“Oh, for God’s sake,” I snapped. “Do you have a princess drill, too?”What's wrong with princesses? What's wrong with princesses?!! I'll tell you what's wrong with princesses!!!
She stared at me as if I were an evil stepmother.
“Come on!” I continued, my voice rising. “It’s 2006, not 1950. This is Berkeley, Calif. Does every little girl really have to be a princess?”
My daughter, who was reaching for a Cinderella sticker, looked back and forth between us. “Why are you so mad, Mama?” she asked. “What’s wrong with princesses?”
As a feminist mother — not to mention a nostalgic product of the Grranimals era — I have been taken by surprise by the princess craze and the girlie-girl culture that has risen around it. What happened to William wanting a doll and not dressing your cat in an apron? Whither Marlo Thomas?Whither Marlo Thomas (wither Marlo Thomas), indeed. I guess there's some big offensive princess assault going on. Got a problem with that? How strong and how good are the princesses? That would be my question. But I don't have daughters. I don't even have little kids, so I'm not following this perhaps deleterious trend. Care to shed some light on the princess problem?
ADDED: Aw.
পোস্টগুলি
৫৫টি মন্তব্য:
"This is Berkeley, Calif. Does every little girl really have to be a princess?"
Indeed, it is Berkeley, California. Does every article in the New York Times and it's magazine really have to be about the angst of liberals living in America?
Yes, yes it does.
And they wonder why readership is declining.
Have you see Peggy Orenstein? Not very pretty. Hers are sour grapes, I'd imagine.
Verification word: fmieicy--a frigid feminist. Apropos, no?
Only in the New York Times, kids, only in the New York Times.
If I were more like Peggy Orenstein, I'd fisk the article, but I've got a life...albeit not as glorious as a "feminist mother."
It gets worse when they get older. To the extent that the girls (I have a 12-year-old one) take their cues from popular culture, they go from princesses to hos and sluts. One of the things I find striking is the complete lack, in popular culture, of the female role models we were promised by the women's movement. Where are the female Dr. Kildares and Jim Andersons? When it comes to role models, it's Sex and the City, Victoria's Secret, Britney Spears and Jenna Jameson.
Sometimes I feel like leaving American popular culture, and moving to the evangelical subculture, but I'm not sure that would be the right thing.
"in true American fashion, every little girl can be a princess. I rather like it"
The question is will the princesses enjoy being married off to son of a family enemy in a vain attempt to prevent hostilities escalating into warfare?
The war on princesses. Bring it on.
Snappy Come Back To Ms. Orenstein:
Madame there's a special chair for bitches in the waiting room. Princess will only be a minute and then we'll sparkle your Visa.
Please, please, please, please tell me she's kidding. I feel so sorry for her daughter.
(Spoiler alert) in the conclusion of the article, her daughter tells her, after sharing her excitement about her princess costume... "But Mommy, when I grow up, I'm still going to be a fireman."
I have a feeling that Ms. Orenstein thinks that's some sort of wonderful conclusion, a ray of hope. Frankly, it's incredibly sad. These are the words of a preschooler doing what she can to make sure her mother isn't disappointed in her. A preschooler. And for what? For an innocent game of dressup. I can just hear her now: "Ah, but it is far from innocent, you pathetic little Y chromosome carrier, you."
Someone over there in Berkeley, please, I'm begging you, pull that gigantic stick out of Ms. Orenstein's ass.
My six-year-old daughter loves anything pink and sparkly. She's loved the stuff since she could consciously choose clothing, etc. for herself (which started near 18 mos. old). I don't have a problem with it - she's independent, fiery, funny, and kind-hearted towards others. She'd like to be a ballerina, a doctor, and a teacher. Only time will tell if my permitting her to think for herself, to choose what she wears and what toys she likes, will be a good thing or not.
Ruth Anne said:
Smart, kind, beautiful, helpful are all the qualities of the modern princesses as portrayed by Disney. Faeless and Sean, though, are seeing the trend at its worst [princesses who morph into Bridezillas], and not the Disneyfied version.
