We want to redhead!

[wdw&sonny]

So I'm totally speculating here, but perhaps it was less "we MUST change this because people are complaining" and more "we want to add a badass female pirate, where can we do that. Oh there is this one scene that is questionable towards woman, why not repurpose that one."

I don't know enough about the ride to say if there was another spot to change/add the female pirate. I'm just saying that maybe this was less about the changing things aspect of it and more about the adding of something.

Agree. No way did WDW execs spend as much time discussing, debating and analyzing this as the people on this forum have. Let's get back to discussing how offensive Gaston is.

 

[declansdad]

Never bothered me in the least. I have no problem separating make believe from actual life.

 

[DVCcurious]

It's very uncomfortable when your kid asks "mom, WHY do they want the red head?".

 

[minniemous]

It bothered me a as a child and it still bothers me today especially having a young daughter. I am so happy it will be gone.

By the way I hope it is Keira Knightly's character Elizabeth they use in keeping with Jack Sparrow.

 

[Robo]

By the way I hope it is Keira Knightly's character Elizabeth they use in keeping with Jack Sparrow.

I she a pirate?

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

It's very uncomfortable when your kid asks "mom, WHY do they want the red head?".

Not even close to the most uncomfortable question our kids will ask us though, right?

That's my approach. I do understand that some will feel quite differently.

 

[minniemous]

I she a pirate?

Yes..she becomes one.

 

[CT Disney]

I'm going to be honest. There's only one redhead that me really wants:

 

[sarahruthtoday]

So I'm totally speculating here, but perhaps it was less "we MUST change this because people are complaining" and more "we want to add a badass female pirate, where can we do that. Oh there is this one scene that is questionable towards woman, why not repurpose that one."

I don't know enough about the ride to say if there was another spot to change/add the female pirate. I'm just saying that maybe this was less about the changing things aspect of it and more about the adding of something.

I like your thinking!!

 

[bryanb]

I was a DLR Pirates CM, so I had no issue with the ride. My mom had no issue with the scene when I was growing up and we'd ride it as a family. I'm also not too upset that it's changing, but I wanted to clarify a few things that people have said on here. I'm reconstructing what I understood/was taught as a CM below, injected with some observations:

• The whole scene is a "fat joke." The wench on the auction block's name is "Tiny." It's not stated in the dialogue, but that's her name. The pirates make jokes about her weight ("Do you sell her by the pound?" and "show them your larboard size" -- clever, because she's portly) but she is happy and compliant because she now gets her chance at a man.
• The Redhead has a backstory too, and it's unspoken that she's probably a prostitute. Dolled up in that bawdy red dress with too much makeup, she's used to unsavory characters and getting what she wants with her sensuality. She is everything that Tiny isn't.

You'll remember that the next scene was already edited to be more P.C..

• In the original version, the pirates were chasing after the ladies in circles. Then in the last part, there's "Tiny" again! But she's the one doing the chasing while the pirate is running away, horrified. It's clear that at auction or in the chase scene, the this poor fat woman can't get a man.
• Before Johnny Depp, there was a scared young maiden hiding in the barrel. In this scene, there is a "Pooped Pirate" who is exhausted from chasing the maiden. The drunken pirate says he wants to "hoist me colors on that shy little wench" (if you catch his drift). He also tells the guest, if we help him, "I be willing to share I be!" which makes it clear that this joke is about non-consensual stuff.

When the original scene was replaced by pirates chasing food, you'll recall there were a lot of people angry about political correctness. I remember I was even rolling my eyes about people having to be "so sensitive" and that it's just a joke. Over time, people got used to the change. This is why I don't think the change will bother me too much.

Now, people can accuse me of overthinking the scene, but I obviously got to know it really well over time, and I think what I've said here is accurate. Perhaps it's no longer cool to make fun of people for their weight, and for that reason alone, it wouldn't bother me if they wanted to take the scene in a new direction... as long as it was done well and with the same quality and whimsy that is PotC overall.

