slave name’ and she was also a maid working for a wealthy white boss, which was criticised as being racially insensitive. Even the New Orleans setting for the film was questioned as it had overtones of voodoo and slavery. Disney has insisted its choice of a black princess was part of a policy to give characters as much diversity as possible. In the past, founder Walt Disney has been accused of being racist, particularly against Jews and blacks. One extreme example often cited by his critics was in The Jungle Book which was made in 1964 at the height of the civil rights movement. In one scene, Mowgli is told he can't live with Baloo the bear because different species need to keep to themselves. Disney also ran into trouble when creating the character of Pocahontas in 1995 for the retelling of the encounter between an English settler and a Native American princess. Animators were accused of modelling Pocahontas on model Naomi Campbell, although they said they had used Native American faces as their inspiration. Anika Noni Rose, the black actress who voices the character of Princess Tiana, has insisted that people should look beyond the colour of the character. ‘Not only is she the first black princess, she’s the first American princess. We’ve never had an American princess,’ said Rose.
‘The scope and the significance is larger than people even realise,’ she added. Rose has starred in Dreamgirls but is best known in Britain as the officious secretary Grace in the new BBC series The No 1 Ladies Detective Agency. The film also features the voice of chat show queen Oprah Winfrey as Tiana's mother called Eudora. The film is scheduled for release in December. Although set in 1920s New Orleans it an adaptation of the classic tale The Frog Prince. In the Disney version, Prince Naveen is turned into a frog by a voodoo magician and asks Princess Tiana to kiss him to break the spell. But she turns into a frog and the pair must reverse the spell, while in true fairy tale tradition, they fall in love. Nobody from Disney was available to comment tonight.

yeah, i'm sure anyone who reads this thread will feel the same way.

no thats not the video

wow what a surprise

What's not the video?

The first one is examples of HOW they create cartoons out of sexual organs. That is all. The 2nd video where brooklyn-ho needed some undoubtable proof was the one with Lion King, Snow White, etc..

The 3rd video was from Fantasia that just happens to have the scene of when Satan rules world for some really f*cked up reason. Which has a nude scene in it.
What that you didn't have a childhood, living in America? No shit...

What's next, your parents are actually two homosexual women?

What's not the video?

The first one is examples of HOW they create cartoons out of sexual organs. That is all. The 2nd video where brooklyn-ho needed some undoubtable proof was the one with Lion King, Snow White, etc..

The 3rd video was from Fantasia that just happens to have the scene of when Satan rules world for some really f*cked up reason. Which has a nude scene in it.
What that you didn't have a childhood, living in America? No shit...

What's next, your parents are actually two homosexual women?

I think all JC was asking for was some proof that these cartoons that are based on sexual organs are still in circulation. If it's something that was drawn up but never made it to the general public, then why does it matter?

no i didn't you f*cking douchebag. i didn't say those weren't snow white and shit. i said relate the first video to actual disney characters before anyone will give a shit about characters drawn from sexual organs. you're just too dense to get the point that drawing characters out of sexual organs doesn't matter if you're not going to show it was actually done to make those that children watch.


where did you live when you were a child?

Do you not understand english or something? Your video wasn't the video im talking about, lmao, f*cking sherlock holmes over here getting mad AGAIN. So once again.

I think all JC was asking for was some proof that these cartoons that are based on sexual organs are still in circulation. If it's something that was drawn up but never made it to the general public, then why does it matter?

I find it surprising that you think it's really affecting a child psyche. When a child watches Disney I highly doubt that he or she can point out a penis. If the kid can, then I'd be questioning if something happened to that child. Just sayin'.

THANK YOU


but since he's too stupid to understand that he has to call me and my parents f****ts instead.

What would it have mattered? I mean... I understand if you lived in like... Africa or Haiti or heck even Dominican Republic. It's children cartoons.. you haven't seen these yet I bet you be rockin some serious homo, "Bob Square Pants" type ish, huh?
Oh...

I'm saying that kids shouldn't be able to see something and go "LOOK MOM! There's a penis... right there in the middle!" It's just... wrong. If a kid came up to me and said that I'd be really suspicious.

This is why the Debate forum is not your friend. What does ANYTHING about where he grew up/what he watched/who his parents are have anything to do with cartoons being drawn out of sexual organs? Unless he was the one who drew up the damn cartoons I'd have to say nothing.

Holy. shit. you guys are f*ckin nuts. Are you even reading the full context or do you only see me having a convo with uh... a f*ckin ghost? I'M NOT ASKIN HIM WHERE THE f*ck HE LIVED AS A CHILD YOU IDIOT.

thats right you little bitch, now sit your ugly ass down and shut the f*ck up

prob would love me to touch you too huh you little f****t