I like smart, kind, and beautiful any day, and in fact the traditional fairy tale princesses (not the Disney-fied versions, mind you) were smart, kind, and beautiful. The new Disney princess, in my opinion, is not so much smart, kind, and beautiful, but so PC and super-serious it makes me turn away in pain.
I have girls ages 5 (almost 6) and 3, and they like princesses, but we don't watch Disney movies so their exposure to that kind of princess is limited to small doses through commercial products. What they know of Cinderella comes from actual Cinderella stories, where you know, Cinderella is actually smart, kind, and beautiful (and in some versions the wicked stepsisters get their eyes pecked out at the end, and who wouldn't like that???).
We have a CD of Disney songs (a gift), and I skip the ones from the recent movies, almost uniformly, because they are so PC and self-important. Just my opinion, of course.
Girls like to dress up in fancy clothes. They like it. If their only options are slutty, they'll go that direction. If you make that off-limits, they'll go another direction, but they like to dress up. Not all of them, but most. I am not a girly-girl, but my daughters would like to be. The younger one especially would wear high heels and "princess dresses" everyday if she could.
Sean said...
"One of the things I find striking is the complete lack, in popular culture, of the female role models we were promised by the women's movement. Where are the female Dr. Kildares and Jim Andersons?"
That's a very good question. There are, of course, a plethora of women who would fit the bill, who would be great role models, but in most cases, they aren't role models in the sense that there aren't masses of people that look to them. That is, I don't think it's a good enough retort to your point for someone to say (as I'm sure the Feministing crowd would) that there are people who could be good role models; rather, I think you have to look to who actually is being looked to as a role model.
"Sometimes I feel like leaving American popular culture, and moving to the evangelical subculture, but I'm not sure that would be the right thing."
Is the question whether it's the right thing, or whether it's the best of the available options?
Hero
Maybe Disney will make a movie.
Another NYT story about another lib humorless scold (heard that phrase here a few weeks ago). If it were not so stereotypical it would be sad.
Ms. Orenstein is too stubborn to admit she can't fight biology. For example, I was in a UPS store the other day and held the door to let a young mother and her three kids (a set of twin boys about 2-3 and a girl 4-5) enter before me. It was truly hilarious to watch the the boys jumping into the bins of styrofoam packing and trying to eat some. The mother had little luck getting the boys to settle down. The girl just stood alongside her mother like a good little princess. I felt like Darwin must have felt when he validated another theorem. Yeah, you can't fight biology.
When my daughter was three she decided to be an airline pilot. "Why, dear?" "Because you get to fly the plane and to clean it."
"“Her face is all right,” I said, noncommittally, though I’m not thrilled to have my Japanese-Jewish child in thrall to those Aryan features. (And what the heck are those blue things covering her ears?)"
Let's see the NYT have some balls by switching "Aryan" and "Japanese - Jewish". What a bigoted asshole.
If parts of that story really are true, Ms. Orenstein sounds like a good candidate for an unscheduled interview with California's Child Protective Services.
Her behavior, as initially reported, sounds abusive, not merely highly inappropriate, given the age of her daughter and the circumstances. If she regularly engages in such behavior (as related at the beginning of her article) in her daughter's presence, the psychological damage she may be inflicting upon her 3-year-old daughter is not just unfortunate, it is unforgivable. I hope the end is more indicative of her behavior than the beginning, although there is not much of a silver lining to be found when her 3-year-old daughter finds it necessary to repeatedly reassure her own mother that she will turn out like her mother wants her to turn out.
The lesson this tiny little girl has apparently already learned is that her life is not really about her dreams, her future, her possibilities. Instead, it is all about her mother's failed ideals, her mother's personal phobias, her mother's fears, and her mother's apparently conditional love.
If Orenstein really is telling the truth, I am heartbroken for her daughter.