 

[mirak]

Agreed. What people are overlooking is that the two women who drive this scene are both clearly "in" on the arrangement. The fat one is dressed to the nines looking for a husband. The "lady in red" is, well, a lady in red.

One compromise would be to remove the other women from the scene, which really contribute nothing to the joke and I never really paid much attention to, anyway.

That would be much better than killing the joke altogether, which is what this change would do.

 

[HopperFan]

If posted I apologize I missed it but apparently the petition is there and going much stronger than I expected.

https://www.change.org/p/the-walt-disney-company-we-wants-to-keep-the-redhead

 

[NuJoy]

()

 

[SheHulk]

Thank you for the education and insight. As with any historical or artistic interpretation, removing it from original audience relevance, removes it from its context and separates it from its meaning. To apply modern 2017 interpretation to a 50-year old expression is irresponsible, illogical, and in some cases, dangerous.

With all due respect, what you're saying is true in some cases, but applying a 2017 interpretation to an amusement park ride for kids is not irresponsible, illogical, or dangerous. Kids have no interest in taking time to understand the historical or artistic interpretation of a ride. They decide if they like it or not and move on. I remember as a kid taking this scene as a "fat joke" too, and it was cute. That was 30 years ago. Let's be honest, fat jokes and jokes about being drunk are seen as corny or ignorant by a lot of kids today, and it's not going to age well. All of us have movies or TV shows that we liked as kids that our kids think are stupid because the joke is played out by now.
For anyone who has seen the move "21 Jump Street", you remember a scene where Channing Tatum decides he's going to establish himself as cool by finding a kid, punching him, and calling him a homosexual slur. He expects the kid will slink away and everyone will be impressed. Instead the kid gets mad and says, "you hit me because I'm gay?" and everybody thinks he's a jerk. Poor Channing learns the lesson that kids are different today. They see a lot of large women who are happily married and just wouldn't get the joke. As much as people like to fantasize that there are these PC police that faint or cry at the "redhead" scene, the more likely outcome they are trying to avoid (if that's why they are changing it and not just to add something else) is younger people just shrugging and deciding too much of the park is corny. If Disney wants to sit the kids down afterward and, say, "Well, you see, 50 years ago this was funny, so you should put it in that context," more power to them but that seems like a lot of work for a ride that you can just update for what kids will automatically get.

 

[MickeyMinnieMom]

With all due respect, what you're saying is true in some cases, but applying a 2017 interpretation to an amusement park ride for kids is not irresponsible, illogical, or dangerous. Kids have no interest in taking time to understand the historical or artistic interpretation of a ride. They decide if they like it or not and move on. I remember as a kid taking this scene as a "fat joke" too, and it was cute. That was 30 years ago. Let's be honest, fat jokes and jokes about being drunk are seen as corny or ignorant by a lot of kids today, and it's not going to age well. All of us have movies or TV shows that we liked as kids that our kids think are stupid because the joke is played out by now.
For anyone who has seen the move "21 Jump Street", you remember a scene where Channing Tatum decides he's going to establish himself as cool by finding a kid, punching him, and calling him a homosexual slur. He expects the kid will slink away and everyone will be impressed. Instead the kid gets mad and says, "you hit me because I'm gay?" and everybody thinks he's a jerk. Poor Channing learns the lesson that kids are different today. They see a lot of large women who are happily married and just wouldn't get the joke. As much as people like to fantasize that there are these PC police that faint or cry at the "redhead" scene, the more likely outcome they are trying to avoid (if that's why they are changing it and not just to add something else) is younger people just shrugging and deciding too much of the park is corny. If Disney wants to sit the kids down afterward and, say, "Well, you see, 50 years ago this was funny, so you should put it in that context," more power to them but that seems like a lot of work for a ride that you can just update for what kids will automatically get.

