Talk:Tiana (The Princess and the Frog)

First American Princess?

I thought that title belonged to Pocahontas or Snow White. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 76.194.238.156 (talk) 21:42, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

That should be "African-American". It's been corrected. Cactusjump (talk) 21:48, 7 July 2009 (UTC)

Snow White clearly takes place in a made up European country. America has never has a monarchy. I'm still not sure how they're doing it in Princess and the Frog. And the edit did mention Pocahontas, actually. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.208.15 (talk) 21:17, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

It seems she is not a princess to start with but marries "free-spirited, jazz-loving Prince Naveen of Maldonia". I guess I could have put a spoiler warning on that, but heck, anyone who can't work that out is probably too young to be reading this. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:14, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I wonder if we should also make the point of her being an American princess. It's far less talked about than her being the first black princess (don't criticise, that's how many sources describe her) and I don't know if she's the first or second (was Pocohontas a princess?) but if there are a few references maybe a mention is worthwhile. DJ Clayworth (talk) 17:24, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

I didn't see any articles mentioning her as being a stand-out American princess (since Pocahontas is considered part of the franchise), just the uniqueness of her being the first African-American princess. But I think it should be included that she is not born to royalty, as other Disney princess articles make that clarification. Cactusjump (talk) 17:31, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

yes tiana is a princess not by birth she is the only other one apart from cinderella (mulan is not royalty but a heroine) America isn't a monarchy like others said and doesn't have royals so tiana is a princess after marring a pince and there for is princess tiana of Maldonia pocahontas is natvie amercian/amercian indian and comeS from a tribe which her dad is cheif so shes techically a princess and is offical a princess at disney BUT IS ISN'T AFICAN ONLY DARK SKINED LIKE ONE and tiana is the first black princess as no other black character is on the offical line up and pocahontas is the only other american. i really might murder someone who says she the first afican amercian princess agian--Veggiegirl (talk) 01:39, 31 July 2009 (UTC)

First African-American Princess

Just as the Barack Obama page points out that he is the first African-American president in the history of the United States, this article has ONE sentence stating that Princess Tiana is the first African-American princess in the history of Disney animation. There are two works cited that discuss that this is groundbreaking in the history of Disney's princesses, and is therefore relevant to the article. Cactusjump (talk) 18:08, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I would call those articles racist for only looking at her appearance. Second, I'm sure you could find a lot of racist things written about the President too, would those be added to his page? Having other people support prejudice doesn't make it okay, you seem to think so. It certainly doesn't make it relevant to a movie that has nothing to do with it. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.208.15 (talk) 21:43, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

first she isn't afician amercian but black obama isn't black and they put that there to make him sound better and people think afican american is another term for black people so they say that so people think he is and try to cover up his white and its shamefull to be mixed and wont get as much votes for not been "black enough" for the racist aifcan amercians out there who soooooooooooo many time critisize people and make sh*t up and milk sad storys to bring up racism even though some never actually experince racism themselves and then do it themselves buy racial favouring, sterotyping only watching tv/films that only have black people in yet never do they show much deversity on BET and also have award shows only for people who are black enough and giving awards purely cause of their colour. people morn about racist groups and if today someone had church or group meanings that banned anyone whos black hell would brake lose but then they do the same thing as well. Expecting others to pay for crimes and things that happen when they wasn't even born or could do anything about is unfair only in america i've seen this(not in other countries i've noticed) wierd.

Mentioning her race is racist!

As I have edited the page several times, and will continue to state it is degrading and racist to mention this character's race. It is not relevant to the story or the film. She is not the first minority princess, and she is also the only one to have her race mentioned without it pertaining to her geography. She shouldn't have to be remembered for skin tone, she should be remembered for the character they're creating. This is extremely offensive. If anything mention that she is the first American Princess, since Pocahontas. Someone mentioned Snow White, but that doesn't make any sense. Mentioning her race gives the impression that she is inherently different someone because of it, which is completely false. Science has proven beyond doubt that race does not exist. Let's please pretend this is 2009, and discuss this character and the HUMAN BEING she is, not the socially constructed label. I don't care if it's one sentence of a thousand, it is demeaning and insulting. Just as it is with the President. You want to talk about something groundbreaking? How about ignoring her appearance and presenting her as character equal to all others? Then you have progression. Until then, you're only seeing color and it's racist! (173.60.208.15 (talk) 21:13, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

Let's not feed the trolls. DJ Clayworth (talk) 21:16, 10 July 2009 (UTC)

Clearly someone not capable of an intelligent discussion. (173.60.208.15 (talk) 21:18, 10 July 2009 (UTC))

For your information it is not racist to mention or discuss race, either of a real person or a fictional character. Prejudice against race is not the same as acknowledgement of race. Your edits here are disruptive. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:10, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Thank you! Cactusjump (talk) 16:57, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

