Cinderella's New Look

[baler31]

deleted to change

[baler31]

Originally Posted by fitzperry

These are available as small as size 3-5. The Frederick's of Hollywood look has worked its way down to the elementary and even pre-school set.

I have never seen the costumes featured in your photo in sizes as small as 3-5, the ad itself lists the sizes as JR. sizes. My daughter is 13 and the extra small is juniors is just starting to fit her and she is the tallest in her class at 5'7".

[fitzperry]

Originally Posted by baler31

I have never seen the costumes featured in your photo in sizes as small as 3-5, the ad itself lists the sizes as JR. sizes. My daughter is 13 and the extra small is juniors is just starting to fit her and she is the tallest in her class at 5'7".

If that's true then our Party City was displaying them in the wrong place. They were in the middle of all the girls costumes, not with the other juniors. They've probably taken the display down since Halloween was two weeks ago, so I doubt I can find out now.

[t_daniels]

Originally Posted by ArthurFiggis

You want to talk about objectification? How about Snow White's prince--doesn't even have a name. Phillip and Charming are pieces of wood that barely talk. Fathers are totally absent or blithering fools. The men who do talk are full of themselves or grovelling sidekicks. Plus, they don't even get toys, and you can't seem them at the parks except for special events. Except for the thief and the violent animal, of course. /rant

And Gaston, now.

Good points , though I think they are getting better with their princes.

[baler31]

Originally Posted by fitzperry

In a similar vein, how about these?

You can find out by looking at the ad you posted, it clearly lists the sizes available. JR sizes, 3-5 is a jr size not a standard size for children unless listed as toddler sizes which they are not.

Regardless of where you saw them displayed they are not available nor intended for children.

My daughter is 13 and the tallest in her class at 5'7" and a junior small is far too large for her.

[Princess on the Run]

Originally Posted by ArthurFiggis

You want to talk about objectification? How about Snow White's prince--doesn't even have a name. Phillip and Charming are pieces of wood that barely talk. Fathers are totally absent or blithering fools. The men who do talk are full of themselves or grovelling sidekicks. Plus, they don't even get toys, and you can't seem them at the parks except for special events. Except for the thief and the violent animal, of course. /rant

At least they get to be alive. The mothers are all dead, missing or wicked. LOL!

[fitzperry]

Originally Posted by baler31

You can find out by looking at the ad you posted, it clearly lists the sizes available. JR sizes, 3-5 is a jr size not a standard size for children unless listed as toddler sizes which they are not.

Regardless of where you saw them displayed they are not available nor intended for children.

My daughter is 13 and the tallest in her class at 5'7" and a junior small is far too large for her.

My apologies . . . Evidently our Party City was confused too. They're still tacky! But I'm glad to know they aren't intended for 7 year olds.

[tcp0421]

I think this is getting way off topic. The point is the princess's should look like they do in the movies. Would it be OK to make rigger purple or Peter pans costume blue??

[rebeccaariel]

Originally Posted by tcp0421

I think this is getting way off topic. The point is the princess's should look like they do in the movies. Would it be OK to make rigger purple or Peter pans costume blue??

IMO the new park outfits DO look like they do in the movies. The new cartoon versions that are on all the new new merchandise - not so much.

[tcp0421]

Originally Posted by rebeccaariel

IMO the new park outfits DO look like they do in the movies. The new cartoon versions that are on all the new new merchandise - not so much.

I think the new costumes are stunning. You are right not so much the merchandise. IMO I don't think they ( in the park princess's ) look trashy or anything negative. Just wished they would have left them be.

[marielynn724]

I don't like it She looks like Barbie. A little too ****ty for my taste. I like my Disney princesses classic! Just make her look like she does in the movie! Eventually they will all look like those super-creepy warped Bratz!

[tcp0421]

Originally Posted by marielynn724

I don't like it She looks like Barbie. A little too ****ty for my taste. I like my Disney princesses classic! Just make her look like she does in the movie! Eventually they will all look like those super-creepy warped Bratz!

Even though I do think the dresses are very pretty I do wish they would keep them the way they are in the movies.

[woahhcrazyyxo0]

Went to the Disney Store today and must say the dolls don't look right. My mom an I were on line looking at the dolls and commenting on how awful they looked. They looked cheap and just not right. Some also looked kind of creepy.