NOTE TO STEPHENB: Whatever Orenstein looks like is irrelevant. Perhaps the rest of us might say something similar about you.
Ruth Anne, it's one of those rare (but not unheard of) occasions when you and I agree fully. Prostitots, indeed!
As a feminist, I dislike things that box kids into stupid gender roles, but I don't think fantasy character stuff does that as a matter of course. (Somewhere there are a few little girls playing Xena, Warrior Princess, right?) And I'm all for kid stuff that allows them to stay kids, which fantasy does. I'd say it's more important not to pressure a little girl into the whole princess thing if she doesn't like it, than to pressure her to reject it on PC grounds.
I taught a section of Intro to Women's Studies this semester, and there were a few moms and dads in the class (many of the other students had little sisters and nieces. One of the issues that kept coming up for discussion was the trend toward sexualizing little girls through fashion and media. Between the "prostitot" Ruth Anne evokes and the image of young women in videos, particularly rap videos, there wasn't much respect for media among that group.
NOTE TO STEPHENB: Whatever Orenstein looks like is irrelevant. Perhaps the rest of us might say something similar about you.
Ah, but I'm not the one railing against dentists in the New York Times.
NOTE TO INTERNET RONIN: What Orenstein looks like may be irrelevant to you, but I reserve the right to determine relevance for myself.
Internet Ronin:
The lesson this tiny little girl has apparently already learned is that her life is not really about her dreams, her future, her possibilities. Instead, it is all about her mother's failed ideals, her mother's personal phobias, her mother's fears, and her mother's apparently conditional love.
I was originally going to comment, but you saved me the effort. I hope her kid turns out well despite it all.
Elizabeth, surely Xena, the warrior princess, like Lara Croft, tomb raider, is wholly a male fantasy. Do you actually know any girls under the age of 18? (I don't mean that as a hostile question.) I'm highly confident that none of the girls in my daughter's class fantasizes about being Xena, the warrior princess.
Ah, but I'm not the one railing against dentists in the New York Times.
No, you're the one denigrating her physical attributes here and now.
I reserve the right to determine relevance for myself.
You have every right to do so, too, just as others have a right to express an opinion about your determination, as I am sure you agree.
Merry Christmas.
Sean,
I do actually do know girls under 18, and a lot more right around the age of 18. Half my teaching load is made up of freshman courses.
Last year, Lucy Lawless was filming a movie on my campus, and there were male and female students crowded around watching. Look, it's Xena!
I was mostly kidding about Xena as a little girl princess role model, but in answer to your question, no, the character isn't a wholly male fantasy. A huge part of that show's fanbase is female, lesbian and straight alike.
This princess thread reminded me of an email I got from a student a few years ago, with a paper attached. It was unsigned, from "tinypinkprincess@someisp.com" When I opened the attachment I realized it was from a student best described as a little bulldog of a guy, a crew-cut wearing, stocky wrestler--think Sluggo from the old Nancy cartoons. My guess was he'd used his little sister's email account and had no idea how much amusement he'd provided me.
Thanks to Mr. Oni for a truly priceless link.
Check it out and you'll see StephenB is wrong on both counts. Ms. Orenstein is pretty and her Bio makes it hard to believe she missed out on the Princess experience.
Elizabeth - love that story! Definitely made me chuckle.
This archetype doesn't lose its grip: princesses grow up to be queens.
A princess is the heir to the realm. She's beautiful, special, and powerful. Why the hell not?
Hey, my childhood dentist was a sadist who oozed hypocritical smarm about "candy bugs" and then clapped a black rubber cup over your mouth if you cried for fear of the drill. I didn't know there was anything wrong with that: I just thought it was how dentists were. Ask me when I was last at the dentist.
I was not into the princess gig as a child because things were more dichotomized then, and if you were a little princess you had to sit still and not get your dress dirty. I was a woodland sprite one Hallowe'en and Robin Hood (not Maid Marian) the next. But now that princesses can roll up their bangles and kick butt, I might feel differently.
Fly the plane and clean it. Exactly.
