#anti-tangledseries

[bellaaldamas]

Misogynists on either the pseudo-"progressive" left or openly bigoted right hate women who dare to live out their power fantasies. That's why their main targets are Ariel and Cinderella (and Aurora to a lesser extent): because they have the audacity to have goals that revolve around them and their desires (be it personal desires such as escaping a toxic and oppressive environment where your bigoted father holds the power; or desires that would seem "mundane" to more privileged people but are a way to have a break from abuse and exploitation for domestic violence victims like Cinderella for whom the ball represented exactly that; or romantic/sexual desires). Versus around the idea that a woman sacrificing herself and her feelings/needs in the name of the Greater Good TM is more "empowering" than sacrificing for love. This idea became pervasive in mainstream media in the 90-s when pseudo-feminist narratives started flourishing.

From the more well written and genuinely high quality in many respects "Sailor Moon" which, alas, still did not escape the issue of demeaning and belittling the female protagonist Usagi in every episode and framing her daring to want to enjoy life as a regular teenage girl as an example of "immaturity" (only the "not like other girls" heroines get to be considered "mature and empowered"). Whilst celebrating 21+ year old Mamoru picking on 14 year old girls because he was "struggling with understanding himself and his new destiny" (something that Usagi was forced to do from the moment her supernatural powers were revealed to her - and she never had a choice in that matter, unlike Mamoru who was allowed infinitely more agency and freedom).

To the most gratuitous pseudo-progressive trainwreck that was "Buffy" which flat out told women they are obligated to forfeit individual wants, connections and feelings for the sake of a Greater Mission TM imposed on them by men. That is, before our "feminist" heroine "defied" those "EvOL conservative men" from the past in a "modern liberal way". Namely by forcing other women to follow the destiny SHE imposed on them without their consent (as if any sensible person needed proof that the conservative right and the "progressive" left are one and the same and always bond over their hatred of women). This not even touching up on the matter of every woman on Whedon's shows experiencing a gendered trauma of some kind, be it sexual assault or life threatening pregnancy or magical and other forms of brainwashing, culminating in either suffering or death.

And then the "progressive left" was "shocked and heartbroken" when a sexist male hack Whedon who wrote all that and was put on a pedestal by their "feminist" selves was outed as a vicious misogynistic abuser. Who psychologically tortured women on set and allegedly cheated on his wife while at it. They "separate fiction from the creator" while bullying literal children who enjoy media that was produced by problematic authors and see no problem with it.

Disney - being a pandering conformist machine that it is now - has turned Rapunzel into that exact pseudo-feminist, modern culture conformist stereotype in the series in order to cater to those who critiqued original film for the fact that it upheld an abuse victim and her narrative. Furthermore, Disney did so in the most tasteless manner possible, by directly repeating armchair critics' talking points, word for word.

First, Disney addressed the "feminist critique" of Rapunzel supposedly "falling in love with the first man she met in her lifetime" even though it is an outright false, manipulative argument. In the original film, about a half an hour after meeting Flynn Rapunzel met an all-male group of thugs from the pub and bonded with them platonically before she bonded with Flynn in an equally platonic way and then in the romantic way. The message went as follows: the men in the society saw a vulnerable young girl who physically was no match for them but instead of taking advantage of her vulnerability they chose to self reflect, relate to her and provide their support. Disney, therefore, was not telling women they should look, act or behave in a certain way to avoid being abused. They told men they have to respect women and not perpetuate the mistreatment and invalidation said women already face daily, be it in their households or from other men (in Rapunzel's case she was abused by Gothel and told she was unworthy and incapable for her entire life and then tricked by Flynn who took her to that pub with explicit purpose to discourage her from following her goals). This was the ultimate subversion of victim blaming and misogyny.

