The Instigator
nofairman
Con (against)
Losing
14 Points
The Contender
TheSkeptic
Pro (for)
Winning
37 Points

Disney

Do you like this debate?NoYes+0
Add this debate to Google Add this debate to Delicious Add this debate to FaceBook Add this debate to Digg  
Vote Here
Con Tied Pro
Who did you agree with before the debate?
Who did you agree with after the debate?
Who had better conduct?
Who had better spelling and grammar?
Who made more convincing arguments?
Who used the most reliable sources?
Reasons for your voting decision
1,000 Characters Remaining
The voting period for this debate does not end.
Voting Style: Open Point System: 7 Point
Started: 12/21/2008 Category: Education
Updated: 8 years ago Status: Voting Period
Viewed: 3,100 times Debate No: 6303
Debate Rounds (3)
Comments (2)
Votes (8)

 

nofairman

Con

We all know Walt Disney, right? Mickey Mouse, Aladin, all those things. But if you look on YouTube, you will find numerous videos about Disney and Disney Channel having subliminal messages in their music/products/movies/shows. The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it, The Lion King has a scene where the sky spells out "SEX", I think Hannah Montana teaches kids it's ok to walk all over your friends and family as long as you say sorry, the list goes on and on. There's a huge YouTube battle called the Anti Disney Movement that is going on right now, it's been there for about 8 months. DOWN WITH DISNEY!!
TheSkeptic

Pro

Since my opponent didn't explicity state it in the topic or his opening argument, I will assume he is against Disney because of the supposed sexual innuendo founded in several of it's works. This can be verified from his last statement: "DOWN WITH DISNEY!!"

=====Counterarguments=====

"But if you look on YouTube, you will find numerous videos about Disney and Disney Channel having subliminal messages in their music/products/movies/shows."
----> Because YouTube is always right, huh ;D?

>>>The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it<<<

Since my opponent didn't give the source about this issue, I will link it [1]. Basically, a close-up examination of the VHS cassette is supposed to showcase a "golden penis". A brief look can easily make out the picture: it looks like a penis. Looks like a big penis. It looks like a golden penis. So Disney must've purposely put it there right? No.

1. Accident - human brain picks up paterns/images
Since it's a pure speculation, we don't know whether or not it was an accident. A simple mistake in the drawing can lead to wild images. It's been known that the human brain is susceptible to trickery, and in the context of this debate, it's been known to tend to visualize patterns among things [2].

2. Fraud
Perhaps someone put it there witihout anyone knowing. Or an employee purposely did it to try to sabatoge Disney. The list of possible examples go on and on - how do we know which one is true and which one isn't?

3. Other editions
In the following editions, the image is no longer there (due to different covers). So why does it even matter anymore?

Basically, simple cases of "possible" and disputed sexual innuendo is little reason to bring down Disney, which I interpret as shutting it down. Disney brings great economic value to society, tons of little kids enjoy the theme park, and they make many movies/shows that don't seem to have this mark of sexual innuendo. Why should all that go away for a possible and not likely sexual innuendo charge?

>>>Lion King<<<

*Sigh*, I've seen this same argument from dopes like Donald Wildmon. Anyway, the alleged "SEX" is really "SFX"[3], which means special effects. This has been stated as a casual inside signature for the techies at Disney - I mean, heck they made a good*ss movie. Why not let them have an inside signature? But of course, constant complaining of alleged sexual innuendo led to further editions deleting this scene. So why does it matter anymore?

>>>Hannah Montana<<<

"I think Hannah Montana teaches kids it's ok to walk all over your friends and family as long as you say sorry"
----> What you think isn't necessarily true.

My opponent states that Hannnah Montana teaches kids it's okay to shrug off your family and friends as long as you say sorry. Evidently, he hasn't watched many episodes of this show, or perhaps many other shows. The common format for many kids or teengaer sitcoms is to have a flawed main character (and many times minor characters). They will do something bad, and by the end of the 30 minute episode they will learn a valuable lesson.

For example, in The Fresh Prince of Bel-Air[4] (awesome show, I don't know why they stopped or they didn't get any awards), Will Smith is the main character who is a street-smart kid from West Philadelphia who lives with his rich relatives. Their lifestyle, and clothing style, obviously clash. Will usually does something stupid or bad, and goes through tons of trouble throughout the episode to fix the situation and his relationship with the people involved (which many times involve his relatives). However, always in the end does it involve redemption and somewhat of a "moral lesson".

This is a common feauture of MANY sitcoms, and is similar of Hannah Montana. It's my opponent's burden to show that Hannah Montana advocates rudeness and disregard for one's family and friends.