Did you hear about the new Japanese-Jewish restaurant? It's called "SOSUMI."
For those who don't have time for the Queen link:
Millions of women are now entering or in the midst of midlife. With unprecedented freedom, education, longevity, and wealth, they hold positions of unheard of responsibility and stature. No longer Maidens, nor Mothers, and not yet old Crones, the question arises: Where do these dynamic, accomplished middle-aged women fit into the traditional description of the three stages of womanhood?
In The Queen of My Self, Donna Henes proposes a completely original paradigm— that of the midlife Queen, a woman in her prime who has achieved wisdom, mastery, and self-esteem— that reflects more accurately the realities and needs of women today. Henes draws on history, mythology, and literature, her own life experience, as well as stories from women in many different societies, situations and stations to provide upbeat, practical, and ceremonial inspiration for all women who want to enjoy the fruits of an influential, passionate, and powerful maturity.
But diva will do just as well.
As a child, I was far more frightened by the giant novacaine injector than the dentist's drill, so all of my fillings (and there were many) were done while I screamed for eight very long years. Looking back, I feel very sorry for that poor dentist.
A princess is the heir to the realm. She's beautiful, special, and powerful. Why the hell not?
Mirror, mirror on the wall.......because outside of her egocentrism there is a whole world in which the majority of people live in desperate straits. Let her take her 'beautiful, special, and powerful' self and accomplish something of real use.
Where do these dynamic, accomplished middle-aged women fit into the traditional description of the three stages of womanhood?
Why do people agonize over minutia? Who cares where they fit. Just DO.
..that of the midlife Queen, a woman in her prime who has achieved wisdom, mastery, and self-esteem..
Is it possible to become any more smug, self-absorbed and self-congratulatory?
While admitting there's excess in merchandising to girls, the author's overreaction is just too funny! Best laugh I've had in days.
"At Hot Topic, that edge was even sharper: magnets, clocks, light-switch plates and panties featured 'Dark Tink,” described as “the bad girl side of Miss Bell that Walt never saw.' "
How can you not laugh at that? It's just so over the top!
Oh, and thanks, Ruth Anne for "prostitot". In the intended context, it's perfect.
I wonder what the author would think if her daughter *really did* grow up to be a firefighter? Or, for that matter, her son?
I suspect that in either event she woul not be pleased, and that the reasons would have nothing to do with gender roles.
That's an interesting point. So much stereotypical-lefty-coastal-type condescension is actually rooted in middle-class anxiety. Not wanting to drop down a peg or be associated with something that's middle-class as opposed to upper-middle. Proper upper-middle children are androgynous because it's a class marker; being "girly" is hopelessly middle class.
(Boys too: "I have friends whose son went through the Power Rangers phase who castigated themselves over what they must’ve done wrong.")
"... being "girly" is hopelessly middle class."
Or worse. For all that the lefties claim to support the immiserated workers they would faint if their daughter became one. "Girly girls" are just trailer trash to them, lowlifes who use their bodies to get what their brains can't provide.
By the way, my little "princess" is six. She likes clothes, art and karate. Her role models include her mother and grandmother, both lawyers. Her fantasy life does not involve cartoon characters, as far as we know. I don't know "what she wants to be when she grows up" and I don't really care right now because, um, she's six.
She sometimes pulls the bossy/entitled routine, but is learning that it's not permitted and is in fact a great way to lose TV for a week. Oh, and my wife is the biggest pushover in the world but would never, ever permit our daughter to overrule her decision on what clothes are appropriate. Just. Won't. Happen.
And Peggy - have a nice life. Maybe your daughter will, too. Twat.
For all that the lefties claim to support the immiserated workers they would faint if their daughter became one.
What a silly generalization, and a stupid conflation of class with political orientation. So, upper class conservatives wouldn't mind if their daughters became an "immiserated worker"? Blue-collar lefties look down on themselves and other workers?
It would be so nice if people could put aside their knee-jerk impulse to make every comment a jab at "them," whoever "they" are.
