Why So Sexist, Disney? [Pic]

Submitted by: mushie_mush 7 years ago in Misc

A letter from Disney rejecting a job applicant because she was female.
There are 97 comments:
Male 6,693
Walt knew what he wanted.
0
Reply
Male 1,834
so gimme a sammich
0
Reply
Female 314
putting all the sexism aside, they really make their rejection letters pretty
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Well said.

Also, "Madness"!? THIS. IS. SPARTA!!!![/quote]

That scene is a brilliant piece of film-making. It`s a shame that almost everything in that film is wrong. I wish people who made films claiming to be covering real events in the real world would make them accurately or just make the fantasy film they want to make and not pass it off as anything real.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Angilion there .. I could have been like you and said " go look it up" like you did to another poster.. but since I wasn`t the one who brought it up.. here is a link :D [/quote]

I spent two posts giving a detailed example. That is not "go look it up". I did not write "go look it up" at all. A radical change in opinion is not going to happen from reading a few posts by me on IAB. That has to come from finding out for yourself, which is why I suggested they did so if they were interested.

[quote]www. taphilo.com/history/WWII/ BofBamericanpilots. shtml [/quote]

Thank you. 10 is a lot more plausible than "lots".

By chance, I found a figure for the total number of Americans who joined the British military in WW2 before the USA entered the war - 244. The source (Jeremy Clarkson) is very unreliable and he may well have just made it up, so that doesn`t help much. It sounds plausible, though.
0
Reply
Female 28
hahaha i saw this in a book about rejection letters.
0
Reply
Male 72
Why the hell is this dated all the way back to 1938???
0
Reply
Female 250
this is dated 1938
0
Reply
Male 54
Whatever. No biggy. There are many things out there that guys can do better than girls, and many things girls can do better than guys. All this equal opportunity employment is just BS. Why not give the job to the most qualified person applying. Nowadays, having to have a certain number of black, asian, hispanic, etc.. all while keeping ratios of men to women proportional is ridiculous. That`s still prejudicial.
0
Reply
Female 3,574
[quote]It all makes me want to scream. We`re supposed to be an intelligent species with some degree of rationality, yet slopping billions of people together as if they were one person and attaching whatever stupid stereotypes are fashionable at the time on them is consistently normal. The stereotypes change and the degree of stereotyping for each group changes, but it`s always common. That`s far from intelligent and rational. It`s madness.[/quote]
Well said.

Also, "Madness"!? THIS. IS. SPARTA!!!!
0
Reply
Male 639
I thought it had been proven that women can`t do things as well as men. Why all the outrage?
0
Reply
Male 28
It was not just the disney studios that had that practice. A recient story on the history detectives about some cells that were found explained it. if you would like to see it it can be found at the pbs website.
0
Reply
Female 66
Angilion there .. I could have been like you and said " go look it up" like you did to another poster.. but since I wasn`t the one who brought it up.. here is a link :D

www. taphilo.com/history/WWII/ BofBamericanpilots. shtml
0
Reply
Male 721
Flame war, much.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I want to go out an find all those bra burning b*tches from the 60`s[/quote]

i) That never actually happened. It was a publicity stunt that didn`t really have anything to do with anything but for some reason became an iconic image.

ii) You`d be missing the people who laid the foundations years before, who should get more consideration than they generally do. I`m not sure about the USA, but here in the UK you`d have to go back to the early years of the 19th century, not fairly late in the 20th. You`d probably be surprised to find that many of them never wore bras anyway, as they were men. Not that bras as we know them existed back then.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote] Lot`s of RAF pilots were American.[/quote]

I`ve been trying on and off for years to find out how many people from the USA joined the British military before the USA formally entered the war. I can prove there were some who came here as civilians and joined up, but I can`t find out any idea of the numbers. Could be a handful, could be quite a few.

You`re the first person I`ve seen claim "lots". Do you have any sources?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Somewhere there`s a letter floating around addressed to some depressed young man wishing he could be an "inker" but was denied because men aren`t allowed. But we`re not going to see that letter on here, it wouldn`t infuriate enough people.[/quote]

It`s also alleged that in those days Disney refused to hire men for some types of jobs because they thought only women could consistently pay attention to fine detail, blah blah blah. Possible but unproven, like this.