Flynn, at that stage, either tried to scare Rapunzel back into the tower (which failed and backfired on him magnificently, even though in his defense it should be noted that Rapunzel set in motion the entire situation with her own blackmail of him; Flynn responded in kind because he did not hold her, a woman, to a different standard - if she was using trickery and cunning so would he). Or, at other times, he rejected her attempts at getting emotionally closer to him and getting to know him ("I don't do backstory"). It was Rapunzel who went out of her way to learn more about him while Flynn/Eugene remained consciously emotionally distant (he certainly made no advances on her and was not swayed by her looks nor tried to prey on her vulnerability and lack of experience). Knowing Flynn's personal history and experiences was important to her even when she thought they were going to part ways forever when he guides her to see the lanterns and brings her back to her tower, to end her days there alongside her abusive "mother" (whom Rapunzel had no idea was abusive because this is how brainwashing and gas-lighting works). Rapunzel was the one in charge of her self expression whilst Flynn had to pick his battles, literally and figuratively, and only reciprocated her bonding attempts when he thought they were both going to die.

Then there came the campfire scene where Flynn/Eugene finally did respond of free will and with no imminent death looming ahead: first by expressing his desire to get to know her and understand why she "never left that tower". It was only when he took interest in her motivation and psychological context of her actions did Rapunzel make another attempt: by asking him about his past again and getting physically closer to him to prove her willingness not to judge but to listen when Flynn believed that judging and dismissing was all he was going to get.

The movie, thus, made it clear that a relationship between the two is only possible when no pressure on either end is involved. This message was further reinforced by the following scene where Gothel reminded Rapunzel of her blackmail and the satchel she was holding "hostage" to get Flynn to act as she wanted. According to Rapunzel she wanted to give the satchel back to Flynn there and then but was "scared" due to Gothel's manipulative words. And it is ONLY when she finally does give it back do they take their relationship further and almost kiss. Again, Disney makes it clear a relationship can only work when it is equal and when both parties have agency.

The campfire scene is one of the most powerful couple bonding scenes in the Disney canon because of the equal partnership it endorses. Neither knows the full backstory of the other but they are ready to listen instead of inserting their "invaluable input". Out of universe, the scene holds an even broader and greater meaning because the audience knows of the social/class imbalance between the two characters, with Rapunzel being a princess (unknowingly to herself) and Flynn/Eugene being an orphan who turned to thieving as a "better option" to starving and dying on the streets (and who, unlike Rapunzel, is intimately aware of his own backstory and how the more privileged society perceives him). Instead of admonishing and lecturing him Rapunzel acknowledges and validates Flynn/Eugene's experiences by saying she likes his real self better than his made up facade.

And then there comes the series. Which not only undo but openly spit in the face of that scene in the very first episode.

The campfire scene was permanently invalidated and ruthlessly mocked when the series did a "reprise" of it by having Flynn/Eugene "pour his heart out" about his childhood traumas and current needs to who he thought was Rapunzel. Only to find out he was actually talking to Pascal all that time ("pouring his heart out to a frog" - an actual punchline for this joke). All while Rapunzel herself lied to him and everyone else by running out of the castle - because it is so "feminist" when a woman/female character lies to her partner and her parents and "escapes on her own TM", proving she "doesn't need a man to get her out".

Except - Rapunzel was no longer a prisoner of anyone. She was, at that point of her life, a privileged princess, in the position of power herself, dealing with her father's overprotectiveness while ignoring all of Flynn/Eugene's experiences with HIS oppression and abuse (the opposite of what she did in the original movie).

Who labeled marriage to Flynn/Eugene as an automatic loss of freedom.

And the narrative reinforced that idea - but only for women and female characters, including Rapunzel. Disney started perpetuating this pseudo-feminist misconception ever since "Brave", treating marriage as a prison and loss of individuality for women and just one of the many accomplishments men can have and enjoy in their lives. Which is why King Fergus got to be the "fun dad" and reap the benefits of his marital life and fatherhood while doing the bare minimum. Whereas Queen Elinor, who had to fulfill all the emotional, royal and parenting labor, was punished for not being a perfect wife and mother by being transformed into literal animal, deprived of humanity, agency and autonomy by her "feminist" daughter Merida. Who, instead of running off on her own if she wanted freedom so much (like the "selfish" Jasmine and Ariel did) or finding an equal partner who had end goals and interests that made it beneficial for him to aid her (like original movie Rapunzel did) saw no better way to go about the situation than to rob another woman of her free will in order to have her way.

