Our Shared Shelf discussion

This post is discussing the Postscript, so if you haven't finished the book yet, spoilers ahead!

In the Postscript, Moran discusses the obsession with princesses and I thought it would be worthwhile to analyze her assessment of this given the popularity of the thread Disney and Feminism.



I liked her thoughts on the differences of expectations with regards to being vs. doing. Moran claims that men are expected to do things, while for women, things happen to them. As a result, young girls are led to believe that they can just be the best versions of themselves and everything else will fall into place.

Additionally, I was curious about her assessment of the shift in princess stories after the death of Princess Diana. Are the changes really a reaction to Princess Diana's legacy?

She also observes that people are less interested in Kate Middleton and sort of perhaps pity her, compared to obsession with and admiration for Diana. I was surprised, because at least in the U.S., people seemed pretty obsessed with the most recent royal wedding and royal babies. Were feelings about it different in the UK? Even if people were still very invested in Prince William's wedding to Kate Middleton, is it to a much lesser extent than with Diana? Or is it perhaps generational—Moran already lived through the excitement of a royal wedding and this time she was "over it," whereas for people of my generation, it was all new, but Moran may not have been interacting with younger people and getting their full reactions?


Those were some of the thoughts I had reading this section of the Postscript. Please feel free to either respond to my thoughts or post your own discussion points related to Princesses as discussed in the Postscript of How to Be a Woman!

Diana received a lot more attention here in Europe. It is so much more than what Kate is seeing.
In a sense, this is generational. If you have not lived through the 80s to see Diana in all papers every day with accusation, admiration, stories, etc., you simply cannot compare. You will have to take Caitlin's experience at face value and put in her personal context.

We as a group need to be careful that we differentiate between opinion and experience. This gets mixed up very often. I see people debating experiences or dismissing them which is a form of communication all abuse -- a tactic to silence the voice of others -- I find unacceptable. Experience in a sense is a fact; valid for the person having lived through it, and as such not to be dismissed. It typically cannot be used for generalization.

Example: I was robbed by a Scandinavian. This is why all Scandinavians are thieves.
Item one is an experience and thus a fact. The second part a wrong conclusion as it is an unfounded generalization.

I have always been uneasy with princesses. The entire monarchy is so horribly sexist. Girls can only become Queen if they have no brothers.
And I do not find the Disney attempts to create Princess heroes quite as convincing as this is simply not based in reality. I would rather see strong other women. Why not Rosa Luxembourg or Marie Curie? But this is a different thread. :-)

Keep in mind Caitlin is living in a monarchy. The topic for her has a relevance that is not the same for people who only know democracy.

Princesses these days do not become queens only if they no brothers, most of the modern democratic monarchies that is. In the uk Sweden, Netherlands, Spain it is only birth order that counts. I think while the interest in Kate was high, most people already knew she had a pretty good relationship with William, whereas Diana has a high drama choice from the get go, younger, from a rather dramatic family.

I for one think the royal pecking order is the least of my problems in relation to monarchies :D

It boggles my mind why people wish to favour blue blood still, when they could have someone they have actually voted for, and whose credentials they are familiar with, rather than hope for the best that the latest brat born with a silver spoon in their mouth will turn out good enough. It's just circumstance that made a particular family The One, and to perpetuate this over and over - voluntarily - is beyond my comprehension. I'm glad we have a people-voted president.

How many nations rely only on monarchi by now? In Denmark we have a royal family (and I am no huge fan), currently a queen, but we also have a democratically elected parliament. The queen holds no real power.

I thought the comments about princesses were interesting as I definitely grew up wanting to be a princess and I mean the old fashioned princesses like Snow White and Cinderella. Just as she became more confident in her own skin people were expecting her to change her appearance with plastic surgery. This juxtaposition says something about our society and meeting ideals. I love the fact that Moran goes against this by empowering women to be who they want to be.