Are these children in the park by themselves, left to their own devices to interpret a ride originally conceived of in the 1960's, unless Disney explains it to them or just gets rid of it?

And I think that this argues for shutting the entire ride down: "jokes about being drunk are seen as corny or ignorant by a lot of kids today"

 

[DoTheDisFam]

There is so much here I would like to comment on, however - after being called a troll last night in another thread, I'll refrain.

 

[SheHulk]

Are these children in the park by themselves, left to their own devices to interpret a ride originally conceived of in the 1960's, unless Disney explains it to them or just gets ride of it?

And I think that this argues for shutting the entire ride down: "jokes about being drunk are seen as corny or ignorant by a lot of kids today"

Even if a parent has to explain the joke, that's not awesome for an amusement business. You can explain to your kids, "You see that lady that looks a lot like your mom, who is happily married to your dad? Well, actually she should be thrilled to have any man at all, even a toothless criminal. It's funny, see?" My point wasn't who has to explain the joke, Disney or parents, it's that a joke that needs to be explained is not worth keeping. I don't have a deep discussion with my kids after each ride, we move on to the next thing and they are silently evaluating how much they liked it. Or not, I have no idea. Listen, there are certain parts of the park that I absolutely have a lot of nostalgia for and I would be sad to see go. But the parks are not a shrine to my childhood, they are a business. And if the only joke they can come up with is drunk jokes, yeah, they may need to shut the ride down and fire their creative staff. But that's not all it is.
We all know what's going to happen, though I'm sure it's anathema to a lot of folks here: Way more emphasis on the movies because that's what kids think of when they think of PotC. And Jack Sparrow does not go around selling women in the movies.

 

[OhhBother]

I was a DLR Pirates CM, so I had no issue with the ride. My mom had no issue with the scene when I was growing up and we'd ride it as a family. I'm also not too upset that it's changing, but I wanted to clarify a few things that people have said on here. I'm reconstructing what I understood/was taught as a CM below, injected with some observations:

• The whole scene is a "fat joke." The wench on the auction block's name is "Tiny." It's not stated in the dialogue, but that's her name. The pirates make jokes about her weight ("Do you sell her by the pound?" and "show them your larboard size" -- clever, because she's portly) but she is happy and compliant because she now gets her chance at a man.
• The Redhead has a backstory too, and it's unspoken that she's probably a prostitute. Dolled up in that bawdy red dress with too much makeup, she's used to unsavory characters and getting what she wants with her sensuality. She is everything that Tiny isn't.

You'll remember that the next scene was already edited to be more P.C..

• In the original version, the pirates were chasing after the ladies in circles. Then in the last part, there's "Tiny" again! But she's the one doing the chasing while the pirate is running away, horrified. It's clear that at auction or in the chase scene, the this poor fat woman can't get a man.
• Before Johnny Depp, there was a scared young maiden hiding in the barrel. In this scene, there is a "Pooped Pirate" who is exhausted from chasing the maiden. The drunken pirate says he wants to "hoist me colors on that shy little wench" (if you catch his drift). He also tells the guest, if we help him, "I be willing to share I be!" which makes it clear that this joke is about non-consensual stuff.

When the original scene was replaced by pirates chasing food, you'll recall there were a lot of people angry about political correctness. I remember I was even rolling my eyes about people having to be "so sensitive" and that it's just a joke. Over time, people got used to the change. This is why I don't think the change will bother me too much.

Now, people can accuse me of overthinking the scene, but I obviously got to know it really well over time, and I think what I've said here is accurate. Perhaps it's no longer cool to make fun of people for their weight, and for that reason alone, it wouldn't bother me if they wanted to take the scene in a new direction... as long as it was done well and with the same quality and whimsy that is PotC overall.

The "fat joke" part of the scene is what has always made me uncomfortable. As an overweight woman, it bothered me to see fat shaming celebrated at my happy place. I'm glad the scene is going.

 

[NuJoy]

()

 

[ThornXBL]