new thread
Hello Everyone,
As you can know, the dress code at any Disney resort is so rigid, that even costumed employees must project the Disney image of short hair, no facial hair, even under mascot costumes.
To push the sillyness of such a dress code, here is a picture of the Three Musketeers mascots wandering on the site and you can see, that there is a lady on the left (There was no lady musketeers in the 17th century), and she has her real hair, and two "longhairs" on the right obviously wearing cheap wigs.
Are they in violation of the dress code since any representation of long hair on men should be against the Disney image?
What if one of the two musketeers works all day hiding his real hair under a short wig, and has to wear the long wig on top of the short wig, boy this must be hot :)
Have a nice day,
Georges.
I saw a great Johnny Depp lookalike wandering around Disneyland in Anaheim dressed as a pirate, when we were down there in October. He was clearly hired because he looked and moved like the pirate in their movie. Of course, they made the movie as an inspiration from their ride (which is backwards to how movies and rides are usually related). The man I saw, if he had fake hair, was certainly faking it well. My guess is that his mane was real because he was hired to play a specific part that required long hair.
The guy seemed to pick up on me as longhairs often do, while of course his main interest was in children. The way he spoke to me, albeit briefly, left me with the impression that he identified with longhaired guys and probably had long hair. When he spoke to me his voice was not like Depp's at all. As is the case with many Disney characters, when interacting with the kids he did not speak, so his voice did not matter when playing his role.
All this led me to assume that Disney will hire longhairs, as will just about any studio, if they fit the part the man is to play.
Disney does not, by the way, discriminate against longhairs in positions that do not have public contact. They would lose a lot of creative talent, something they need, if they did. My partner worked for them for many years, and there was no more pressure in the workplace to look a certain way than one gets anywhere else.
Some of the concern about Disney's relationship with employees goes back to Walt's day. Walt went a bit overboard in this area, not hiring men with mustaches even, although he had one himself. To this day, the company calls all its employees "cast members", which suggests that they are all actors, and thus not subject to the usual anti-discrimination laws. The logic was that California allows movie studios to pick whoever they want to fill an acting part, and if they wanted that guy picking up cigarette butts at Disneyland to be an old white guy, a young black gal could not complain. Now, the use of the term "cast member" is more attuned to pointing out that the company's mission is to entertain, and to foster a camaraderie among all who work there that that is their overall reason for being there.
There was a time Disneyland would not even admit longhairs as patrons, but that, too, is long ago in the past.
The Walt Disney Company has been around for a long time and it has very much been in the public eye. Fifty years ago, I had short hair and my politics were nothing like mine today. Times change, and opinions change with the times. This applies to companies as much as it does to individuals. Just because we can learn of what the company's politics were fifty years ago does not mean we should be particularly harsh about holding them accountable for them now. If we took that tack, we would not be dealing with a lot of German companies and the Catholic Church, because just ten years further back, they were cooperating with the Nazis. Wasn't the present pope in a Nazi youth group when he was in junior high school? With the passing of time, can't we forgive?
Why do we hold "freedom of speech" so highly and then disdain those who change their minds? Freedom of speech would be a worthless endeavor if people did not change their minds. That is what it is for. Changing one's mind to my eye, if done to improve on one's past beliefs, is just as honorable as is touting the First Amendment.
Disney's approach toward its gay employees, for example, in recent years has been exemplary, despite their goal of presenting a "family" image and despite harassment they've gotten from rightwingers for that stance. The company was treating me as my partner's spouse, for example, for about a decade before state law required it.
All that said, the company still is a bit over obsessed about longhairs in "public eye" positions, and that hopefully will change. If you ever look around at Disneyland, you will note that everything is spotless and looks exactly the way someone designed it to be. The employees' appearance is just as meticulously managed. The company sees their parks as a movie set, and they control everything there just like a movie studio would do. Being in that setting is what many patrons come to the park for, so the company is reluctant to make changes that might affect the impression that the patrons might get. When they sense that the public will not care about hair length, THAT is when their attitude will likely change.
