Board Thread:News and Announcements/@comment-37829055-20181216134307/@comment-5952365-20181217080139

I read your petition and I do have some thoughts on it,

"Elsa: Strong and independent." and "Elsa is a role model of a strong independent woman who learns to accept herself and cares about her family. Giving Elsa a girlfriend or a boyfriend in the sequel would ruin these aspects of the character that we love so much. Disney, please do not give Elsa a girlfriend or a boyfriend; please keep her the strong independent woman that she is. Please #KeepElsaSingle!"

Um, ahaha...Yeah, this is probably going to be disagreed with by a LOT of people, but I strongly believe Elsa is not independent. Like, at all. First of all, she's not exactly an active character, she's a reactive one. You know who is an active character? Anna, that's why she's the protagonist. Elsa was told what to do by her parents, and she did it. Reactive. Elsa's parents died and she still continued doing as they told her. Reactive. Anna kept reaching out, even after their death. Active. Elsa avoids confrontation with Anna at her coronation, Anna yanks her glove off. Active. Elsa runs away in response. Reactive. Elsa makes her ice palace. "That's active! Isn't it, Ember??" Well, no. She only built it because she ran away from everyone, she wouldn't have created it on her own account, she would have kept shutting people out and running her kingdom if Anna had never asked for her blessing to marry Hans, so no, this is not an active moment, it's a reactive one. Especially when you consider that all she sings about has to do, in one way or another, with Arendelle. Anna goes after her. Active. Elsa blasts Anna in the heart by accident due to the stress of her now knowing about the storm she created, something she only knew about because of Anna. Reactive. Anna ultimately saves her in an active character moment, while Elsa sits there unable to save herself. Reactive. Elsa cries, and Anna returns back to normal. This is again not active, she didn't cry because she knew it would help Anna, she did in reaction to the events around her. Again, reactive.

Now, I know someone might say, "but she fought the guards when Han's was attacking her! That's active!" but again, no, it isn't. She fought in reaction to what was happening around her, if anything, Hans was the active character in that scene. The truth is that Elsa isn't very independent, everything she does is a reaction to the characters around her, not due to her own choices. Now, I'm not saying that no reactive characters can be or are ever independent, but in Elsa's case, the most independent thing she ever did was run away and fight guards, that's not very good for a role model. She didn't even try to fight Hans when he was about to literally kill her, she had to be saved, by a man or no. This also applies for her being a "strong" character, in terms of emotion, everything above applies, but in terms of her magical abilities and ability to fight, then one could say she is strong.

"Just because I don't need a man doesn't mean I'm a lesbian."

Ooooh >^< Yes, in short, that's true, but that misses the point of the story. She didn't kiss a guy (or a girl) because she's straight, nor gay, nor bi, nor asexual, nor any sexuality. She didn't kiss someone because she shuts people out, she doesn't let anyone get close to her out of fear. It doesn't have to do with her sexuality, it has to do with the fact that she was afraid of her powers and hurting others, and because she was completely isolated. Of course she never got into a relationship.

"One of the reasons why many people love Frozen so much is because it was about family love rather than romantic love. It was sisterly love that saved both sisters, not romantic love."

Yes, of course, but even so Disney still felt the need to cut this message short by having Anna end up in a romantic relationship in the end anyway. One of the reasons I used to dislike this movie was that it didn't actually have the guts to go all out on this message. It seems progressive at first when Elsa tells Anna that she can't marry a man she just met (as if she would have any clue regarding romance anyway considering she was isolated from everyone?), but after Han's betrayal you would think she would have learned that lesson for herself, right? Nope. She gets with Kristoff, someone she doesn't know any better then she did Hans. Remember all those questions Kristoff quipped to her to prove she doesn't know Hans well enough? Do you think she could legitimately answer any of them if some other guy asked the exact same questions but about Kristoff instead of Hans? Moreover, Anna still believed that kissing a guy would save her after Han's betrayal, she was still heading over to Kristoff. Yes, she ultimately decided to try to save Elsa instead, but it's not like she knew that would save her, she still believed she needed a man to save her. And she still ultimately hooked up with that man, too. One could say that she knew Kristoff longer than Hans, but let's be honest.