=====Conclusion=====

I've given explanations for alleged cases of sexual innuendo in the two cited examples by my opponent, and given a brief explanation of the show format that Hannah Montana and many other sitcoms adhere to. There are now two things to note:

-Even if Disney did put those images in, why does it matter? It's not there anymore in current editions. Similariy, should we really shut down the entire business just because their animators probably sneaked in a few jokes? People gotta cool down.

-Using Occam's Razor, we should trust explanations like "SEX is really SFX, because this is an inside signature techies like to use", rather than "Disney executives are trying to advocate sexual promoscuity among children, for whatever mysterious reason".

Think about it, and common sense will evemtually prevail.

---References---
1. http://en.wikipedia.org...(1989_film)#Allegations_of_sexual_innuendo
2. http://www.ucgis.org...
3. http://en.wikipedia.org...
4. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 1
nofairman

Con

Ok, first off, I will agree that YouTube is not correct all the time, nor are the other sites. Since you pointed out that it would be better if i linked my points, I will this time.

>>>The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it<<<

Ok, the penis isn't really that big, and it is very camoflauged in Neptune's palace thingy, (don't know what it's called), but it's possible to see with the naked eye, a favorite scenario by subliminal advertisers.

http://images.google.com... link for the Little Mermaid scandal.

>>>Lion King<<<

whether it says SEX or SFX it's still sort of subliminal. I learned last year from a teacher that students will try to disguise letters on spelling tests (lowercase "A" will look like lowercase "O" (a,o), in this case capital "E" will look like capital F" (E,F), lowercase "I" will look like lowercase "J" (i,j) and other things. everyone's handwriting is different, and it won't be rare to find that one little failing student that will do that. Lion King message, the user even says it was eithier SEX or SFX. Note that the last line of the "E" is bent at a crooked angle.

>>>Hannah Montana<<<

Ok, I don't have very much excuses for this arguement, but the shows and movies like Hannah Montana I HAVE watched alot of, I've seen alot of that. (HSM 1's hidden moral suggests disobeying your parents for the things you REALLY want to do, a.k.a Troy quitting basketball and pissing off his dad to join the high school musical.)

>>>New Arguement<<<

Ok, outside of LK, LM, and HM,there's an old movie called "The Rescuers" that has a scene where 2 little mice are flying in something around a city, and it goes too fast to clearly show a naked woman in one of the windows. Note: this movie was not made in English, so the scene is around 0:30.
TheSkeptic

Pro

I thank my opponent for starting this rather unique debate. Now le's get on to the arguments!

>>>The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it<<<

All my opponent did was reaffirmed what I already acccepted: that there was a "penis-looking object" on the original VHS cover. However, he failed to refute my arguments corresponding to this topic. All he did was supply a picture. Until I get an actual rebuttal, I will extend this argument to this round.

>>>Lion King<<<

"Note that the last line of the "E" is bent at a crooked angle."
----> For animation purposes. Having the stars move in such a majestic, celestial way makes it look nice. This is probably the reason for the "suscpicious crooked angle". The thing with conspiracy theorists, ranging from Apollo moon landings to Disney sexual innuendo, is that they come from the conclusion and arive at a fact. They find little details and distort it from reality. When people normally see the "crooked angle", they don't interpret it to be the subtle formations of SEX, but rather pleasant animations.

Again, my argument pertaining to Occam's Razor still stands. So does my argument of why it doesn't matter anymore, when future editions right now delete this part of the scene.

>>>Hanna Montana<<<

My opponent concedes this point - may this be a big sign for the voters.

>>>The Rescuers<<<

This is actually the only legit example. Yes, a photograph of a naked woman is in one of the windows. However, there are several points to be made:

1. Who cares? The future editions have taken this out, so why does it matter now?

2. At normal speed, it's so fast that most people can't even find it. If you watched the entire movie without previous knowledge of this innuendo, would you really have noticed?

3. A proposed theory concerning this example is that perhaps someone put it in for sabatoge. Around the time the movie was being released, it was predicted to be a success already. Similariy, Walt Disney had died, and tensions were high[1].

=====Conclusion=====

My opponent has failed to refute the notion of Occam's razor, possible other explanations, or why if these allegations were even true that it should be the reason for Disney's demise. Many things have been left unanswered, and one of my opponent's arguments has even been dropped.

---References---
1. http://en.wikipedia.org...
Debate Round No. 2
nofairman

Con

I thank my opponent for accepting this debate. You really like debating don't you? ;)

>>>The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it<<<

We may never know how it got there, or why someone did it, but there is a rumor flying around about one of Walt's cartoonists getting fired just before production and so he got revenge on Disney by hiding a penis in the middle of the palace. But hey, just a rumor.

>>>Lion King<<<

What does Occam's Razor have to do with this? Anyway my belief is that it spells SEX, because Disney has alot of examples of sexual messages/ pictures, both hidden and plainly visible. It's wouldn't be a suprise to have one more.