It all makes me want to scream. We`re supposed to be an intelligent species with some degree of rationality, yet slopping billions of people together as if they were one person and attaching whatever stupid stereotypes are fashionable at the time on them is consistently normal. The stereotypes change and the degree of stereotyping for each group changes, but it`s always common. That`s far from intelligent and rational. It`s madness.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]You`re going to actually argue that that wasn`t the mind-set of your typical man in the 30`s, 40`s, 50`s...hell, 60`s, 70`s..? [/quote]

Of course I am. It was a simple sexist stereotype. People who agree with stereotypes think they reflect the typical man/woman/ "black"/ "white"/homosexual/Briton/ American/whatever. That doesn`t make it so.
0
Reply
Female 535
David: What you said is basically the equivalent of, "Hey, I may have mugged someone, but there are murderers out there!"
Wrong is wrong.

That said, this letter is old and during the time when this was "normal". Now, if it were present time...
0
Reply
Male 92
"Lol, Yep I really went into the politics of your nation there didn`t I? ...but you have to admit that the U.S has got a horrible track record going on here.
to discriminate on sex, discriminate on race...both of these ideas are (or should be!) unfathomable now so it`s just funny that they haven`t figured out that discriminating on sexual preference is just as stupid.... "

You`re joking, right? This woman lost a job opportunity for not having the right equipment, but you should look at the ridiculous things that some developing countries (and even some developed) do to women, for the reason that...


they`re women.
Trust me, equal rights is not global. And you`re JOKING if you think that sexual and racial discrimination don`t go on where you live.
0
Reply
Female 3,696
"Yes Swaywithme thank you for telling the U.S. all our faults and how to run our nation.
Canada=France light without the cool parts or class. "

Lol, Yep I really went into the politics of your nation there didn`t I? ...but you have to admit that the U.S has got a horrible track record going on here.
to discriminate on sex, discriminate on race...both of these ideas are (or should be!) unfathomable now so it`s just funny that they haven`t figured out that discriminating on sexual preference is just as stupid....

Besides, anyone that compares Canada to France has country experience fail x2!! I mean Quebec? Sure, yeah! but as for the other 9449061km2......
0
Reply
Female 31
..... 1938.
0
Reply
Male 5,194
"...very few openings in comparison to the number of girls who apply."

Any Hollywood anything, even an inker for Disney, attracts a huge number of girls. Could it be that this is the driving force of the sexist aspects of that letter?
0
Reply
Male 21
@DixxyRarr............Me too... to the hugging braless b*tches :)
0
Reply
Female 2,674
Wow. This really makes me think about how lucky I am to have been born in the 80`s. I want to go out an find all those bra burning b*tches from the 60`s and give them big hugs. Bra-less hugs.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Ah OK, good. I thought you meant like a little one. "Steve, 89, missed by all." "Alice, 67, survived by husband John." "Mary, 72, once rejected from Disney job."
0
Reply
Male 959
This was written in 1938. Up to the 1970s job adverts is the Belfast Telegraph would often contain the phrase `Protestants only need apply`.
0
Reply
Male 282
"Getting a job rejection letter was one of the most notable events in her life? That`s a bit of a shame."

It was one of those obits that take up half the page because of how generous she was to orphans and the community in general. I just remember it because one of the women lib groups picked up on it and rallied against Disney, even though it was 50 years prior to her death.
0
Reply
Male 4,290
[quote]It was part of her obit.[/quote]
Getting a job rejection letter was one of the most notable events in her life? That`s a bit of a shame.
0
Reply
Male 282
I think I knew the lady who was the applicant. I grew up in Searcy (rhymes with "mercy"). It was still a known story in the late `80s when she died. It was part of her obit. I can`t seem to remember her married name.
0
Reply
Female 4,039
I like how the secretary has to sign her name right near the wicked witch. I wonder if acceptance letters have something nicer at the bottom.
0
Reply
Male 4,593
Ah, the good old days.
0
Reply
Male 605
stupid women!
0
Reply
Male 221
@109y and fabarati.
I think what Crucible was talking about was sexism... not the war. but I could be wrong
0
Reply
Female 19
Crucible - You need to do some serious study. Americans were very aware of the war in Europe. Lot`s of RAF pilots were American. Lindburg was a supporter of Germany. There were German U-Boats off the east coast and in the gulf well before the 40`s.
0
Reply
Male 1,240
@Crucible: 1938 is the year before the war for everyone. WW2 broke out on September 1 1939. One can argue that the lead up to the war should be included, but one can also argue that WW2 is merely the extension of WW1, and thus not a separate war.

