Disney May Ban Leia's Gold Bikini From All Star Wars Merch

[Scarim Coral]

So in another word, if this is true then it means all the current gold bikini Leia merch prices wil skyrocketed?

 

[Cicada 5]

This would make little sense seeing as one of Disney's most popular characters wears a seashell bikini.

Apples and oranges. Ariel was not deliberately portrayed as a sexual object. Leia's outfit was called "Slave Leia" for crying out loud. That alone should tell you the difference.

 

[Redd the Sock]

This is like 30 years too late to matter.

The rest of the comments would suggest otherwise...

Let's be perfectly honest though. The people who are getting angry. Where they ever going to actually buy any Slave Leia toys or are they just getting mad on principle because "SJWs" or something. I get the feeling very few were planning on buying one in the near future.

I'm not saying they can't do that, I'm just pointing it out.

Guess my money for such things will go to an artist alley vendor now. Their posters were better anyways most of the time.

And speaking as someone that does have several games I'd like to get that won't see localization, and was reading Dejah Thoris before her upcoming outcome change, I think I do have a right to ***** about a mindset that either won't be up front about how sex-negative and moralizing it is, or doesn't realize you don't have to take away the sexy to get less sexy things made for your enjoyment.

 

[Cicada 5]

Realistically it isn't much of a problem. There's plenty of merch out there already with the gold bikini, and frankly, who wants to see Carrie Fisher in it now?

In more idealistic levels, just another break in the line: no one wants to take your toys away. You don't need to have zero tolerance for the sexy to make and market the more pragmatic, and yet, here we are.

Forget that some women like it

https://www.facebook.com/leiasmetalbikini/

Forget that in context, it was never bullshit as anything but the result of Jabba's odd fetish for humanoid females.

Forget that she was her most badass in the Jabba arc.

Nah, sexy - anti-wmoan these days.

Next, should C-3PO wear pants?

If she was at her most badass during the Jabba arc and the big take away is that she killed him, then what does it matter what she's wearing. It's not like any merch with that outfit shows her killing the guy.

And Disney not producing the merch doesn't mean people still can't cosplay in it.

 

[Erttheking]

This is like 30 years too late to matter.

The rest of the comments would suggest otherwise...

Let's be perfectly honest though. The people who are getting angry. Where they ever going to actually buy any Slave Leia toys or are they just getting mad on principle because "SJWs" or something. I get the feeling very few were planning on buying one in the near future.

I'm not saying they can't do that, I'm just pointing it out.

Guess my money for such things will go to an artist alley vendor now. Their posters were better anyways most of the time.

And speaking as someone that does have several games I'd like to get that won't see localization, and was reading Dejah Thoris before her upcoming outcome change, I think I do have a right to ***** about a mindset that either won't be up front about how sex-negative and moralizing it is, or doesn't realize you don't have to take away the sexy to get less sexy things made for your enjoyment.

I said A few were, not none.

"I'm not saying they can't do that" I said that. Why the hell are you bringing up "your right" to complain? No one was denying that to you. And sex-negative, ok stop right there. We don't know why this is happening, hell, we don't even know IF this is happening. People are just jumping into the usual Freedom vs Social Justice trenches because that's the only discussion of any size going on on this website anymore. So take a step back and don't jump to conclusions.

 

[MonsterCrit]

Sorry but no. Gold Bikini Leia needs to stay. I mean for starters it's not an outfit she chose to wear it was what she was put in by a big fat crime boss slug ... and honestly it gets even a little weirder when you realize Hutts, like real slugs, are hermaphrodites So it's not exactly patriarchal oppression there since Jabba had a fully set of working girl parts. That's practically slashfic right there. Yeah chew that in your mind's eye Yuri Jabba x Leia slash.


But seriously, She was in for what.. 15 minutes, This is a case where trying to clean something basically says more negative things about the society I mean that basically says that there's something wrong with women wearing gold bikini's. This is essentially Slut Shaming.

 

[Lightknight]

One of the earlier examples of a damsel literally saving herself by taking out the planets biggest known crime lord and they want to wipe it out? Is it that sexy stuff makes their special places feel all funny and they don't know what to do with those emotions?

Just doesn't make too much sense. It's a much beloved and emulated costume.

They're not wiping out anything. The scene with the outfit will still be in the movie but if the rumors are true it may simply mean that merchandise featuriong that outfit will not be produced.

Wiping it out from the future product lines, not wiping it out from history.

Besides, it's not like any merch featuring Slave Leia showed her killing Jabba. She's either shown as scared or giving a "come hither" look.

And that's bad because...?

