shoomlah:

Finally updated Pocahontas!  I don’t think this is what people were expecting as the next entry in the series, but some of the criticisms of my first design have been eating away at me for years now and I needed to get off my ass and address them.

So hey!  Spunky age-appropriate Pocahontas/Matoaka, sans feathers in the hair/European imagery/other superfluous details.  This is closer to accounts and illustrations of Powhatan dress from the period, and I kinda think it’s closer to the Disney design anyway. WIN/WIN.

Thanks to everyone who’s educated my ass over the past couple of years, including moniquill, apihtawikosisan, this-is-not-native, and numerous others.  You’ve made me a way more thoughtful artist in the process. :)

-C

See the rest of the series HERE
Read the FAQ HERE
Buy prints HERE

(via jhenne-bean)

bubbley-boo:

Disney men of color!

waltdisneyconfessionsrage:

waltdisneyconfessions:

“I don’t see how Pocahontas is overtly offensive against Native Americans. I’d say the Powhatan culture and language were very accurately portrayed and all Native American characters were two-sided, complex and realistic. If anything, I think the greatest fault in Pocahontas is that they made the villain and his cronies so comical and cartoony”

 mcknightofthelivingdead said: unless the op is actually Powhatan then their opinion on whether or not Pocahontas is racist isn’t f**king relevant.

disneyforprincesses:

COLORS of LOVE ❤

Does anyone notice that with the exception of Tiana and Naveen all of them feature women of color with white men?

This really goes back to the fetishization of women of color and the white savior narrative (which is applicable to all of these with perhaps Phobos as a minor exception).

I would really dig for Disney to make a black hero with a white love interest for a change instead of more white men falling in love with ‘exotic’ women.

Interestingly enough, with maybe the exception of Esmerelda and Tiana’s films, these heroines and movies are lukewarmly received.

(via thedisneyprincess)

petitetiaras:

Disney movie posters come to life. 

renamok:

dopesamurai:

jaythedrizzlemcbride:

suckmyco0kies:

recreationalcannibalism:

daringstars:

horny-heiwajima:

Yup. Disney sure was racist before they added a black woman.

Because everyone knows that the only races there are in the world is black and not black.

Silly Disney.

While I love Princess and the frog, the idea that Disney hadn’t done any other racial differences is mindblowing. I mean really?

Add to that the “Ooh, mixed race couple! How inclusive!” argument.

Because Disney

Has never

Done that

The last one isn’t even the same fucking species.

okay but theyre not all even considered “disney princesses” 

But they wont cross that line and put a black dude with a white girl though.

Exotification, white savior story, white savior story, stereotypes run amok (and a shuck-n-jive dragon), whitewashing/stereotypes, Lilo’s cool (only because I’m not familiar enough with hawaiian culture to say otherwise).

They don’t get any cookies for having a white guy fuck the exotic brown woman, and Jay is right, you not bout to see a Disney movie in which the main relationship is a PoC man and a white woman. Shit, two PoCs in itself is rare. Aladdin, Mulan, The Princess and the Frog, and then Noni and David from Lilo & Stitch, but they weren’t the main focus of the film. 3 and a half examples in all of Disney major motion picture history. Oh ard

And yes

Disney

sure was

racist

before

they added

a Black woman.

Funny we’ve gotten this far and no one has pointed out that whoever made this ~mindblowing~ image used an Anti-Ziganist term to describe Esmeralda’s ethnicity… Or the fact that they ignore that Aladdin is insanely whitewashed and an offensive cultural mish-mash of Arabic and Indian cultures and stereotypes.

And it also amuses me that someone white would have the audacity to say that black people only judge diversity based on how many black folks are included. You can suck my big toe on dat shit. That is WHITENESS at work. No, white folk only think of black people as ‘others’. Other races, like those shown in this little pictagraph are esteemed “okay” by white folks because they adhere to certain Western/Anglo/Whitebread standards of beauty… that, or as posters above have mentioned, they play into white people’s love of ‘exotic’ things and people. ‘Exotic’ here meaning, of course, “Ambiguously Ethnic… but not TOO ethnic”.

Anytime Disney attempts to represent other cultures outside of their comfort zone of lily white fairy tale Europe, they rely HEAVILY on stereotype to the point of ridiculousness. 

Also, “Atlantian” isn’t a fucking race. Neither are mermaids. Get that through your fucking heads. We’re talking about THE REAL WORLD, not whatever escapist fantasy you’ve created to escape uncomfortable facts about reality. If anything, Kida is of a race of Indigenous Australian-like people.

There is literally NO WAY you can deny Disney’s storied history of problems with portraying people of different races or even their perceptions of those people. They do the bare minimum and skate by on the narrative that they are family-oriented and all about love and acceptance. They aren’t. If they were, they wouldn’t be so afraid of portraying marginalized people… and portraying them in ways that aren’t offensive, hackneyed, or completely archaic.

(Source: konnei)

renamok:

littleojibwe:

nijireiki:

feministdisney:

disneytrivia:

Pocahontas was harshly criticized by Chief Roy Crazy Horse as historically inaccurate and offensive for glossing over more negative treatment of Pocahontas and her tribe by the English. He claims that Roy Disney refused the tribe’s offers to help create a more culturally and historically accurate film.

You can read his entire statement on the subject, which includes the factual story of Matoka, or “Pocahontas” as she was nicknamed, here, on the official website of the Powhatan Renape Nation.

I recommend reading the above linked piece- it’s pretty short, but will give you a very clear understanding of the history/the accurate account v. the myth/Powhatan response to the movie.

OH HAY AND LOOK WHAT’S ON MY DASH asapigfhjsvhi feeeeeliiiiings

I knew the true story but I never knew that it was made up by Smith. So in reality there is not story at all. Just a white guy with a big mouth. Big surprise. As much as I love the Disney movie, this makes me want to punch Disney in the face because they could have told an even better story of colonialism.

This was one of the things we focused on in my last American Literature class. I really enjoyed dismantling the falsehoods created by Smith and learning most people during that time knew he was an aggrandizing loser. My favorite part was learning he looked closer to a ginger Tolkien dwarf than the dashing ~tan blue eyed blond Adonis~ the Disney film made him out to be. I need to go back and reread that information.

taijavigilia:

Disney Princess raceswap.

Quick sketch that’s not fully researched so apologies for any errors in costumes, just needed to get internetrage out of my system.  Reading and following Disney blogs there’s always the guaranteed idiot comment that pops up when the subject of Disney and skin colour comes up: “Oh black/asian/arabic/native peoples need to stop complaining, they have Tiana/Mulan/Jasmine/Pocahontas”.  Hey genius, if you had 1 princess out of 10 to claim as “your own” then you’d be complaining too.

waltdisneyconfessions:

“I honestly don’t know anymore why Pocahontas and Mulan are even a part of the Disney Princess Franchise anymore. I can see that they bring a much needed diversity to the group, but why does it matter when they’re barely ever on any of the promo pictures or merchandise?”

AND there is no shortage of Belle/Ariel/Cinderella merch, and I can honestly say that I have probably never seen more than one piece of Pocahontas merch in about three years. Mulan is a little better. It’s tokenism, and I don’t see it getting better.