"Elsa remained single, yet she had her sister and was happy with her life."

Yes, but she also never had a chance to get romantically involved, either. Would she be smarter then Anna about it? Perhaps, but most likely due to cynicism and difficulty trusting, not experience or any sort of general knowledge. Don't forget, they were both locked away for over a decade, she would not realistically be any smarter than Anna. Also, she was happy because she was accepted, by her sister and her people, the fact that she was single would not have made any difference. In fact, I would argue she would have been happier knowing a romantic partner doesn't mind her being different.

"She showed that family is most important, and that life is not about romance. She showed the world that it is OK to be single and that you do not need romance to be happy. Giving Elsa a girlfriend or a boyfriend would ruin this powerful message and promote the myth that single people are miserable."

Both my previous points apply here as well, and wouldn't Anna be a direct contradiction to your last point? Again, I would argue she would have been happier knowing a romantic partner doesn't mind her being different.

"In addition, Elsa’s struggles to accept herself and her ice magic serves as a metaphor to anyone who is different, and the beauty of this metaphor is that anyone can relate to it since no one in real life has ice magic. While some people view the character as a gay metaphor, many others do not. Making Elsa a lesbian might ruin the character for people who relate to her for other reasons, and that would be very unfair to them."

Not necessarily, I would say it's easiest to assign her ice magic as anxiety, which matches how she describes it as well. However, the more you think about it, the more it makes sense that it could be a metaphor for homosexuality. It would make sense for her to describe it as a "curse" considering that many people assume it's something you choose as opposed to something you are born with (I don't have a definitive opinion for which it is and I think it's inherently ignorant to assume either). But then again, it falls apart just as easily. How would being gay make sense with when she sings "let the storm rage on"? That implies it's something you not only choose but is also harmful, storms aren't good, and especially not in the context of a snow storm. I get that it's quote-unquote empowering to associate something powerful like a snow storm to being gay, especially if you feel powerless in your own life as a gay person, but it makes little sense once dissected. What would Olaf and Marshmallow represent? What would the ice palace represent? What does Anna, her sister have to do with her acceptance of her sexuality? You see? That's why it being a metaphor for anxiety works so much better, though not perfectly (which I can elaborate more on). Yes, it makes sense that Elsa would be afraid of judgement and persecution for being gay, but it makes more sense that "fear would be her greatest enemy" due to her feeling she's going to royally mess up something huge and important because she couldn't focus due to overpowering anxiety. Also, it wouldn't be "unfair to the straights" as one could claim it's already unfair, after all, with this logic, how could anyone who isn't extremely white with blue eyes and VERY conventionally attractive possibly relate to her or Anna? See? Doesn't make as much sense, huh? If people can relate to her even though she's the whitest white then why can't they relate to her if she's like the gayest gay? OH YEAH! Because white is the majority and gay is a minority! Oops, silly me, I forgot that it's only "unrelatable" if the majority says so! Honestly, anyone who feels Elsa would be "ruined" for liking girls like boys like girls is just being ignorant. Honestly, just replace "gay" with anything else and you'll see all the holes in this argument: "What?? Elsa's gay?! Now she's ruined because I can't relate to her, I'm straight!" "What?? Elsa's an introvert?! Now she's ruined because I can't relate to her, I'm extroverted!" "What?? Elsa's a dog person?! Now she's ruined because I can't relate to her, I'm a cat person!" or, alternatively, if you want a more serious comparison, "What?? Elsa's a Polytheist?! Now she's ruined because I can't relate to her, I'm a Christian!" You're also forgetting about Merida, who's movie actually does tackle the issue and goes full out doing it.