>>>Hannah Montana<<<

No further notes.

>>>The Rescuers<<<

Removed or not, it's still there. Have you ever had a friend who did something really bad to you and later said sorry after it? The action still remains, and it will always remain.

"At normal speed, it's so fast that most people can't even find it. If you watched the entire movie without previous knowledge of this innuendo, would you really have noticed?" Yes this may be true, but subliminal messages are ment to catch you off-guard and subconsiously make you think about something.

Last Thoughts:

This is the final round, I would like to thank my opponent again and anyone who sees this debate.

Link:
http://en.wikipedia.org... Subliminal message definition.
TheSkeptic

Pro

"You really like debating don't you? ;)"
----> Yeah :D

=====Counterarguments=====

>>>The title cover of Little Mermaid has a hidden picture in it<<<

My opponent, whether known to him or not, has conceded this point. All he states is that at most, there is a "rumor flying around". But of course, this doesn't mean that it's true. Without pressing this point further, I have nothing to refute as this argument seems to be dropped.

>>>Lion King<<<

"What does Occam's Razor have to do with this?"
----> Just a rule of thumb. Which seems more plausible: SEX is actually SFX (an inside signature for techies), or that the Disney corportation plotted to sneak in "subliminal sex messages"?

"Anyway my belief is"
----> In a debate, this hardly matters.

"because Disney has alot of examples of sexual messages/ pictures, both hidden and plainly visible"
----> You failed to supply more LEGIT examples of sexual messages/pictures, thus making your point null.

My opponent has failed to bring up any new point in refutation of the ones I offered.

>>>Hannah Montana<<<

It should be crystal clear that my opponent drops this argument.

>>>The Rescuers<<<

"Removed or not, it's still there. Have you ever had a friend who did something really bad to you and later said sorry after it? The action still remains, and it will always remain."
----> There's several things to consider however:
1. Further editions removed it
2. You have failed to give proof that Disney corportation inserted these pictures, and not some person who did it behind-the-lines. If this was perpertuated by one person, then Disney shouldn't be at blame.

"but subliminal messages are ment to catch you off-guard and subconsiously make you think about something."
----> And what demonsratable effects have arised from these examples from Disney?

=====Conclusion=====

My opponent has conceded several of his points,and dropped one of his arguments. He has failed to show why Disney corporation should be shut down EVEN if they were rightly accused of inserting sexual images. He has failed to show they were even inserted by Disney. Having failed his burden, I urge readers to vote PRO.
Debate Round No. 3
2 comments have been posted on this debate. Showing 1 through 2 records.
Posted by EmyG 8 years ago
EmyG
I like Disney.

And I don't even see the "golden penis".

As for the wind in the Lion King saying SEX, I believe it says SFX. It is just drifting away, making it look like SEX at one point. If you're looking for it, that is. At the clearest point, you can tell it does say SFX. It's just your mind playing tricks, or your wanting to prove Disney bad.

As for The Rescuers, you can't even tell what is in the window. It is too blurry and goes by too fast.

Hannah Montana says to follow your dreams. Not walk all over your friends and family. You obviously don't watch the show. I admit, there are many episodes where Miley walks all over her friends or family, but she always learns a valuable lesson in the end. You learn from your mistakes, as well as others.

Please Vote Pro.
Posted by firesoul139 8 years ago
firesoul139
whoooooo!!! disney sucks!!!!
8 votes have been placed for this debate. Showing 1 through 8 records.
Vote Placed by philosphical 8 years ago
philosphical
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by EmyG 8 years ago
EmyG
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by DiablosChaosBroker 8 years ago
DiablosChaosBroker
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Agreed with after the debate:Vote Checkmark--0 points
Who had better conduct:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:Vote Checkmark--1 point
Made more convincing arguments:Vote Checkmark--3 points
Used the most reliable sources:Vote Checkmark--2 points
Total points awarded:70 
Vote Placed by luigiforever96 8 years ago
luigiforever96
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05 
Vote Placed by JBlake 8 years ago
JBlake
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:06 
Vote Placed by Labrat228 8 years ago
Labrat228
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by dvhoose 8 years ago
dvhoose
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:--Vote Checkmark0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:-Vote Checkmark-1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:07 
Vote Placed by TheSkeptic 8 years ago
TheSkeptic
nofairmanTheSkepticTied
Agreed with before the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Agreed with after the debate:-Vote Checkmark-0 points
Who had better conduct:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Had better spelling and grammar:--Vote Checkmark1 point
Made more convincing arguments:-Vote Checkmark-3 points
Used the most reliable sources:-Vote Checkmark-2 points
Total points awarded:05