I think people (especially children) see princesses as a sort of wonderful, magical person. This is mostly due to the fact that we grow up with stories about all these lovely princesses. Maybe that image never really goes away and we will continue to feel that way about princesses.
Now, I wasn't born early enough to experience the media-madness about princess Diana, but I think her death kind of made people see that being a princess doesn't have to be that lovely ( I believe Moran said something simular).
So now with Kate Middelton, we aren't jealous because we lost interest in being a princess.

This, by the way, is only my theory, I don't know if I am right or anything.

BookishMusician wrote: "I think people (especially children) see princesses as a sort of wonderful, magical person. This is mostly due to the fact that we grow up with stories about all these lovely princesses. Maybe that..."

I agree, I think that is her overall point. I was just confused because from my U.S.-based perspective, people were really obsessing over Kate Middleton and the babies, but apparently it was a lot crazier with Diana, so I stand corrected!

It seems that as Disney Princesses have become less magical, less perfect, less helpless, etc., we've come to relate to them more meaningfully. And in this way, we've lost interest in being princesses because they're just like us, so what difference does it make? So the more we are able to relate to them, the less exciting the prospect of being a princess is. We're already like them. Maybe?

I think (when referring to Kate vs Diana) that Diana was a first...the Jackie Kennedy of the royals. Everything she did was more human and "in touch" and accessible...the princess story come to life. So now that Kate is here and is quite lovely and human etc etc, she is still not ground-breakng. Diana did that. Kate has her own popularity and is charismatic and part of the fantasy life...but she isn't breaking the mold like Diana did.

I don't think Ameticans really get democratic monatrchies really as a Brit who lives in America I am ok with the Queen they do the representing bit and ceremonial thing well really well most of the time and we have an elected bunch for making rules and policies oh and they bring in tourist dollars in the USA you get a whole bunch of people who were never elected either sometimes good sometimes not the Kennddies Billy Carter Roger Clinton various bushes for example not really relevant from a feminist perspective thought but good to have new style princesses for when we want to be girly nothing wrong with that

I also wonder if some of the difference between the media coverage of Kate is from William. William grew up seeing his mother harass by the media and didn't want what happened to his mother to happen to Kate.

Sandy wrote: "I think (when referring to Kate vs Diana) that Diana was a first...the Jackie Kennedy of the royals. Everything she did was more human and "in touch" and accessible...the princess story come to lif..."

I agree with this point. There was a kind of mania around Diana and all she did and she was able to do a lot of charitable work as well. So that was her own way of breaking the mold. Now with Kate, I feel like she's seen as more in Diana's shadow as Diana was indeed first and surrounded by media. Maybe Kate is trying to stay as far away from the maelstrom as possible.

Well my mom used to reeeally admire diana when she was a teenage and i don't admire kate middleton at all. I can't imagine how can a girl love a real world princess bcs i don't think that the today's royalty is so unique and memorable. As a 2000's girl the only princess that i admire are belle, pocahontas, jazmin, mulan, tiana, rapunzel, merida, ana and elsa ( queen) , the fictional ones. I do believe that the concept of a modern disney princess may be the result of princess diana, and i'm grateful for that because without even knowing i'm turning to be just as my favorite princess belle and rapunzel without the fear of being weird and i know what you all think about disney princesses but i love them , i see them from what they are, for they personalities and sacrificies. And i think that perjuicing a character only for being a disney princess is just as bad a perjuicing a woman for dressing in some certain way or liking some certain activities

Why don't prince ?

Kiho wrote: "Why don't prince ?"

Ohh that's a good question :3 if we talk about real life princes i don't know pretty much about they, if we talk about disney princes the ones that i like aren't actually princes, they married a princess. But i really like fictional princes such as Dorian or Kai , princes really interested in their people and their family

I'm an Australian for a republic and don't support monarchies. I also intensely dislike the stereotype of a princess. I am freaked out by the social conditioning of girls as princesses.

Diana wrote: "I'm an Australian for a republic and don't support monarchies. I also intensely dislike the stereotype of a princess. I am freaked out by the social conditioning of girls as princesses."