This is the "feminism" progressives wanted from Disney and Disney delivered: empowerment only for the privileged and entitled young women who abuse other people - including other women - when things don't go their way.

Original Tangled was the movie that unabashedly showed how Gothel and other abusers in the position of power over their victims are wrong when they tell, in particular, their female victims that the latter are too stupid, hormonal and gullible to be in charge of their agency. That they will be inevitably tricked and used by the "dashing and handsome men" whose good looks supposedly deprive women of the ability to think critically because women are "servants to their emotions" (a misogynistic rhetoric in and of itself). That men cannot possibly respect and aid a vulnerable woman without taking advantage of her because it is inherent to men's nature to be exploitative just like it is inherent to women's nature to be exploited (read: men are aggressive conquerors and women are delicate and nurturing flowers and if something/someone deviates from this norm it means that something/someone is wrong and unnatural; the left perpetuates this ancient patriarchal and far right thinking and does not even see a problem with it).

And then it does not happen: Rapunzel proves Gothel and her misogynistic manipulation wrong. The movie deconstructs the idea that the society and abusers "know better" what and who a woman needs. Just like it deconstructs the idea women are victims by nature and cannot expect respect and help from men unless they "show how strong, independent and not like other girls they are" first. Because it is never woman or victim's job to show and prove that to anyone.

Pseudo-"feminists" called it "wrong and not progressive" because in their view, Rapunzel should have either been "taught a lesson", Anna and Hans twist style (when a woman is lectured by everyone, from her anti-social sister to a day old mansplaining Snowman, about her own feelings and needs; and everyone ends up being in the right whilst she is framed as being in the wrong and "desperate for love" for daring to act on her romantic agency). Or Rapunzel should have "saved herself" and it was so "unfeminist" when Flynn "CuT HEr HAirr WiThoUt heR CoNsENt!!!1111!!!" when she, a victim of lifelong abuse, should have apparently done it herself.

But the most telling and outstanding thing is that the argument those "far left progressives" used to back up the above position was an unapologetic copy of the bigoted far right/"conservative" rhetoric that insists that vulnerable and oppressed people are just "not trying hard enough". Followed by examples of the people or fictional (female) characters "who made it and there is no excuse for you, Rapunzel and someone else not to".

Which conveniently diverts attention from the fact that those examples are exceptions to the rule and work within the system of abuse and oppression instead of challenging it. Prospering and thriving within the system of oppression is not empowerment, it's doing your best in a terrible situation while ignoring the majority of victims who do not thrive and who, in many cases, suffer and die because of the system.

This is also ignoring the context of Rapunzel trying to heal Flynn at the expense of her freedom without his consent, twice. All while he literally pushed her hands away because he did not agree to those conditions and was not ready to survive if it meant Rapunzel's agency and freedom being taken away from her,

The original film celebrated that genuinely empowering narrative but the pseudo-progressives did not. Hence why we got the Tangled series which warped said narrative and validated the pseudo-progressive arguments.

This is why series Rapunzel seeing the idea of marriage to Flynn as a loss of freedom is "progressive" (didn't you know that women turn into doormats and lose their individuality when they marry men?/sarcasm). Rapunzel allowing Cassandra, a third party who knew nothing of the context of her and Flynn/Eugene's relationship, to push the boundaries of them both, insert her opinion in an unsolicited manner and harass and belittle Flynn for being "unworthy" of someone as privileged as Rapunzel (that's not classism and bigotry at all, that's modern feminism TM) is also "progressive".

Conformism to the system of oppression and abuse is the modern day progressive storytelling. Especially when it is women doing the conformism or outright reinforcing said system.

The above led us to the two explicitly pandering episodes where Disney was not just addressing the talking points of the middle class armchair "feminists" whose cult leader if a misogynistic abuser Whedon and his horrendously overrated girlboss heroines like Buffy - but outright repeating said talking points within those episodes.

First it was the low quality filler where Rapunzel was throwing tantrums about that one person in the Kingdom who did not like her. This "conflict point" is literally copied and pasted from the "feminist critic" argument about Rapunzel being "too perfect" and "everyone liking her" and how "unrealistic" it supposedly is. By "everyone" they meant fellow outcasts in the form of the thugs from the pub, ironically the group that was oppressed by Rapunzel's own royal parents. The OG movie was empowering because it had Rapunzel empathize and understand the oppressed groups before regaining her own royal status - first the thugs and then Flynn.