 

[Something Amyss]

But seriously, She was in for what.. 15 minutes, This is a case where trying to clean something basically says more negative things about the society I mean that basically says that there's something wrong with women wearing gold bikini's. This is essentially Slut Shaming.

I'm curious as to how you get from an uncomfirmed rumour that there may be no more Slave Girl Leia toys to slut shaming.

 

[Redd the Sock]

This is like 30 years too late to matter.

The rest of the comments would suggest otherwise...

Let's be perfectly honest though. The people who are getting angry. Where they ever going to actually buy any Slave Leia toys or are they just getting mad on principle because "SJWs" or something. I get the feeling very few were planning on buying one in the near future.

I'm not saying they can't do that, I'm just pointing it out.

Guess my money for such things will go to an artist alley vendor now. Their posters were better anyways most of the time.

And speaking as someone that does have several games I'd like to get that won't see localization, and was reading Dejah Thoris before her upcoming outcome change, I think I do have a right to ***** about a mindset that either won't be up front about how sex-negative and moralizing it is, or doesn't realize you don't have to take away the sexy to get less sexy things made for your enjoyment.

I said A few were, not none.

"I'm not saying they can't do that" I said that. Why the hell are you bringing up "your right" to complain? No one was denying that to you. And sex-negative, ok stop right there. We don't know why this is happening, hell, we don't even know IF this is happening. People are just jumping into the usual Freedom vs Social Justice trenches because that's the only discussion of any size going on on this website anymore. So take a step back and don't jump to conclusions.

I was challenging your statement about people not buy the slave Leia stuff with the idea that even if true, this type of product decision has come up before, will come up again, and as such are going to attract anyone angry that they have lost something or sees themselves as possibly losing something. It's a war of ideals and values now and it's best to accept that.

As such, the rest of my post was to, while in empathy to the frustration you feel toward how these topics go, point out that the topic itself, the defense of it happening, and the frequency it comes up, are a large part of what causes that entrenchment and the feel of a need to fight every battle. It's probably too much to ask anyone that swore when the talk of representation of women in games and comics started that they didn't want to take away our toys, to take that step back and say "we weren't supposed to be about this" when companies [might] start making decisions to stop supporting sexy products. But still, I don't think the conversation can move forward if one side is always told to "calm down" while the other never has to stop and ask if they are doing, supporting, or giving the appearance of same, the thing that is making the other side angry. That, in this case, supporting the removal of that type of outfit from incidental merchandise in the future is not the way to combat a view of being a sex-negative person trying to tell others what they can and can't have.

The differences between the freedom and social justice sides aren't going to go away, but we might learn to get along if both sides look at themselves to ask if they're aggravating things needlessly, not just the one side.

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

I was talking about people specifically on this website. I know the people here and I've seen the way they talk. I doubt even half the people in this thread complaining about this were going to buy anything Leia related. I'm not saying there's anything wrong with that, I'm just pointing it out.

Companies might stop supporting sexy products? Is there any evidence that this is a large trend? Because people who complain about the over saturation of sexiness don't want it to go away, they want alternatives. And I really don't see any evidence of people even considering getting rid of sexy items. Things like this are so minor they're barely a blip on the reader. Doesn't help this one is STILL just conjecture. Yeah, well, both sides are pretty guilty of pissing the other side off. You know, the only people I've seen supporting the removal of this outfit is the removal of it from kids isles. Which I'm not gonna lie, is kinda messed up. Christ, I came into this thread for the first time wanting to make a fucking joke about how an outfit I had fantasized over was being taken away in an over the top manner, but then I remembered I was on the internet and all the fun and joy got sucked out of the room

Well I guess both sides just need to calm down and understand each other and things will be over...get comfy.

 

[MonsterCrit]

But seriously, She was in for what.. 15 minutes, This is a case where trying to clean something basically says more negative things about the society I mean that basically says that there's something wrong with women wearing gold bikini's. This is essentially Slut Shaming.

I'm curious as to how you get from an uncomfirmed rumour that there may be no more Slave Girl Leia toys to slut shaming.

Think about the reason why and you get an easy bridge actually.

 

[Erttheking]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider that this might be less pandering to SJWs and more Disney trying desperately to be family friendly? I'm not defending it, I don't really like the idea of it being taken out of everything (though I won't complain if it's out of kids isles) but remember how violently family friendly Disney is? Remember how they didn't want gays in The Old Republic?

 

[Something Amyss]

Think about the reason why and you get an easy bridge actually.

So enlighten me. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict it's going to go the opposite direction, though.