Actually, that last bit is kinda true. Either way, the US didn`t properly join the war until December 7 1941.

@davy: I also enjoy Angilions rants a little too much.
0
Reply
Male 1,557
1938. Nuff said.
0
Reply
Male 183
is it signed by someone named Mary? that would be funny..."women only do inking and painting. and rejection letters."

0
Reply
Male 1,002
Yeah, we should all go picket Disney for being so unfair to 70 years ago women. It must be terrible to be a 70 years ago woman because you would be treated unfairly by Disney and also because you would be a time anomaly.
0
Reply
Male 1,815
Mantowlen, 1938 is years before the war for the Americans. It wasn`t even on the minds of Americans
0
Reply
Female 387
> Uh 1958? What that means is that this particular time frame was long before women were treated equally. Women did not have the same rights as men and did not need to be considered for employment at all especially based on sex. There were no sexual discrimination laws back in the 50s. <

It`s 1938, which means pre-war when women were suddenly allowed to do a lot of stuff they`d been forbidden from before because all the men went off to fight.
0
Reply
Male 2
Corpsecrank:

It`s actually from 1938. Being pre-WWII, that makes it even less surprising than 1958.
0
Reply
Male 928
Uh 1958? What that means is that this particular time frame was long before women were treated equally. Women did not have the same rights as men and did not need to be considered for employment at all especially based on sex. There were no sexual discrimination laws back in the 50s.
0
Reply
Male 94
Yet men voted for suffrage in 1920`s. We trusted them with policies and war but not animation. Interesting.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
Sway:
I think Angie`s point was that it basically didn`t say "some men", they made it seem like all men. Which isn`t the case.

I`ve seen a lot of Angie`s posts, and I think he`s... well.. very straightforward.

Currently, he isn`t sexist. He thinks that an equal world consists of treating everyone the same. He dislikes therefore, statements about men being acceptable, and statements about women being unacceptable.

the world doesn`t work that way, but him arguing from the perspective that it should is perfectly reasonable.

That`s part of the problem. The world isn`t perfectly reasonable.
0
Reply
Male 759
Somewhere there`s a letter floating around addressed to some depressed young man wishing he could be an "inker" but was denied because men aren`t allowed. But we`re not going to see that letter on here, it wouldn`t infuriate enough people.
0
Reply
Male 661
"Canada=France light without the cool parts or class."

In writing that, you just did what you gave another crap for doing. Ignorance 2, intelligent reply 0
0
Reply
Male 582
Yes Swaywithme thank you for telling the U.S. all our faults and how to run our nation.

Canada=France light without the cool parts or class.
0
Reply
Female 1,101
"I consider it possible, as I said before. I don`t consider it certain without evidence."

I would consider it probable, but not certain. Especially because there are other similar letters to this out there and it appears that the animators were all male at one point in time.
0
Reply
Female 3,696
"Your sexist stereotyping is much worse than Disney`s was."

..You`re going to actually argue that that wasn`t the mind-set of your typical man in the 30`s, 40`s, 50`s...hell, 60`s, 70`s..? though, thankfully as decades passed the "Typical Guys" slowly converted into "Boring Idiots"



But need I say more? I think my favorite has to be the one that just starts out "MEN ARE BETTER THAN WOMEN" or maybe the "The Chef does everything but cook- That`s what wives are for!"

So don`t attack Stormydreams for stating the truth. Just because the mens and society in general have smartened up now, doesn`t mean that it wasn`t different in the 30`s...Now if the U.S could just learn from it`s mistakes... (Women...African Americans....Gays...)