And what a misogynist way to end a post, calling someone a "twat."
When I had a young daughter, I made sure that she didn't watch the traditional Disney Pricess movies. But many of the newer ones were fine. She quickly learned that my major concern was the passivity that was being taught in Snow White, etc. So, active female characters, like Mulan were great, but passive ones were not.
My worry had been that she might grow up with the life ambition of being beautiful to catch a Prince Charming. That may have been a viable strategy in a previous time, but not any more. So, instead of trying to catch the rich doctor through beauty, she knows that her best chance would be in medical school. Ditto for lawyers and law school, except that she knows too many of them already (including me).
I visit places like Scottsdale (AZ) where there are a lot of women out looking for rich men, and I know that is not what I want for a daughter. Instead, I want a daughter who has the choice to earn that money on her own, and not depend on the vaguaries of romance for her security. And I think that the best way to do that is not to expect Prince Charming in the first place. If he shows up, then fine.
The thing that has surprised me is that once you are open for female role models, there are plenty of them out there. My daughter knows female doctors, lawyers, executives, politicians, etc., and by now thinks that is normal. Most of her friends also have mothers who work or have worked in professional jobs, and in several cases, it is the mothers who have the jobs that support their family's life styles.
I will admit that a lot of the thinking behind my actions that I outlined in my last post are a result of my Baby Boomer feminism, reacting to a mother who gave up her career to raise five kids.
But part of it is also watching young women even today opt for husband and kids, instead of an education and career, and then turn around at 25 or so and find that they have the kids, but no security (and often no husband either).
This sort of behavior was much more realistic when most girls married and started their families in their teens, and their husbands were similarly situated. When an eigth grade education was all that was needed for either one.
And back then, the dream of being swept off her feet into marriage and kids I think helped overcome the reality that she might soon perish in child bearing, and, in any case, would be old by 40.
But now, it is foolish for girls to marry in their teens, as that almost always relegates them to a life of poverty. The most likely road for success for many girls is through education and career. And if they marry, they have a much better chance at catching the more successful guys.
So, my big problem with the traditional princess stuff (not the later Disney PC stuff) is that it seems to engender a certain passivity, where a girl learns that if she is beautiful enough, she can catch Prince Charming and live happily ever after. But that doesn't work any more. Prince Charming is likely to have an advanced degree these days, and isn't going to be happy with the airhead who doesn't have one too.
So, do I regret the feminist restrictions I put on my daughter's viewing when she was young? Not for a minute.
amba
But in real life most princesses don't grow up to be queens. They would typically have two routes to queenhood - either be the heir to the throne (and reign in the own name, like QE II), or marry into it.
When we are talking about Prince Charming sweeping them off their feet, we are talking about the second scenerio, and that is just not likely to happen any more for the reasons that I have mentioned in my previous posts here.
Maniacal cackling from Peggy Orenstein:
I am SuperFeministMom! Hear me Roar!
Mr. Evil Dentist Guy, how Dare you call my Daughter, heir to the Progressive Womyn's Throne, a princess? I will destroy you!
Geez. What overkill. I'm surprised she didn't sue the that goddam Aryan tooth polisher for emotional distress. Can you imagine the fun being her dentist? You're slogging through another day inside people's mouths, and you use the best phrase you can come up with to calm a little girl, only to find you just said The Worst Thing Possible to Medusa's kid.
I'll bet it was a tantrum the dentist saw in that little office, his eyes up at the ceiling, sorta why me and Jeeesus H.. And little did he know he'd wind up in the NYTimes for his transgressions. Maybe if he went to Feminist Re-education Camp to learn about tolerance and gender equity he'd be a better practitioner.
Can you imagine the day's tribulations if Peggy Orenstein has a son?
The dentist is a woman....
The dentist, a woman?
A traitor to her gender.
And you, a woman...
God, that makes this story even funnier!
I wonder if the dentist also sees Peggy herself. Can't wait for the next root canal. She's in for a real treat.