That being said, I don't think the changes are too bad to the images of them. I am 17, turning 18 in less than 4 months, and I grew up with the older looks and am exposed to the newer ones at a young age to live with the rest of my life. Besides some of the hair choices, i think the new looks aren't too bad.

Now for all these "sexual pose" comments:: really? I guarentee you half the songs your child listens to on the radio refers to more sexual things than the poses of the princess'. Go listen to a One Direction song ("people going all the way", "tonight lets get some", "when he lies you down i just might die inside", "shut the door turn the lights off..i wannt feel your love..trembling hands touch skin", "theres a pile of my clothes at the end of your bed", from the way that we touch to the way that you kiss on me") and say you are okay with those lyrics but are appalled by Belle looking over her shoulder (which she has done for the past few years btw).. And those just lyrics from SOME of the songs from THE FIRST album from ONE DIRECTION (excapt for one lyric), a group that is selling dolls and shirts just like the princess' are. (Note I did not listen to the second album yet to comment on it).

I find it hippocratical that the new designs of the princess' are getting grief for their poses (I will agree some of the hair is too much but the dresses and the poses aren't bad) meanwhile children are listening to songs with many sexual references and their parents are okay with that.

Thats just my two sense. If your going to judge the way a princess looks, then judge singers on what their lyrics say. Look at Justin Bieber, One Direction, Katy Perry, and the new Taylor Swift lyrics and see what your children are exposed to in pop culture. Then come back to the "sexual" poses. They aren't very sexual or provacative at all. Especially when compared to the words children are listening to every day and are becoming impressionable on. And this is coming from an (almost) 18 year old girl.

[awoogala]

Originally Posted by woahhcrazyyxo0

Went to the Disney Store today and must say the dolls don't look right. My mom an I were on line looking at the dolls and commenting on how awful they looked. They looked cheap and just not right. Some also looked kind of creepy.

That being said, I don't think the changes are too bad to the images of them. I am 17, turning 18 in less than 4 months, and I grew up with the older looks and am exposed to the newer ones at a young age to live with the rest of my life. Besides some of the hair choices, i think the new looks aren't too bad.

Now for all these "sexual pose" comments:: really? I guarentee you half the songs your child listens to on the radio refers to more sexual things than the poses of the princess'. Go listen to a One Direction song ("people going all the way", "tonight lets get some", "when he lies you down i just might die inside", "shut the door turn the lights off..i wannt feel your love..trembling hands touch skin", "theres a pile of my clothes at the end of your bed", from the way that we touch to the way that you kiss on me") and say you are okay with those lyrics but are appalled by Belle looking over her shoulder (which she has done for the past few years btw).. And those just lyrics from SOME of the songs from THE FIRST album from ONE DIRECTION (excapt for one lyric), a group that is selling dolls and shirts just like the princess' are. (Note I did not listen to the second album yet to comment on it).

I find it hippocratical that the new designs of the princess' are getting grief for their poses (I will agree some of the hair is too much but the dresses and the poses aren't bad) meanwhile children are listening to songs with many sexual references and their parents are okay with that.

Thats just my two sense. If your going to judge the way a princess looks, then judge singers on what their lyrics say. Look at Justin Bieber, One Direction, Katy Perry, and the new Taylor Swift lyrics and see what your children are exposed to in pop culture. Then come back to the "sexual" poses. They aren't very sexual or provacative at all. Especially when compared to the words children are listening to every day and are becoming impressionable on. And this is coming from an (almost) 18 year old girl.

well, considering the disney company admits the target audience for princess products are ages 3-5, I do consider the poses overly sexualized.
To answer your question, my daughter is not allowed any of that music. My kids aren't really allowed to listen to much modern pop because the lyrics are not appropriate (let alone the fact that everyone is autotuned and vapid). I don't even let them watch any of the disney channel shows, for that matter.(except for the cartoons).

I don't let my kids look at fashion magazines, either, since these types of victoria secret posings are bad for girls self image. But, to each his own, and everyone gets to make their own parenting choices.
A lot of us look to Disney because (except for their television "tween" department), they tend to respect the innocence of children.

[rebeccaariel]

I'm still extremely confused as to what is sexual about the new costumes. They cover the same amount as the old ones, they barely look different. The new animated ones, while ugly in my opinion, are certainly not sexual. Would you prefer the dolls be dressed in floor length skirts and turtlenecks? I'm not sure how any of the changes make the princesses any more sexualized than they were before, and I don't think they were sexual to begin with.