This was a fun piece to write, as I hadn’t seen the 1959 Sleeping Beauty film in quite a few years. It’s probably in my top 5 as far as favorite Disney Princess movies go, both for story and villain, because let’s face it…Maleficent is pretty cool.
Evil cool, but still cool.
Aurora is a nice character as well, but feminists don’t see it that way.
This is one of the few fairy tales which actually mentions the time period that it is set in first of all, keep that in mind. It’s set in the 14th century, so the whole betrothal thing? That’s actually historically accurate, even if the fairies and evil sorceress/dragon hybrids are a little more fanciful. I’m actually extremely glad when Disney gets something historically accurate in their films.
Ask me about what happened in my American history class in 8th grade when the topic was Pocahontas.
No, don’t ask me…I might cry.
Next problem, Maleficent didn’t kill Aurora, though I suppose she wanted to, but with college students signing petitions in favor of 4th trimester abortions, is attempted infanticide really the complaint against this film that feminists want to go with?
I’ll give feminists the “out of spite” thing, since that really was her reason for cursing Aurora. Come on Maleficent, curse her parents, after all they were the ones who decided that inviting the queen of evil to the party would be a bad idea.
That’s not really a point against Aurora though, she was a baby, or the film in general. Seriously, that just teaches children that being spiteful is evil, I think we should agree that is perhaps a good lesson for them to learn.*
And here we head into the point that really annoys me.
For feminists every thing appears to be about sex.
Bring up true love and they assume it has to do with how babies are made, rather than having to do with love.
There are really so many things wrong with the statement “Her owner saves her with a kiss. Again sex is her only salvation.”
At least they don’t make this kiss out to be some sort of attempted rape the way they do with Snow White.
But still. If you watch the film the kiss clearly has to do with “true love” which, admittedly, is not well defined in Disney films, but it’s clear that this kiss is not about the fact that they were betrothed as infants. These two, as unrealistic as falling in love at first sight may be, fell in love without ever knowing who the other was.
True love conquers all, it would have even conquered the betrothal itself if Aurora hadn’t been Aurora and Phillip hadn’t been Phillip. Think of it this way, if some other man (let’s call him Michael) had met Aurora in the woods that day and they had fallen in love, a million kisses from Aurora’s betrothed “owner” wouldn’t have woken her up. Michael would have had to be the one to break the curse.
But this is a fairy tale and in fairy tales we require perfect endings, tied in a bow. So to avoid any political upheaval (no 6 year old wants to see that) Phillip is conveniently the prince she’s supposed to marry and the man she met in the woods.
Let’s face it though, other than the supposed “ownership” of Aurora by her fiance, feminists have nothing to complain about.
Sure, Aurora doesn’t save herself…she’s cursed.
Aurora before the curse isn’t full of herself, she works hard (as hard as anyone can, growing up with 3 mothers, in a forest), she’s a little rebellious, and she’s honest.
I think we can forgive her the one breakdown she has in the movie. How would you react if you’d just found out you were raised by fairies and now you had to go home to parents you didn’t know and marry someone you had, presumably, never met before? I’d cry too.
In short, feminists please stop making everything about “ownership” and what’s between the character’s legs. You are the only one seeing this crap.
*I never did learn that lesson. I like being spiteful though. I’ll stab you with a spindle if you try to stop me.