You can't get most jobs at Hooters without big boobs, and you can't get most jobs at Disneyland with long hair. That is because both companies are selling an image.
Bill
Hey, I bet if a man were to get silicone breasts he still couldn't get a job at Hooters!
Actually, I once came across a weird news item about a scandinavian guy who worked on a North Sea oil rig who got a boob job for a bet. I assume he was drunk when he made the bet? We aren't talking about a transgendered person, just a boozy oil rig worker looking completely masculine except around the chest. It must have been a large bet to cover the cost of the operation plus enough to have them removed and still leave a sizable profit. Anyway, after he won the bet he apparently was planning to have them removed, but decided to keep them, because he swore that women liked them! That raises all kinds of questions, LOL!
I haven't tried to check this on snopes.com, but I am now wondering if it really happened, or if it was some kind of online hoax. There were pictures!
Indeed, people go to Disneyland or Hooters for the fantasy. No one wants to see a skinny black female Santa Claus or Snow White with a beard. Working in a place that sells fantasy has to conform to the visual aspects of the fantasy or the fantasy just won't "take".
Hair length requirements at fantasy purveyors can go both ways. Lots of the men working at Colonial Williamsburg have long hair. It was in vogue during the period they are portraying there.
Although banks often have similarly strict dress and hair code policies to those seen at Disneyland, they cannot be justified on the same premise. No customers go to a bank for fantasy. They just want to cash their paychecks.
Bill
I thought the blond, in the middle, was a blonde (OK, that was a grammar joke).
Kind of like the movie Victor/Victoria...
Hey Georges, thanks for starting this thread, and Walter, Juli414, Bill ~ the missing eighth dwarf, Hippy (LoL!), aaand Elektros, for all so far contributing; I, too, think they look patently absurd, aaand that all three of them are women, the individuals in the middle and to the right each wearing false facial hair appliques and llokin' pretty female to this artist's trained eye.
Maybe they're three real life friends who were admitted TO Disneyland dressed in costume. They sure aren't wearin' historically accurate garb for Musketeers, that's fershure.
Anywho, yeah, it's all a "family fun" walk-through corporate movie set. Their same sex couples 'tude HAS been exemplary, despite the raining fire and brimstone flack that they've received for it.
And Elektros, man, wuzz that oil-rigger clinically insane as well as a drinker hungry for a winning wager?! I jus' can't believe what goes on in the world anymore! lol!
Quenyan
NY
he Three Musketeers mascots wandering on the site and you can see, that there is a lady on the left (There was no lady musketeers in the 17th century), and she has her real hair, and two "longhairs" on the right obviously wearing cheap wigs.
I get what your saying about how disney doesnt allow long hair and facial hair. but they are obviously not against it. there have been disney characters with long hair and facial hair. In Beauty and the Beast, Peter Pan, and Pocahantis for example. Men with long hair and facial hair. But i agree with you. if they are able to hide their hair and their facial hair is neat then they should be able to wear it. : )
I'm trying to think, and have there been ANY Disney heroes, other than historically semi-accurate characters, who had facial hair? It seems like all the beards, anyhow, were villains, or at least out of the realm of the romantic lead, like the princess' father instead of Prince Charming.
An interesting thought Georges and that just the madness of working for the Disney company I suppose. Good job nome of us work for them then!
Cheers,
John.B
"...you can see, that there is a lady on the left (There was no lady musketeers in the 17th century), and she has her real hair, and two "longhairs" on the right obviously wearing cheap wigs."
All three are women, not just the one on the left.
And there are no "cheap" wigs at Disney. If you look closely, that just might be real hair on the middle one and the one on the right. "Disney" hair looks much better than real hair...that's why I think the other two are showing their real hair.
Are they Disney employees? Or cross-dressing females? The face hair seems quite fake. Are any of them really males? Hard to tell...
Carol