yeah… I mean, I don’t exactly blame people for coming to conclusions I don’t agree with because it’s sort of the first step to examining media, is thinking about the “why”
so I get it, I get why, for example, people reblogged the coloring book post being like “who gives a shit/ they’re just shown more because they’re the most popular princesses/ the other princesses aren’t ‘classic’.”
Like in the grand scheme of things: I agree, a coloring book isn’t a big deal. The reality is, though, that it’s a micro-aggression, and a super easy one to document and quantify at that. People will act like real evidence isn’t a big deal on the one hand, then they’ll look at big, big things, events, and deny that race is in any way still an issue in the U.S. And of course if you’ve ignored the thousand little things then yeah, it might just seem like “people arguing” rather than “sanctioned racial oppression” etc.
And the thing with the “most popular princesses” is, again, something that requires a deeper look. While I agree that Disney is usually simply looking out for what will make the most money, race isn’t somehow… removed from this equation. Like: who you think will be popular influences how you produce the merchandise (who is featured most prominently) which, in turn, influences actual, real popularity.
A lot of people commenting on marketing just assume it’s some organic force when that’s like the inherent opposite of marketing, to an extent. In marketing you get to define who becomes the “classic princess” when the entire princess line isn’t that old itself, it’s a manufactured thing. Which is why it’s not just some random thing that Mulan gets constantly ignored in spite of the lasting popularity of the movie and character. But it requires looking a little deeper than “oh well they’re just printing more of the popular characters duh!” anyway I worded this all pretty badly because it’s late