What's Wrong With Cinderella?

originally written Dec. 28th, 2006

I am very pleased by this article (cut and paste):

"http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/24/magazine/24princess.t.html?_r=2&pagewanted=1&ei=5124&en=3887685b453b9e60&ex=157680000&partner=permalink&exprod=permalink&oref=slogin"

It sums up the complexity of the princess paradigm very well.

I, for one, do not apologize for loving the Disney princesses for one reason: they taught me to think for myself. Ariel, Belle, and Jasmine showed me at a young age that it was cool to have an independent spirit and that it was okay to not want what everyone else wanted for me.

I love the princesses, individually, in their individual movies... but I hate the "Disney Princess" merchandise. It strips them of their individual characteristics and stories, and lumps them under one heading. Belle is cool because she's bookish-- but that is not reflected in the merchandising. This is why I always go for the Tinkerbell merchandise, because Tink is allowed to remain her sassy, spritely self. What's even worse is that Esmerelda, Megara, Pocahontas, and Mulan are almost entirely forgotten in the merchandise.

I don't really think there's anything inherently wrong with playing princess-- it's an accessible way for little girls to feel special, and hey, shiny things are shiny and pretty. But this article makes a very good point-- the problem is that princess play is dominating all other types of play for girls, and they are being left with few other options.

Sure, play princess--- but then play pirate, and then veternarian, and then lawyer, okay?