Transgendered Villains

Amanda Putnam claims in her piece "Mean Ladies: Transgendered Villains in Disney Films" that Disney's practice of characterizing villains through mean as well as transgender characteristics is dangerous. Disney's movies are commonly used for entertainment on family nights, especially when toddlers and young children are involved. Putnam believes that by associating villainy with those who step out of the typical heterosexual role, Disney is subconsciously telling its viewers that it is okay to expect the worst from those that may be something other than heterosexual, that it may even be acceptable to treat them as less than human beings because those people can turn out bad, character-wise.

Putnam has no problem with there being individuals in the Disney movies that could be characterized as transgender. Her problem is that Disney only assigns those characteristics to the villains, as she herself writes that "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". It seems that Putnam would be all for these transgender characters as it would bring diversity into these movies which are often among the first that children view as they grow up. However, when this diversity is only given to those who cause problems in the movies, it can become a message to these children's subconscious that they must handle those diverse character carefully because it may turn out that they are villains. Personally, I can agree with this point because I can see where Putnam is coming from. If almost every movie that you watch shows villains as being transgender, you may begin to believe that message. However, I do not agree with the fact that she believes actual children will be so affected by this message.

Putnam mentions that her daughter tends to call the villains "mean ladies", yet I think Putnam extends this category too far when she starts including characters such as Scar, Jafar, and Ratcliffe. As a child, it is easy to recognize women in Disney movies because of their figure and even when it is not the ideal "feminine" figure, the clothes help identify the gender as well. It is Putnam herself that throws in the male characters that tend to act flamboyant, but I find it hard to believe that a child would actually see it that way. A child would most likely find those characters weird or just see them as weaker which would work fine with the fact that they will lose against the hero/heroine. Like other critics, I feel that Putnam believes children see more into these Disney movies than they actually do.

I will say I agree with Putnam's disapproval of these transgender traits being given only to the villains. Putnam states "many of the female Disney villains are subtly masculine - their faces, body shape, and behavior lend 'mannish' traits to their characters". Putnam is quick to note that the stepmothers are thin, making them appear less motherly and less attractive than the heroine. Cinderella's stepsisters have boyish faces and are flat chested as well as clumsy, all to make them appear ugly compared to Cinderella, our heroine. Yet it is not clear why Disney seems to believe that having "mannish" women is the easiest way to make them ugly and unfavorable. Why not use a trait that is unpleasant for all genders, such as acne, a bad haircut, or a certain state of deteriorated hygiene? I think this "transgender = villain" message is much more dangerous for older audiences and Disney could improve on that because there is no need to associate meanness with being transgender.