'''Most importantly, Elsa's story is about acceptance. Not just of herself, but of her family and people accepting her as well. The people who say she would be "ruined" are the people who scare Elsa in the first place.''' Yeah, that kinda makes things a bit clearer, huh?

"Elsa (and Frozen in general) is popular among people of all sociopolitical backgrounds, and that includes those with diverse views on homosexuality. Some parents do not want to expose this topic to their young children for various reasons, and these parents may not let their children watch Frozen 2 if Elsa is a lesbian. Thus, giving Elsa a girlfriend would be extremely unfair to those Frozen-loving kids."

"Diverse views" includes people who support it too, you know. It's okay if parents don't want their kids watching a cartoon who's into chicks, and it's their right to hide it from them. However, it is them who must accept that they can't protect their children from all people who might be different from them, and there are a LOT. It is them who will have to explain why they chose that if they're child turns out to be homosexual and confused/angry/upset that they were confused about themselves due to it being hidden from them the whole time. None of this is Disney's fault and Disney should not care, the fault lays entirely on the parents if they never get to watch Frozen 2. Can you imagine the backlash this would be getting if someone said, "I just don't want to expose my children to Mulan, Disney is being unfair to my kids by making her Asian so they can't watch it." No one would side with the notion that it's Disney's fault instead of the parents.

"We sympathize with the people who want gay representation in Disney movies, but Elsa is not the right character for this because it would be exploiting her popularity. If Disney one day decides to represent gay characters in their movies, then we ask that new characters are created for the purpose. As Coco recently showed, it is possible to create new minority characters that the world will fall in love with, and if this can be done for Latino representation, then it can also be done for gay representation."

It's WAY more complicated than this. Yes, I agree representation matters, and yes, creating an originally gay character would be fine, but it's not exactly like Disney is good at this (*cough* BeautyandtheBeast2017andeventhatistotallydebatableinit'sownright *cough*), and while it would make sense to see this as a way that Disney might be trying to look diverse and cool by turning a well known character gay, it's also valuable. People already love Elsa, and again, her entire story is about acceptance, this would align with that message well. This is all too similar to the argument of changing a white character like Annie to black, or male characters like the Ghostbusters to female characters.

Now, for my own opinion, I think this has become WAY more of a character study than I meant it to. Back on track,

Should Elsa get romantically involved?

I don't care.

Should Elsa get a girlfriend?

I don't care.

Should Elsa get a boyfriend?

I don't care.

You know what I do care about? I care about a good story. I care about a character that is introduced without being obvious that they're a token character, I care about a character being added who actually progresses the story forward and is interesting.

Do I care if they kiss Elsa?

Not really.

Do I care if they kiss Elsa and are a girl?

Not at all.

I don't care if Elsa gets a girlfriend, I don't care if Elsa gets a boyfriend, but if she does, this is what I want:

I want a character that cares about Elsa, not her throne. I want a character that helps her through her anxiety, I want a character that helps Elsa grow and motivates her, making her an active character. I want a character that genuinely loves Elsa, and what's between their legs doesn't matter to me. And hey, if they also have powers, too? That's okay with me as well.

Above all, I want a good story, I don't care if it's only about Elsa and Anna again. You know what I don't want? The internet losing it's freaking mind because they didn't get the exact character they wanted. I don't want fans turning on the movie and being the literal villains of the first. The moral of the first movie is that true loves comes in many forms and people need to be accepting of other's regardless of their differences, that's why it's okay that Elsa and Anna love each other but that Anna also loves Kristoff. That's why Hans, the one who pretends to love, is the literal villain. After all, "some people are worth melting for." and it would be REALLY COOL if everyone understood that message. What happened to, "I don't care what they're going to say, let the storm rage on"?

Most importantly, I don't want the story being sacrificed for the relationship. And PLEASE I REALLY don't want another liar revealed story unless they can actually make it good!

However, one last thing to consider and something I think people are overlooking too much is the fact that since she's the Queen, she'll probably need heirs. Yep.

Also, you should probably enable comments on your blog.