Ditto

Katherine wrote: "I'm really interested in the new marketing of Disney princesses as THE PRINCESSES. I grew up in the 90's, The Little Mermaid was the first movie I saw in a theater, and grew with up with princesses..."

I'm a 00's child and i had the same experience, i mostly grew up with the same princesses and i admired them for their bravery, intelligence and independence, i never liked them for being princesses and i didn't want to be a princess,( my dream was to be veterinarian :3)

Aly wrote: "Katherine wrote: "I'm really interested in the new marketing of Disney princesses as THE PRINCESSES. I grew up in the 90's, The Little Mermaid was the first movie I saw in a theater, and grew with ..."

Same here :)

If there was any princess I had wanted to be like it was Mulan or Pocahontas. :D Many songs from each are ones I like a lot. <3 Ironically if you asked me what prince I wanted to be like ... hrm. The only one similar or close enough would've been Spirit... and he's a horse. xD Well. IDK if he counted as a prince. A king? IDK he was the leader of his herd so... xD I wanted to be able to fight against the world as boldly and bravely as he did. That or Little Creek a sweet, kind, loveable yet strong and determined man from the same movie, Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron.

In any case, Pocahontas was the chieftain's daughter yes but she was never really a princess, at least not in any way that the white invaders from Europe had understood that term or role. -^- My later on research proved THAT point well. Oi. Mulan was the daughter of a prosperous farming family, and her eventual husband, Shang, was the son of a famous general. No "born princesses" here lol. Not like the later ones. xD (Though Tiana wasn't a born princess either, but Elsa and Anna were.)

Nobody's brought this up, but there's an awful racial stereotype called a JAP a/k/a Jewish American Princess. Perhaps it's not well known outside Jewish circles, but it is so distasteful, I NEVER wanted to be a princess, and my sister, who has daughters, would NEVER buy her girls any clothing saying "Little Princess" or anything like that. She couldn't avoid showing them the Disney movies, though.

Same with you on the Mulan there Emma. :) Though I'd also have to say I love how she thought on her feet, was quick, spirited, and determinedly went after her own goals. Also the song "Reflection" was the song of my childhood and up until now as well. I didn't realize why it was so meaningful until I was almost an adult, and finally realized I was a transman. Beautifully captures how I feel about my own reflection too. :) And she was able to go through the army, be seen as a first a guy, and then seen as a girl, and save the damn day, make the winning plan, get the emperor out, her friends in, and defeat the bad guy with her little friends' help. Also the fact that the song "Be a man!" played when her friends were in drag and used the scarfs to rappel up the poles, was like vindicating and validating the want to be a man and dress up as a woman and how you can still be a goddamn man anyways! <3 Yes my long-time love for the movie is showing. :D

For Pocahontas I loved how her people lived more in harmony with the world around them and the animals. Yes it does veer into the "Magical Native American" trope unfortunately, but I did love the contrast between them and the white men as more the true savages there for how they destroyed so much of the environment. I still get goosebumps and chills over how both sides sang the song "Savages" as they marched towards their intended battle, and she is racing against time to stop them and calls upon the spirits to help her. I also highly related with her in choosing the rougher but more unpredictable and wild course to paddle not just her canoe but also her life, over the more accepted "smoothest course." Her song of "Just around the river bend!" spoke to me of being a dreamer and making the dreams come true in life, regardless if it's "socially accepted" to do so or not. If it's true to you, then follow it. I also love how "Colors of the wind" advocated for environmentalism, conservationism, and yet also was speaking of the deep spiritual bond with other living creatures which I likewise feel and it was awesome to see that represented in film and not ridiculed either (I get enough of that ridicule in my day-to-day life from other sources and other media).

So both of those movies, along with Spirit: Stallion of the Cimarron, have really spoken to me over my childhood and continued to do so even now. :) <3 Shaped me in a way I guess you can say! I'd love to hear how similar movies have shaped y'all too! :D

Kressel wrote: "Nobody's brought this up, but there's an awful racial stereotype called a JAP a/k/a Jewish American Princess. Perhaps it's not well known outside Jewish circles, but it is so distasteful, I NEVER w..."