Sexist Ads (t
Male 391
Walt Disney was a piece of garbage.
0
Reply
Male 12,138
Does anyone else get a bit of a semi-lob-on when Angilion gets on one of his rants? Or do I just need to seek professional counselling?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]Also, how come there are no women priests?[/quote]

Female priests. Women priests would be people who priested women, whatever that means.

It depends on the religion and the denomination within that religion. It also depends on how you define "priest". If you`re going on the catholic version of Christianity (I`m thinking that`s likely because it tends to be them who use the word `priest`), it`s mostly because they have traditionally interpreted the 12 apostles being men as a sign that all priests should be men.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]The mind of a man back in the 1930s-odd: "Oh, women and their shenanigans. When will they accept that they merely exist to sew and for us manly beasts to breed with?"

..only more 1930s-ish.[/quote]

Maybe in Australia. But I doubt it.

Your sexist stereotyping is much worse than Disney`s was.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]@Angellion I couldn`t find anything to prove or disprove the letter`s authenticity. I don`t know that I am as skeptical as you however, given the time period it is very possible that it coul be real.[/quote]

I consider it possible, as I said before. I don`t consider it certain without evidence.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]So nothing you can substantiate with external sources.

Understood.[/quote]

You understand only your own prejudices. You ignored the lengthy example I gave. You will not look for yourself. You know nothing because you are determined to know nothing.

May you one day gain wisdom.
0
Reply
Male 4,546
... clearly wrong on the woman president thing. I assume he means how come we still don`t have a woman president of the USA, but still they can run.

Also, Mauser: There are women priests. Florence Li Tim Oi was the first I know of in 1944.

You don`t have to stick to the USA when it was clearly what he meant, I don`t need to stick to the Catholic church when it`s clearly what you meant. Silly games put aside please.

Now, basically I think the Catholic Church is a slow changing beast. This has positive aspects, and negative aspects.

Generally, liberals make mistakes, and conservatives keep those mistakes in place. The church is a conservative body. It therefore flows slower than government when it comes to social change.

If you wanted women priests, society shouldn`t have treated them as second class citizens until the 1980s.
0
Reply
Female 246
notice this letter was from 1938...
still... shame on you Walt Disney
0
Reply
Male 2,424
then they were all "we want to do paint and ink stuff too wah wah wah"

I mean, have you seen Phineas and Pherb?

ps dont tell my wife I made that joke.
0
Reply
Male 1,222
@tatripp
Kirchner, Bachelet, 2 current presidents.

0
Reply
Male 12,138
[quote]@mauser women can`t become priest because the church doesn`t have power to make them priests. How come women can`t be the president?[/quote]
On the second point, please tell me you`re kidding. Please.
0
Reply
Male 1,196
@mauser women can`t become priest because the church doesn`t have power to make them priests. How come women can`t be the president?
0
Reply
Male 7,830
ah, the good old days.
0
Reply
Female 1,623
MauserTM, quit it with the triple post
0
Reply
Female 1,435
1938, yup, now which woman wants to be around in them days?
0
Reply
Male 590
Oh come on, women do a lot of creative work in the kitchen
0
Reply
Male 1,222
Also, how come there are no women priests?
0
Reply
Male 1,222
Women actually dont have creativity, except in really really rare cases. But theyre good at other things, like multitasking, or perseverance.
Its like taking in a jew to play football, let him do the accountings, theyre great at it, ask peter griffin.
Racist me? what are you taking about?
0
Reply
Female 3,598
yeah well they hated jews too so whatevs. once a bigot always a bigot no matter what you hate.
0
Reply
Female 160
The mind of a man back in the 1930s-odd: "Oh, women and their shenanigans. When will they accept that they merely exist to sew and for us manly beasts to breed with?"

..only more 1930s-ish.
0
Reply
Female 1,441
I-A-B the net`s hottest breeding ground for bigots.
0
Reply
Male 1,598
It was the 1930`s. You simply didn`t have rights if you were a woman or black.
0
Reply
Male 599
Yeah talk about sexism, I love tracing, I would be absolutely crushed if I applied and they said only women traced...
0
Reply
Male 133
Tuesday, October 5, 2010 5:51:17 PM
"yeah, all kinds of injustices in the past.... moving on now"

You wish. Or rather, women wish.

