Boring question #31: Why are all Cupids naked as tradition but they shell the breast of mermaids?

Nekkid Cupids aren’t sexual outside of a small and depraved community. Nekkid mer-folk have a wider, more acceptable fanbase.

Maybe because little cupids resemble cute little chubby babies, and when it comes to cute babies, we accept them in their natural, naked state. But mermaids are grown women and young ladies, so we would like to see their boobies/private parts covered.

I think (think, am still researching, but preliminary results) that mermaids use to be bare-breasted, as you pointed out, but then Disney had to cover them up in Peter Pan, and then even more in The Little Mermaid, and then all mermaids had to bear a resemblance to The Little Mermaid and her kin (lest we all be confused as to what this half-human half-fish creature is). There seems to be a feeling that breasts are more sexual organs than butts are, so bare butts are fine, but bare breasts aren’t.

So, yeah, because Disney felt the need to prude up its movies. Everyone before Disney seemed to be fine with either bare and exposed breasts, or the Godiva hair cover-up. I believe (but could totally be wrong) that the last cherubs in Disney were in Fantasia, in 1940 – and all you saw were butts, there were no teeny baby penises. Peter Pan was 13 years later, and the bras were only shells over the breasts, without straps. By The Little Mermaid in 1989, Disney had become less comfortable with overt nudity (and less obvious sexuality) and opted for an over-sexed but ever so slightly more clothed Ariel, who had bra straps on her seashells. So the real question is: Would Disney show cherub baby butts today?

Edited to add: In Disney’s defense, they were marketing to a much younger audience than most previous depictions had been. Used to be, you not only had to be an adult, but have money to see that stuff.

America is so very prudish, despite the great financial success of the porn and adult entertainment industries. If the religious right and other right-wingers were any more erotophobic, they would fail to reproduce and would disappear in one or two generations.

Erotophobia is a term coined by a number of researchers in the late 1970s and early 1980s to describe one pole on a continuum of attitudes and beliefs about sexuality. The model of the continuum is a basic polarized line, with erotophobia (fear of sex or negative attitudes about sex) and erotophilia (positive feelings/attitudes about sex) at the other end.

Would have been a little odd had Ariel sung “I can show you my nipple, rosey, erect & revealing.” A little age appropriate was the best way to go I feel.

@Dr_Lawrence Oh,we’re not phobic. We just think that there are times and places for that sort of thing, and the silver screen is neither.

@Dr_Lawrence I’m totally with you on that, especially since The Little Mermaid didn’t exactly take all the sex out of the picture, just a small bit of nudity. If they were really worried about being inappropriate around kids, they could have covered the mermaids up quite a bit more.

weirdo!

@Aethelflaed We do what we can, but ultimately us moral types don’t have that much power.

The sight of a human body is not a threat to children. Child sexual abuse and paedophilia is a growing threat to children. A woman breast-feeding her child where and when the child needs to be fed does not lead to the dangers I mentioned. Sexual intimacy between consenting adults should be enjoyed in privacy and certainly out of the sight of children. There will come a time soon enough the child will have questions about sexuality for which their caregivers will be required to provide appropriate answers.

Anatomically correct dolls and innocent cartoon characters do not need to be kept hidden. They represent no danger to young children. Adults who cannot distinguish between real and imagined threats are the ones who sexualize harmless images. Frankly, “Toddlers in Tiaras” sexualizes young girls and is probably more arousing to paedophiles than are naked mermaid cartoons.

@Dr_Lawrence And let us not forget a much greater warper of impressionable minds than seeing a naked breast: Barbie. I’d rather my child see a real woman with actual breasts than have her first impression of the naked adult female form be one that literally cannot exist and survive.

@Aethelflaed So the real question is: Would Disney show cherub baby butts today? I don’t see how a naked butt on a Cupid can be worse than some animated features that was on during prime time like Futurama. I am sure they didn’t corner the market of sexualized cartoons but by nature that they are cartoons they will attract younger viewers who might not get the overly “adult humor” of it.

No bras straps for the shells, there weren’t any.

@Hypocrisy_Central But Futurama is an adult cartoon produced by Fox, not Disney. Not marketed towards 3 year olds, but 23 year olds. And none of those adult aspects are being marketed on party plates in grocery stores right where 3 year olds can see them.

@Aethelflaed But Futurama is an adult cartoon produced by Fox, not Disney. I know that but Disney can’t corner the market on mermaids, they might influence how others do it but they can’t set that as a hard rule. Fox certainly is not Disney. Their cartoons are not for kids really. I know that, and you know that, but as I said, just by nature of it being a cartoon kids will watch, unless their parent block them. Which I know personally many parents don’t. While Disney might try to pit on airs and ”protect” the little kiddies from having evil topless mermaids swimming about, everywhere else it is far from it.

In short Disney and others that would put shells on mermaids what good are they really doing tinkering with tradition?

@Hypocrisy_Central I didn’t say I agreed with Disney’s decision. I said I understood why they did it. And that just because other’s will make adult things is no reason for Disney to partake themselves. I think by putting the shells on in their movies, Disney created a new tradition that others follow.

@Hypocrisy_Central If the Teevee Tropes are correct, ol’ Walt was a stickler for decency in his movies, and would fire people who thought otherwise.