But specially for pseudo-feminists' viewing pleasure, there is the Tangled series.

Where Rapunzel is repulsed by thieves like Flynn/Eugene (without critically analyzing and challenging the system that made them turn to that kind of life). When she takes a break from being repulsed by that Rapunzel laments and takes offense at that one person who dislikes her. Then, after saving said person's life he still keeps disliking her for no valid reason other than being another "bad conservative man" and Rapunzel should just "accept it" because what else do women expect? If others treat them with appreciation and basic decency it makes them "Mary Sues", didn't you know?

Series Rapunzel's "growth" is about no longer being a "Mary Sue": it is about putting up with unwarranted hate and aiding others in harassing, invalidating and putting down the man she loves for explicitly classist and bigoted reasons. That is "realism and feminism".

Women ought to accept nitpicking, passive aggression and deprivation of any support as a "norm" until/unless they "prove themselves".

Disney, thus, went on to validate the "feminist" argument that it was "unrealistic" how in the original Tangled the people/characters an abused young woman encountered on her way towards freedom did not contribute to her abuse, especially the male characters. That they instead aided her or at least sympathized with her (like the already mentioned thugs from the pub).

The society, according to progressives, cannot and should not want to help women. It should be aggressive and hostile towards women and it is - cherry on top of this progressive mindset - woman's job to tackle it, avoid it and be "careful". It is woman's job to "prove" she deserves more than abuse and exploitation. After all, didn't all those female victims who wore shirt skirts and walked back home at night alone not know what they were "asking for"? (this is also sarcasm, in case this is not painfully obvious).

Then there is the climax, the long awaited wet dream of the pseudo progressives. In it, Rapunzel has her girlboss feminist moment of cutting off her magical hair on her own; which progressives have been calling for since 2010. All while Flynn/Eugene is rendered useless and incapacitated, just like he is for the 99.9 percents of the series where he plays the role of an incompetent trophy boyfriend and comedic relief to his privileged girlfriend.

To add even more "progressiveness", Rapunzel terminates her magic hair's unique qualities not for Flynn/Eugene or even herself but mainly for Cassandra. Same Cassandra who spent most of the series being an antagonist. Same Cassandra who inserted herself into personal matters and relationship between Rapunzel and Flynn when she was not invited to do that because (ready for it) she "knows best". When Gothel behaved in that manner and promoted this idea it was rightly treated as manipulative and abusive. But when a young, sword wielding and attractive girl does that it is "badass and feminist".

Fact is that the inspiring, female power fantasy princess franchise ended with PaTF and original Tangled. Live Action TLM which placed the focus on Ariel and Eric romance and honored it while offering a different but no less interesting spin on it was a farewell party before Disney comes back to pandering and pseudo-feminism.

It would be perfectly consistent with their current pattern to release a Live Action Tangled where Flynn would be completely replaced by Cassandra and there is no romance at all (like in the LA Mulan). Because a woman in charge of her romantic agency is "weak" but a woman tolerating toxicity and violation of boundaries from another woman while violating boundaries of her male partner herself (like Rapunzel repeatedly does in the series) is Disney finally becoming "feminist and progressive".

Double Standards Are So Fun

Apparently, it’s totally fine to criticize older Disney princesses like Cinderella, Ariel, and Aurora because they’re ‘anti-feminist’ and ‘bad role models.’

But the second I say anything about how Rapunzel’s actions in the Tangled series make zero sense, suddenly I’m a monster who doesn’t understand ‘modern storytelling’ or ‘strong female characters.’

Cinderella: Works herself to the bone as a literal servant and still dares to dream of a better life—too passive! Ariel: Risks her life for her dream and love—bad example for girls! Aurora: Only sleeps for a curse to be broken—boring and outdated!

But Rapunzel in the series? Rejects the proposal of the man she apparently loves because she feels like a life with him is a prison, dismisses his feelings, draws his face on a punching bag, lets her bestie bully him, and rewrites his personality with time travel—ICONIC! RELATABLE! EMPOWERING!

