Reading Response: Putnam

In Amanda Putnam's "Mean Ladies: Transgendered Villains in Disney Films," Putnam discusses villains in Disney movies and how many of them have qualities that stretch between both the female and male norms. She questions how this affects children, her thesis being: "When gender-bending traits are assigned strictly to villains, then tension arises in terms of determining what, exactly, Disney is preaching so heartily and so frequently to its preschool choir" (Putnam 148). I think her thesis is clearly stated and that makes it easy for the reader to identify the argument. Putnam starts her essay with a personal anecdote in which her daughter says "I want to watch one without a mean lady" (147), suggesting that there is a correlation between villains and gender identity. She goes on to give evidence of these transgendered villains and how they contrast with the good characters.
One thing she acknowledges is how "most of the heroes and heroines of the beloved Disney film franchise are hyper-heterosexual--they fall in love, get married, and as we understand it, live happily ever after" (147). It is important to recognize what is love and gender to these heroes compared to what it is for villains. The princesses for example, are able to move gracefully and live perfectly, whereas the more evil characters, such as the evil step-sisters in Cinderella struggle with typical girl characteristics. Putnam continues by describing how physically many of the villains have characteristics that fit for the opposite gender of which they are supposed to be. Evidence of this came from the Pocahontas villain Governor Radcliffe who wears bows in his hair, carries a puppy, and wears all purple. Similarly, Scar and Jafar appear to wear makeup on their face in their respective movies. The stepsisters and stepmother in Cinderella have rigid facial features and a more masculine look to them. The problem with these distinct differences between the good and the bad is that it suggests that transgender people are inherently different from the heroes and therefore are bad. Putnam does however acknowledge the opposition, that Disney's differences in good and bad help the intended audience "recognize more easily who is 'good' in these films--and who is not"(151). The problem here though is that while it may help the intended audience differentiate between the good and the bad side, it still suggests that those who do not identify with their birth gender are the bad people. We see in our lives today how relevant this argument is to raising children, and even in North Carolina where House Bill #2 discriminates against transgendered people. I personally think that Disney should do something to combat this issue because it is not okay to send implicit messages about something this important to our young children. Overall, Putnam does a good job of supporting her claim. While she does make some hasty generalizations about all of the Disney movies, she does well supporting her claim within the context of her movie selections.