Has anyone ever stopped to consider that this might be less pandering to SJWs and more Disney trying desperately to be family friendly? I'm not defending it, I don't really like the idea of it being taken out of everything (though I won't complain if it's out of kids isles) but remember how violently family friendly Disney is? Remember how they didn't want gays in The Old Republic?

Yes, this has been addressed several times, usually with the same logic: people die in the movies, therefore this is a double standard. Or "Ariel wears less," which strikes me as a super awkward way to argue the point.

I don't think they're good arguments, but they've been brought up several times already.

 

[Redd the Sock]

Companies might stop supporting sexy products? Is there any evidence that this is a large trend? Because people who complain about the over saturation of sexiness don't want it to go away, they want alternatives.

You see, that's the point I'm challenging. Why does getting more of something mean having to get less of something else? Is Disney up to its limit in production capacity? For anyone that actually means that, they should be madder than anyone for the bad rep this action would give their side, as well as how stupid it is for business to think you can only appeal to one side or another, rather than both (maximizing profits). I implied it above, but this is the example of the line I see a lot of people not realize they cross between trying to get something for yourself, and trying to stop something you don't want. The more the active focus seems to be on the latter, the more I think it was the point in the first place.

Has anyone ever stopped to consider that this might be less pandering to SJWs and more Disney trying desperately to be family friendly? I'm not defending it, I don't really like the idea of it being taken out of everything (though I won't complain if it's out of kids isles) but remember how violently family friendly Disney is? Remember how they didn't want gays in The Old Republic?

I joked about it in the off topic thread of the same subject: it's never too early to teach kids our bodies are disgusting shameful things that need to be covered up as much as possible. Yeah, the idea that this is based on potentially old world conservative definitions of family friendly doesn't make me more accepting of the idea. I'd actually be less.

 

[Lightknight]

Besides, it's not like any merch featuring Slave Leia showed her killing Jabba. She's either shown as scared or giving a "come hither" look.

And that's bad because...?

Well, considering a number of people have made the arguments about how Slave Leia was badass and murdering intergalactic crime bosses in this outfitm totally upending the sexualized damsel in distress thing, a toy showing her doing nothing but being scared or seductive in the outfit completely removes that entire argument from relevancy. It also, for said people who go on about how it's supposed to be this empowering thing, turns that supposedly empowering thing into little more than sexualization, submission, and fear, which is something you'd think such people would be opposed to.

I repeat, why is sexy bad? Are we on a mission to make sure no one is sexy in media? That's bleak and puritanical.

Likewise, did she not present fear before strangling his ass?

 

[Erttheking]

Snip

Uh, where did I imply that this was a zero sum game? Meh. I don't really play the rep game. People who are pissed at the social justice side will always be pissed at the social justice side. I tried playing moderator a long time ago, tried to build bridges. All it did was make me frustrated and people actually mocked me for it. When someone likes being pissed and angry, trying to calm them down and reach out to them is an exercise in futility. Besides, you're still basing all of this off of the fact that Disney is doing this because of sex, which is still jumping to conclusions, that is, if they're even doing this at all. Is there really an active attempt to get people to stop buying things? I can't remember the last time I saw someone shammed for buying a product with the exception of when everyone was getting a hate boner towards casuals and saying they weren't allowed to buy COD because they were destroying the industry or something.

I'm not trying to make it acceptable (Hell I said I'm not for it) I'm just tired of it always being the SJWs fault when something happens that people don't like.

 

[Redryhno]

Has anyone ever stopped to consider that this might be less pandering to SJWs and more Disney trying desperately to be family friendly? I'm not defending it, I don't really like the idea of it being taken out of everything (though I won't complain if it's out of kids isles) but remember how violently family friendly Disney is? Remember how they didn't want gays in The Old Republic?

If they wanted that, they'd have probably done this quite a while back...and if they wanted to be more family friendly, then maybe they might've started with some of their own original properties?

But it is sorta funny seeing so many theories being jumped between about as fast as they're grasped to begin with though. There's been alot of pushback against any amount of what is deemed "sexy" or "anti-woman" by a certain political leaning the last few years. Is it really that hard to think that that might be a part of it as well? Especially after Whedon, and by extension Disney, just got lambasted by a bunch of uppity shitheads because Black Widow exists and doesn't conform to their damned headcannons not that long ago?

 

[MonsterCrit]

Think about the reason why and you get an easy bridge actually.

So enlighten me. I'm going to go out on a limb and predict it's going to go the opposite direction, though.

Easily done. Ask yourself 3 things:

1. How is is Slave Leia different from Carbonite Han Solo?
2. Why Remove merchandise that is accurate to the story it is drawn from?
3. What is the logic behind trying to ignore what was in fact a very character defining moment for Leia?