Elizabeth...I think there are plenty of parents who would rather have their kids be lifelong adjunct professors making slightly above minimum wage instead of being welders pulling down $70K or business-to-business salespeople making $200K. The aristocratic contempt for people who are "in trade" is not limited to those on the Left, but it seems to be strongest there.
Elizabeth...I think there are plenty of parents who would rather have their kids be lifelong adjunct professors making slightly above minimum wage instead of being welders pulling down $70K or business-to-business salespeople making $200K. The aristocratic contempt for people who are "in trade" is not limited to those on the Left, but it seems to be strongest there.
Internet Ronin said...
As a child, I was far more frightened by the giant novacaine injector than the dentist's drill, so all of my fillings (and there were many) were done while I screamed for eight very long years. Looking back, I feel very sorry for that poor dentist.
You guys will never believe this, but I just this year found out there was an injection of novacaine for my every tooth filling (and, like Internet Ronin, I had many). I'm 25 and haven't had a filling in several years, and when I saw the dentist giving me the injection a couple months ago I asked if he had always done that. "Oh, sure," he replied. "But when you were a kid the nurse covered your eyes and told you it was so the water didn't get in your eyes. She then proceeded to spray water in your mouth and shake your cheek while I gave the shot."
Speaking as a “girl mom” with two decades of experience, this woman is absolutely clueless. Kids are kids, and girls in the beginning usually tend towards “girly” and pink, while boys tend to like cars and guns – just watch any 5 year old boy and his “finger” gun. Worrying about how they’re going to turn out based on their choices of imaginary play at 3 years old is…ridiculous, at best. Why not let them be kids without all that angst and worry being projected onto them? Pink princesses are much preferred over “prostitots” any day of the week.
My eldest is 20, my middle girl is 12, and my youngest is due to be born in April. I also have two step-daughters at 10 & 12, and a 6 year old step-son. Pink has always been the preferred color, no matter how heartily sick I grow of it. Although the eldest eventually graduated to black and dark blue, my 12 year old, who is a Harry Potter fanatic, refuses to change her pink and lavender girly bedroom. My step-daughters like their blue room, reject the princess thing totally – but the 10 year old wanted (and received) a “pink, sparkly guitar” for Christmas. The 12 year old step-daughter, a quintessential tomboy, wanted a blue one.
My step-son’s favorite Christmas present was the Nerf gun tag set. This is also the child that likes to paint his nails and do “make-overs” (I guess being surrounded by sisters will do that to you).
Regarding the Disney princesses, passive Snow White is my least favorite. We own all the Disney films, but the kids all know how I feel about Snow White and women who, in general, let life push them around while waiting for someone to rescue them. Allowing them to watch a “passive” princess and discuss her choices (or lack thereof) seems a better tactic to me than in depriving them of the experience because of my disapproval of her non-actions.
Although I firmly believe that there is a biological hard-wiring going on for certain predispositions in girl and boy behavior, no two children are exactly alike. My eldest was “Zena, Warrior Princess” for multiple Halloweens, my middle girl an angel for the past three. Older step-daughter likes to be a pirate or hobo, while the younger one wanted to be a fairy. And the lone boy does super-heros. Each one is different, each one has different preferences…but three out of four girls do “girly”. And even though the boy likes make-up, he goes for cars or guns over dolls every time.
Advice for “Ms. Berkely”: let your daughter be herself. Let her enjoy being a girl “princess”, if that’s what she wants. Don’t deprive her of simple childhood enjoyment in imaginary play because of your prejudices, or project your needs onto her. Chances are she’ll grow up to be just fine.
phoenix rising reports 'My eldest was “Zena, Warrior Princess” for multiple Halloweens'
Cool! I'm not completely, cluelessly out of touch with reality. That's good to hear.
Wow, thanks for the link! Observations!
1) I live in Berkeley, CA. Parenting here is weird.
2) I am the dad of a three year old daughter.