Acknowledging race when it has no relevance to the story or character, is racist. It's racist because, it gives the idea that the character is inherently different solely based on her race. And if you're going to talk about Obama, he asked on numerous occasions not to have his race considered, because he wanted to be judged based on his character, not his appearance. This is because he knows, as an educated man, that it has no relevance whatsoever! The very mentioning of her race is offensive because it demeans everything about the character and the film. It makes the progression of her being a minority, nothing more than tokenism. Again, you reach the point of progression when you DON'T have to mention it. Separate is NOT equal. And the very idea that you called her race "crucial information" in a prior message to me shows the weight you put on it, and that is racist. I'm sorry that you find tolerance "disruptive", but this is not acceptable. This page needs to be edited, or I'm sorry I will go above your head and get this changed. Either way, this is not going to be how this character is remembered. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.208.15 (talk) 21:05, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

The only way the one sentence is racist is if the term "African-American" is offensive. Is this term offensive to you? If it is, that means you have your own negative pre-conceived notions about the term "African-American." Because the term has no negative connotations to me, or anyone else who has edited this article. I am proud of my race and my culture. And the fact that this is the first African-American princess in the history of Disney animation means we HAVE moved forward as a society where all races can be recognized.

...And if you choose to change this article again without getting a consensus here, I will report you for vandalism and disruptive editing. Cactusjump (talk) 21:18, 13 July 2009 (UTC)

First of all, I will again say that you can only have moved forward, if you don't feel the need to mention her race. Mentioning something gives the impression of relevance, which race is not. In this instance, it gives the impression that she is somehow inherently different from others simply because of her appearance, which she is not. Mentioning it negates the entire progression of her being created, because the goal is get beyond race. If then turn around and draw attention back to it, you're moving backwards and demeaning the character. This is a simple concept, why do I have to repeat it? Second, I could care less if I'm reported. I'm not disrupting anything, I'm identifying racism, and I will do so on record. Exposing me can only expose you, and I would love that. I'm not trying to make enemies, but this is an unfair double standard. No other princess's race is mentioned, which is great, but she should be allowed the same consideration. I've yet to hear you respond to that. And if you must know, I do find the term offensive. Not because I think there is a negative connotation, but because it gives the impression of differences, which is a false one. This character is an American, period. I am an American, period. It's 2009, in order to get beyond race, we must accept that is not exist. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.208.15 (talk) 02:57, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

This is not the place to push a point-of-view, as we are very much neutral in mindset here at Wikipedia. The fact that reputable news sources have commented on this character being the first African-American Disney princess makes this information notable and worthy of inclusion in the article. Continued use of this page as a soapbox or edit warring will be considered disruptive editing and will result in a block from the site. Thank you, Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 03:25, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

I"m not "pushing a point of view", nor am I the least bit intimidated by you. No, I don't like the term, but that is not why I feel it shouldn't be used. Clearly you can't comprehend my argument, or you are simply insensitive to racial issues. As I've stated before I would fault those programs as well, no matter how reputable. Why are you equating my commentary with "disrupting"? I have given you a rational, truth-based, argument. You have given me complete dismissal, and not responded to most of what I've said. I'm looking for a rational reason for the inclusion of her race, as I've given several reasons why it's wrong, and you refuse to even consider my point. Either way, you're complete rudeness is unwarranted and childish. I was told to bring this up here for discussion, but no one seems to want to do that. Instead they just me to shut up about this issue, and that's not going to happen. Even if banned, I have friends who will protest this. Is what I'm saying so crazy to you people? What a sad world we live in. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 173.60.208.15 (talk) 04:44, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

173... Everyone is entitled to their opinion, and you are fully entitled to believe that any mention of race is 'racist'. However at Wikipedia the content of articles is decided by consensus. See Wikipedia:Consensus for more on what that means. On this matter you are clearly in a minority of one, and hence the article is not going to be changed to reflect your viewpoint.

As to your arguments it is clearly not racist to mention race. Racism is discrimination on the basis of race. It is no more racist to state facts about someone's race than it is discriminatory to describe someone as 'tall' or 'American'. DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:59, 14 July 2009 (UTC)