Got it. Criticizing older princesses = totally fine. Criticizing Rapunzel for toxic behavior = misogynistic and wrong. Makes perfect sense.

[katherinestvincent]

. #romancetakeover - Week 2 - Enemies to Lovers . TANGLED by EMMA CHASE (TANGLED SERIES 01) . This story begins with Drew's first meeting by accident with Kate. Then, he's very shocked, found out this attractive girl was a new associate in his office and was praised by Drew's father. And disaster begins when his father, instead of giving potential clients to Drew, he is intending to give them to Kate, newbie in his office. No doubt, Drew rejected his father's idea and finally his father telling them both to compete making the best presentation and the winner would get the client. Small sabotages happened from both of them.  And after that, ridiculously, Drew's father ordered they both working together in less than 24 hours to lure their potential clients. . Drew isn't my favorite anti-hero. In my judgment, this childish man is very selfish, spoiled and superficial, and considers himself as a gift from God for women. So eager to "win" everything, Drew had made the decision "attack before being attacked" which resulted in him then experiencing pain both physically and mentally. And when he is sick, instead of being a male-style's patriotic, he's playing victim with laments to all people who want hearing his pathetic story, even to his headmaster's nun when Drew was a teenager. Drew is like a war general whose got his beard is on fire, begins to devise a war strategies to get Kate back to him, either playing with smooth, romantic, tacky or dirty acts. But finally Drew with all of his chaotic mind was stealing me to give recommendation this book.  . . . #romancestagram #contemporaryromance #tangled #emmachase #tangledseries #booksbooksbooks #bookphotography #instabook #bookstagram #bookstagrammer #bookstagramfeature #booksofinstragram #bookgram #readingbooks #ireadromance #romancereader #romancebookaddict #romancebooks #romancenovels #romanceseries #booklover #bookaddict #ilovebooks #ilovereading https://www.instagram.com/p/BzrA8fbgAPw/?igshid=pplpz6pikiww

[usuallypleasantprince]

Read Dream Man series online free by Kristen Ashley

Dream Man series Author: Kristen Ashley Kristen Ashley 《Mystery Man (Dream Man #1)》     Gwendolyn Kidd has met the man of her dreams. He's hot, he's sexy, and what started as a no-names-exchanged night of passion has blossomed into a year and a half-long pleasure fest. Sure, it's a little strange that he only appears in her bed at night, but Gwen is so sure he's the one, she just can't turn him away...     Hawk Delgado knows more about Gwen than she could ever imagine. She's gorgeous, headstrong, and skittish about relationships. But Hawk is facing his own demons, demons that keep him from connecting with anyone. Yet when Gwen is drawn into Denver's lethal underground scene, Hawk's protective nature comes out full force. The problem is, when Gwen gets a dose of Hawk's Alpha attitude in the daylight, she's not so sure he's the one anymore....《Wild Man (Dream Man #2)》     While filling the display case in her bakery, the bell over the door sounds and Tessa O'Hara looks up to see the man of her dreams. Within thirty seconds he asks her out for a beer. But after four months of dating, she discovers he's an undercover DEA agent-and he's investigating her possible role in her ex-husband's drug business. For Tess, this means their relationship is over.     Brock disagrees. He's committed to his anti-drug mission, but he's fallen in love with the beautiful woman who's as sweet as her cupcakes-and he'll do anything to win her back. Standing... Read full: Read Dream Man series online free by Kristen Ashley #Romance #BillionaireRomance #New-Adult #Young-Adult #HotBookSeries #fantasy #Vampires #OthersBooks #ScienceFiction #Thriller #Horror #Classics #NewReleases #Mystery/Suspense #HotAuthors #Series #KristenAshley # #《MysteryMan(DreamMan#1)》 # #《WildMan(DreamMan#2)》 # #《LawMan(DreamMan#3)》 # #《MotorcycleMan(DreamMan#4)》 #TheImmortalsAfterDarkseries #TenTinyBreathsseries #TheCoincidenceseries #TheSecretseries #HisDarkMaterialsseries #TheIronFeyseries #GallagherGirlsseries #TheLordoftheRings #Millenniumseries #UpintheAirSeries #StarkTrilogy #TheBadBoysSeries #TangledSeries #BeautifulBastardSeries #ContoursoftheHeartSeries #UnfinishedHeroseries #ColoradoMountainseries #Chaosseries #TheSinclairsseries #TheYoungElitesseries #BillionairesandBridesmaidsseries #JustOneDayseries #SinnersonTourseries #Manwhoreseries #ThisManseries #OneNightseries #Fixedseries #BeautifullyBrokenseries #Fallingseries #TheArcanaChroniclesseries