-Lol, never satisfied.
0
Reply
Female 302
They weren`t allowed to fill in the drawings, but they were allowed to trace them?
What differece does it make?
0
Reply
Female 1,101
@Angellion I couldn`t find anything to prove or disprove the letter`s authenticity. I don`t know that I am as skeptical as you however, given the time period it is very possible that it coul be real.
0
Reply
Male 1,054
"Do what I did. Spend years reading them and thinking they`re true, then research actual history and see how different it is. "

So nothing you can substantiate with external sources.

Understood.
0
Reply
Female 248
"yeah, all kinds of injustices in the past.... moving on now"

You wish. Or rather, women wish.
0
Reply
Male 12,365
Last line was "...property and businesses".

There`s also an entry in the Magna Carta (1215) establishing constitutional protections for women who own land, property, businesses, etc. Note that it didn`t give women a right to do so - that was already taken as a given, something so obvious it didn`t need to go into the charter.

It`s worth noting that this was all under Norman law, which was *worse* for women than the English law that preceeded it.
0
Reply
Male 1,079
By:
Mary Clisal??

FAIL
0
Reply
Male 12,365
[quote]I`m interested in cases of this feminist historical revisionism propaganda, Angillion. Do you have any examples?[/quote]

Do what I did. Spend years reading them and thinking they`re true, then research actual history and see how different it is.

It`s unsurprising in retrospect. Arguing that men want to oppress women and feminism is all that`s stopping them creates fear and anger and is therefore very good for recruitment, but obviously that means that massive oppression must exist prior to feminism gaining power. So it must be made up as far as possible.

Random example:

Women were not allowed to own property in Britain until <insert your own date here>. I`ve heard and read dates from the late 19th century to the 1960s).

It`s not true.

Records in England are fairly common back as far as ~1200, with some earlier ones. Property ownership meant taxes, so it was all recorded. It was normal for women to own property an
0
Reply
Male 39,913
blah blah blah

yeah, all kinds of injustices in the past.... moving on now
0
Reply
Male 848
I`m interested in cases of this feminist historical revisionism propaganda, Angillion. Do you have any examples?
0
Reply
Male 12,365
They had jobs set aside only for men and other jobs set aside only for women, on the basis of irrational babble that they mindlessly believed in because they`d been conditioned to do so, i.e. sexist stereotyping.

The stereotypes have changed, but sexist stereotyping is still popular because people are just as irrational now as they were 70 years ago.

Has anyone checked to see if this is genuine? So much of the stuff is feminist historical revisionism propaganda that it`s sometimes hard to tell what`s real and what`s fake.
0
Reply
Male 2,893
I like how a woman wrote it.
0
Reply
Male 1,931
It was a different time. Does that justify it, or make it right? Certainly not. But it was a different time. Go read the bible, if you want some morale outrages.
0
Reply
Male 2,056
well yeah it`s sexist, its 1938!
0
Reply
Female 3,828
Meh, its 1938. woman got fired for beong pregnant or too pretty, too.
0
Reply
Male 1,452
TADNJESS IS POSTING FROM THE FUTURE
0
Reply
Male 25,416
wow, so harsh!
0
Reply
Male 74
"In 2012 women get treated the same way just worded differently."

You`ve been to 2012? What`s it like? Are there jetpacks?
0
Reply
Male 49
@TadnJess: Since when is it 2012?
0
Reply
Male 258
I think the stationery gives a pretty good example of a) the sort of girl they want to come visit the studio in person and b) what they think of women who want to be in the workplace anyway.

Good job we`re not like that now, hey ladies? Can one of you get me a cup of tea and a foot massage now?
0
Reply
Male 4,290
Ah, the `30s. When the letters PC meant neither politically correct nor personal computer.
0
Reply
Male 207
Could women even vote in 1938?

End women`s suffrage IMO.
0
Reply
Male 147
Well for 1938 most women were treated like this...
In 2012 women get treated the same way just worded differently. :/
0
Reply
Female 2,249
Link: Why So Sexist, Disney? [Pic] [Rate Link] - A letter from Disney rejecting a job applicant because she was female.
0
Reply