3) I hate this princess crap that's everywhere.
4) My wife heartily disagrees
5) Want to keep your little girl off the princess shtick? Good luck, boyo. Not happenin'. And you, too, will sink to invoking in when you need to using it in times of need ("C'mon, now, you have to smile and say thanks when the lady says something nice like that, that's what princesses do.")
6) But I reserve the right to detest this "Disney Princess" crap which enables Disney to package up all their female characters from Cinderella to Pocahontas an synergistically market them.
Hi Elizabeth!
I don't know anyone I'd consider upper class, so I guess you have me there. I know more than a few upper middle class conservatives, though, and most would be thrilled if their children did something that involved sacrifice, whether teaching school, fighting fires or serving in the military. Except for shortly after 9/11 I haven't found the same sentiments expressed nearly as often among my numerous upper middle class liberal acquaintances. As for blue-collar lefties, I guess I don't know any. Do you?
I don't think I'm mistaken - let alone stupid - in thinking that class and politics reinforce each other. I think that Marx fella might agree with me.
It indeed used to be true that the left was hospitable to the working class, and vice versa. No longer. Today, the left is the comfortable home of the comfortably off. From Ted Kennedy to Katrina van den Heuvel, some of our most notable leftists lecture us proles from a pulpit constructed of inherited wealth.
And I'm sorry you feel that it was misogynistic of me to call Ms. Orenstein a twat. I take it back. She's a dick.
ronbo, grow up and stop calling people names. People might take you seriously then.
I grew up in a family of blue-collar liberals, with a long tradition of military service, as well as other public service including nursing, policing, teaching, working in factories and universities as well. Life's more complex than your dick-twat analysis makes it out to be.
Now I am not a particular fan of Snow White being more partial to the vertically-challenged Seven, but I must offer her some defense from the label of 'passive'.
She came from an abusive home, saved her life from her would-be assassin with fast-talking histrionics, without the benefit of survival training courses or a backpack, she survived a forest filled with wild animals to find shelter and food and then overcame more 3 attempts on her life. And with all that she remained compassionate and unjaded.
She need make no apologies.
Shanna,
At worst she was naive for she was of pure heart seeing only the very best in her fellow beings and because she could never cause harm she, in turn, did not believe she would be harmed.
Perhaps the latter day princesses are proficient in kick-boxing, eye gouging and grenade-launching but Snow's way was to change the world through kindness and gentleness. She and Gandhi would have connected.
On the other hand, as her past actions showed, she was intelligent, tenacious and adaptable and so it seems circumstances caused her to become somewhat of a realist. As usual the media and Hollywood spin events to their own purpose but according to the Jacob and Wilhelm Grimm official version when the final meeting took place between Snow and the Queen, not to be outdone by her latter- day sisters, the Queen suffered the following fate:
"But two iron slippers had already been put into glowing coals. Someone took them out with a pair of tongs and set them down in front of her. She was forced to step into the red-hot shoes and dance till she fell to the floor dead." Footnote
Any psychologist or parent knows that children are born with a "me'' complex. With time good parents try to raise the child to think of others, to share and cooperate; to mature. However, this princess craze (heavily promoted by Disney) actually deters maturity and promotes a sense of selfishness and entitlement in little girls.
On the surface it looks harmless...some fantasy role play. But what is it about a princess that little girls emulate? Mostly it comes down to power, money and beauty.
A princess has power (bossy, demanding). She has money (she comes from royalty) which promotes greed, lasciviousness. A princess is beautiful, she's vain and narcissistic. All negative characteristics that are too commonplace these days.
I've seen this behavior in my "little princess" nieces. They're self centered, demanding, vain and inconsiderate of others. They'll be intolerable adults if they don't grow out of it.
Maybe we should be teaching the girls to emulate Mother Teresa. She wasn't beautiful, and had no power or money. But she certainly made a positive difference for a lot of unfortunate people and set a good example for everyone.
একটি মন্তব্য পোস্ট করুন