[bellaaldamas]

Disney already established the direction of conforming to mischaracterizations and misrepresentation of the princesses and their stories by pseudo-"progressive" critics and the Tangled series was the ultimate product of that conformism. The "marriage is a prison but only if you're a woman" repackaged patriarchal stereotype is not the only issue with the series: it served as a jump-start of the pandering process where Disney repeated faux-"feminist" critique of the original movie almost word for word. By doing so the series destroyed and invalidated everything that stood out about the original film, including the healthy and equal dynamic between Rapunzel and Flynn and woman's power fantasy narrative (women do not deserve those according to modern media; men still do, however).

The Live Action is likely to follow the pattern set in the series because there is no indication Disney re-examined and reconsidered it. They did throw the fans of the original, woman's power fantasy concept a bone by presenting a well crafted Live Action Remake of The Little Mermaid where the focus was on equal partnership and healthy relationship between Ariel and Eric as well as on the celebration of Ariel's individual desires. Now Disney is back to faux progressiveness with the Snow White remake.

The Tangled series went as far as to not only copy and paste pseudo-progressive critique of the OG movie about how Rapunzel is "weak" for not cutting off her hair on her own (even though doing so would have been the opposite of feminism and would have implied it is woman's job to escape abuse); but to rework the powerful climax scene between Rapunzel and Flynn where they admit to being each other's "new dream" and give it to Rapunzel and Cassandra instead.

Even the animation and presentation was a rehash of that moment, thematically and visually. All in order to completely remove the importance of Flynn in Rapunzel's life and in the story overall (hence why he is rendered incapacitated and useless, just as he is in all the preceding episodes). The moment is shamelessly ripped off down to a close up shot with Rapunzel leaning towards Cassandra's face and crying while cradling her in her arms.

Therefore it is more than possible that another low blow from Disney will be a total removal of Flynn/Eugene from the LA version. And a replacement of a "dirty romance" with "beautiful platonic bond" between Rapunzel and a woman who constantly pushed her and Flynn's boundaries and outright abused Flynn in the series.

Because a platonic relationship between women, according to modern progressives, cannot be toxic if one of them is the "girlboss" type.

Calling it now: if Tangled LA Remake happens they'll base it not on the original movie (Disney's last female driven and empowering princess story before the company turned to daughters transforming mothers into literal animals to have their way and labeling it as "feminist", Hans twists telling women they are "desperate for love" and are blamed for male abuse and other pseudo-progressive narratives) but on the series. Which fully embrace and perpetuate Disney's current pseudo-feminist trends and completely misrepresent the characters and the title romance.

Thus, in the remake, Flynn/Eugene will be either written out completely (like Shang from the LA Mulan - because a heroine having two daddy figures instead of a love interest she has chosen is so much more progressive) or replaced by Cass*ndra from the series. The climax will be reworked to have the same pandering, faux feminist twist with Rapunzel cutting off her hair on her own because she is such a "girlboss" now and not a victim of lifelong abuse and gaslighting who needed to be helped out of it, just like other victims do.

And just like in the series, Rapunzel will be doing it for Cass*ndra because when Flynn/Eugene sacrificed his life for Rapunzel's freedom and agency it was "not feminist" and "made her weak". But it is an "improvement and fixing the original" when Rapunzel terminates her magic hair's qualities for a female character who, from the very first episode, started to act in the "I know best" manner. Except unlike in Gothel's case the series' narrative framed it as her being strong and "badass" (passive aggressiveness and pushing boundaries is only bad when older women do it, didn't you know?/#hashtag feminism).