Ms. Orenstein writes that Disney's decision about a decade ago to market the princesses from its movies like "Cinderella," "Snow White" and "The Little Mermaid" as a group increased the commercial influence of the characters. Ms. Orenstein, whose 2007 memoir "Waiting for Daisy" was a best-seller, says Disney's female heroines, because they are often "rabid materialists," and "looking to get saved by princes," may not be good role models for kids.
"Girls have always faced this kind of pressure," says Ms. Orenstein, the mother of a 7-year-old daughter. "What's different is that now girls are urged from a much younger age to define themselves through their appearance and beauty and play sexiness."
First of all, "Cinderella" and "Snow White" are not "now". Disney has been marketing them ever since they were released. So why is this different NOW? If there are negative impact on young girls due to those, they should have emerged by now and she should cite valid, scientific studies to prove it. Instead, we get conjectures.
Secondly, many of the Disney princesses, especially the modern ones, are definitely independent and strong-willed women (see Mulan, Belle, Tiana), and they are certainly far from being materialistic!
But really is this new? I've mentioned a similar complaint on this before. And at what point do people take responsibilities for their actions and stop blaming other sources? The author is a mother. Why can't she be the more influential part of her daughter's life, rather than leaving the Disney princesses to dictate how her child views the world and her role?
Maybe she's too busy writing books about how Disney princesses are a bad influence rather than spending her time and effort on here child!