i feel like deleting everyones comments but i'm nice ;) so i'll use block to make myself listened to on the ariel one is states she is the only red head (which she is) and jasmine is the first non white princess so there no probelm with adding it on top at all and should be there BUT!!!! tooooo many people have talked about it and tooooooo many are picking away at everything good in this movie if she wasn't black people would still moan so i agree it should stop and bann the critisism section on the "the princess and the frog" page as most is made up shit buy racist people who thing of black power not treating anyone equality pretending obama is black and not mixed race IS RACIST anyone who say it isn't clearly doesn't no much and these issues i agree we shouldn't talk about it or mention it much as its unfair for the people working on this film to pick things out of new information about the film and sit there for afew hours thinking of what they can find to add a racist story to it i can see them now saying "right her names maddy what can we add to that <look on google> OH YES it sounds like mammy right..right! no oh well, well say it does anyway cause we need new news not enough racist let and we have nothing esle to right or agrue about." say it once is fine but ban it any other places to stop racist insensitve people like Angela Bronner Helm and her racist blog i can't belivie she hasn't said sorry to obama for making him feel ashamed for having a white mother and black dad and the million of mixed-race girls feel left out and insulted by someone partly of there own race these little girls will probably have same ethnic features as tiana and will be happy to have someone who looks like them but like mummy & daddy is in an interracial relasionship. it also stop racist people like Angela come on this earth agian and does what she some how bleives is what shes doing buy promorting racial friendships and respecting other races and cultures which clearly angela lacks.

Black

It's not my intent to be racially insensitive here, but I'm beginning to wonder if rather than "first African-American princess" we might say "first black princess". I know some people object to using black this way, but several major sources are putting it that way. Being the first black princess is more notable than first African-American. Had Disney done many stories set in Africa, Tiana could still be the first African-American without being the first black princess. Opinions? DJ Clayworth (talk) 13:33, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I actually agree with you; a majority of the sources do say "black." I just hesitate because I don't know what the sensitivity is on the word. Everyone has their opinion on if the word is appropriate or not. Cactusjump (talk) 17:59, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Another question would be: if we do use the word "Black" is it capitalized or not? Cactusjump (talk) 18:22, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I don't think so. Sources don't seem to. [1] [2] [3]. DJ Clayworth (talk) 18:35, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I would think if we have a majority of sources saying "black" than that would be the acceptable term to use over "African-American." Cactusjump (talk) 18:45, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I agree with you both. "Black" should be used instead of "African-American" if that is the term in the sources (and that also "internationalizes" the article a bit), and it should be lowercase (except when at the beginning of the sentence, of course). :) Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 18:56, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

Alright, it's been changed then; it was only mentioned once! Cactusjump (talk) 19:19, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

That was a fast change. I was going to wait a bit. But let's "be bold in editing". I'm going to add some more references that explicitly call Tiana "black". DJ Clayworth (talk) 19:34, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

I'm sure if there's a disagreement about it, we'll hear from it--hopefully here. :) I believe two of the three sources there use the term "black," so you have a headstart! Cactusjump (talk) 19:39, 15 July 2009 (UTC)

How about we pretend it's 2009, and not mention her race at all??? Seeing as is has nothing to do with the story, and cheapens her to nothing less than a token character. (173.60.208.15 (talk) 10:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC))

I knew it! You're Stephen Colbert! You don't see race! In other news, the United States Census is destructive because it collects data on racial self-identification, even though it uses the data it collects to more accurately and effectively allocate government services. The NAACP is wrong because, while it has been instrumental in fighting for the civil rights of an historically oppressed group of people, it mentions race in its name. If the mere MENTION of race is blasphemous, then U.S. President Barack Obama is a blasphemer, as he mentions race IN THE TITLE of his seminal memoir Dreams from my Father: A Story of Race and Inheritance. Okay, I'll stop now.

The fact that Tiana is black does not reduce her to a token character at all, for that is merely part of her story. The fact that she is black shows that Disney, like the rest of us, can no longer deny that we as a species are diverse in the color of our skin, that skin color may make us look different but that we are all fundamentally the same people, and that all shades of humanity are just as worthy of being a heroine. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 11:38, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Oh, and by the way, in case I haven't made myself clear, the fact that she is black is notable for mention and is momentous because fifty years ago, Disney would never have considered a black princess because of racial prejudice. Her existence, the fact that she is black, goes to show how far we've come in defeating racism. We mention her race not to be racist, but to show how racial barriers are dissolving. Race may not matter now, in 2009, but it did once. Pretending history never happened, suppressing it from Wikipedia, ignores the very basis of the human story, which is one of progress; it is vital for us to understand how far we have come from the joys and pains of our past, so we may understand how far we have yet to go. Vicenarian ^{(T · C)} 17:16, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Here here! This is why the fact that she is black is mentioned in several notable sources. Cactusjump (talk) 17:24, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

Unreleased?

Just passing by, but I think Tiana can be considered an official Disney Princess as she is shown on the Disney Princess page on their website : http://disney.go.com/princess/ —Preceding unsigned comment added by 71.255.92.127 (talk) 00:19, 21 July 2009 (UTC)

This is indicated in the article in several places. Thanks, though! Cactusjump (talk) 16:56, 21 July 2009 (UTC)