I grew up in the NYC metro area, so I'm very familiar with the stereotype. It was thrown around quite casually when I was in high school, by Jewish kids as well as others. It was also applied to everyone regardless of their religious/cultural background, though it was more often applied to Jewish girls for sure (which is tied up in socioeconomic differences in the community as well between more affluent reform Jewish families and the lower-middle-class white families and families of color). It wasn't until later on, when I left the bubble of that community, that it ever occurred to me that it was in any way offensive (aside from the typical high school teasing).

It seems sort of on par with the "guido" stereotype as depicted on Jersey Shore. In fact, wasn't there another TV show called Long Island Princesses (or something to that effect) that was basically a Jewish version of Jersey Shore (although not all the women on that show were Jewish, but the implication was that the culture they were apart of was Jewish... perhaps by virtue of the "princess" mentality).

Anyway, thanks for making that connection, Kressel! Even though I recognized after growing up a bit that the stereotype is harmful, whether or not it is used by the girls themselves, I hadn't really examined it thoroughly, so this was a good opportunity to do that.

I remember the first time I was called it. I was shocked! I was such a nerdy, fashionless teenager! The girl who said it could only be reacting to my Jewish identity.

Best princess ever = the Audrey Hepburn character in "Roman Holiday." She just wanted to get out of her protected bubble and have some fun.

2nd best = Sarah of A Little Princess because her nobility came from her character

Kressel wrote: "2nd best = Sarah of A Little Princess because her nobility came from her character"

Something I always LOVED about Sara in ALP is the fact that "princess-hood" ("princess-ship?") was always associated with her behavior...showing strength and self-control through adversity. She pretends to be a princess because she wants to behave like one, not because she wants a crown or a prince.

Her story (though problematic with ideas about class) really helped form my morality and saw me through the toughest crisis of my life twenty years later. I still listen to the audiobook at night under my pillow when I'm having a hard time, just to remember how Sara dealt.

Katelyn wrote: "This post is discussing the Postscript, so if you haven't finished the book yet, spoilers ahead!

In the Postscript, Moran discusses the obsession with princesses and I thought it would be worthwhi..."

I wasn't around for Princess Diana's wedding so cannot really comment on the hype around her wedding although my mum (who at the time lived in Pakistan) told me that her wedding and life afterwards was in the limelight and followed quite a lot. This means that Diana's legacy was quite international.

In the case of Kate's wedding, it was equally publicized, in my opinion, not just because it was a royal wedding (as in Diana's case) but also because she was a commoner getting married to a Prince. So in essence, it was a fairy-tale where a normal girl get to live the dream like. In this case, there are two differences. First, Kate ascribes to "doing" rather than "being", and so is different and more life-like than the fictional princessy stories. She isn't a dame in distress to be rescued. Instead, she was an individual with aspirations (not seen in fictional stories). Second, unlike in Diana's case and in Princess stories, more is expected from Princesses nowadays. Plus, they aren't held to high moral standards.

My mum thinks Princess Kate is as popular as Diana. Certainly, the media also thinks so (plus cc Vogue).

One thing that irks me is her name change. Why was that necessary to be a part of the royal family?

Fiza wrote: "Katelyn wrote: "This post is discussing the Postscript, so if you haven't finished the book yet, spoilers ahead!

In the Postscript, Moran discusses the obsession with princesses and I thought it w..."

I am not sure about the name change either.

When the Princess Diana exhibit was in Kansas City, I went to see it. Television just cannot capture how stunning Diana's wedding dress is. But that isn't the point. A whole section of the exhibit was dedicated to Diana's charity work. She was able to help so many people through it.

I may be wrong about this but I thought I read that Diana's charity work shifted the "focus" of the royal family from being served to serving their community through charity work.