Riding crop costumes go bye bye

[TigerLily]

*shrug* they can change whatever uniform they want. I don't notice them anyway. Change is good. ...and most of the disney uniforms are god awful ugly things...maybe thats why I stopped noticing them. I remember going to the park as a teen and thinking...OMG I would hate wearing that!!...and that was for every uniform/costume I noticed...LOL...yeah change is good..

[mistyisjafo]

As a former CM, I can remember being above the "average" sizes offered at the park. Most costumes weren't sized say "12" but more like how jeans are sized "32 X 36". So being just a big larger than that size caused all sorts of problems. My skorts were always too short, too tight, too loose or too long! But it didn't matter because the damned thing was just plain ugly.

I think its important for Disney to have more comfortable fitting clothes. For whatever sizes 1 - 1000. You see how you feel after 20 hours a day wearing solid polyester/rayon blends you'd be happy for anything less form fitting!

[Boss Radio]

I vote for one size fits all, flame retardant Ben Cooper polyester costumes with purple pants, a yellow top, a plastic mask, and a picture of who/what you are supposed to be proudly dispayed in a garishly colored illustration across your chest.

Or unitards.

[LSPoorEeyorick]

Late to the party and shouldn't be doing this at work. But I read the thread before work and it has stuck with me.

Have what opinions of "Disney show" you have. Own them, that's fine. I don't have to agree. I will never respond with anything but thoughtful discourse.

So we're supposed to stick to the standards of dress and size and whatever else that they had in the fifties? OK, if no plus-sized women should be tour guides because of the vintage "show," OK. But there should be no male tour guides. No obviously lesbian tour guides, or straight women with buzz-cut hair. There should be no tour guides who are any color but white.

Of course I'm not OK with any of those restrictions. If I had a tour guide (if ever I felt inclined to take a tour) I'd hope that they looked kempt and clean and to "Disney show" standards, regardless of how attractive they were to me. Even more than that, I'd hope that they be passionate and knowledgeable about Disneyland, warm and friendly, and interested in interacting with their audience. That would be all that mattered to me, personally.

My disappointment in all of this is, as usual, not with anyone's concept of the "Disney show" but with society's desire to be conformist in their ideas of what is attractive (or conformist in any way.) So the very skinny girls are attractive to a sector of this society. But what about me? I'm not attracted to very skinny girls, and this is coming from a place on the Kinsey scale that is not zero. If taking the tour is truly about the attractiveness of your tour guide, why not be able to schedule the appropriate one for you? Butch Bill hosting the 2:00, Twiggy McPhee at 3:30, Zaftig Zoe at 5, Marlin Metrosexual at 7:32?

As for plus-sized people having a "problem" or "not being perfect"? To me, my weight isn't a problem. I'm happy with who I am. I'm more comfortable in my own skin than most thin people I know. If I was concerned about looking thin, I would look thin. I'm more concerned about weight in terms of health, and I know that I'm active and strong even if people who walk by me on the street think that I have a "problem." Or people I know.

My social, my professional, my sexual relationships are not affected by my weight... unless it's the friend, the colleague, the lover who has the problem. I'm a lover of things: food, art, sex, film, travel. If I'm baking a pie, eating a slice of it, I'm doing it fully and with passion. If I'm writing a play, if I'm filling it with complex characters from my collective experience, I'm making love to it. If I'm pleasing you sexually... well, you had really better be ready to handle it, because all of my being, all of my heart, all of my weight is behind it. Call me a hedonist, call me a hobbit, call me obsessive-compulsive, whatever. This is who I am and I'm not apologizing.

[MickeyLumbo]

Originally Posted by LSPoorEeyorick

If taking the tour is truly about the attractiveness of your tour guide, why not be able to schedule the appropriate one for you? Butch Bill hosting the 2:00, Twiggy McPhee at 3:30, Zaftig Zoe at 5, Marlin Metrosexual at 7:32?

.

oh sure. it's Butch Bill at 2:00, but, at midnite, well, let's just say Hello Dolly!

[Prudence]

Today's thought:

Using Main Street as an example -- it's not that fat, short, gay, whatever people didn't exist during the time period emulated. Those types of people did exist. (Would you care to gaze at my photo album of midwestern relatives? Then again, they stayed in the midwest.)

But those types of people were not hired at Disneyland in 1955.

So, for those of you in favor of the "show," which show would you like Disneyland to emulate, exactly? The historical background of Main Street? Or the 1955 of the park's creation? A representation of a representation?

Perhaps guests should also revisit the 1955 standards?

On a pratical note, I don't understand the aversion to more universally flattering costumes. If costume A with a pleated, above-the-knee skirt is only flattering on a size 6 and costume B with an a-line, at-the-knee skirt is flattering on a range of sizes, why not go with the a-line skirt? I don't buy this notion that moving to styles that flatter more shapes is automatically equivalent to dressing everyone in shapeless sacks.

Furthermore, why not make sure costumes actually fit? Don't CMs have their "own" costumes now? That they take home and launder? Why not have them tailored ? Sometimes the slightest adjustment makes all the difference. I can't wear pants unless they're tailored. My backside is about 2 sizes bigger than my frontside. (And it was that way when I was 100 lbs, too. Where was J-Lo when I was a teen?!) If I get pants that fit my butt they are usually about 2 inches too long in the front rise. And petite pants are 2-3 inches too short in the leg. If I had to wear tailored slacks from the rack I'd look pretty sloppy, too.

Heck, when I was in high school theatre we specifically made costumes that could be taken in/let out at key fitting points. And they looked nice, too. (And Fiona, in the mythical land of Brigadoon, was Chinese -- and that didn't bother anyone, either.)

[Not Afraid]

Originally Posted by Prudence

Today's thought:

Using Main Street as an example -- it's not that fat, short, gay, whatever people didn't exist during the time period emulated. Those types of people did exist. (Would you care to gaze at my photo album of midwestern relatives? Then again, they stayed in the midwest.)

Marceline, MO is about as Miswest as you can get.

[Prudence]

Originally Posted by Not Afraid

Marceline, MO is about as Miswest as you can get.

This is true!

I always imagined Main Street as sort of a live-action Music Man set.

One Grecian Urn!

[Cadaverous Pallor]

Originally Posted by Prudence

So, for those of you in favor of the "show," which show would you like Disneyland to emulate, exactly? The historical background of Main Street? Or the 1955 of the park's creation? A representation of a representation?

First off, I don't jive with iSm's interpretation of hiring CMs so they "match" the land they work in. I don't get how that would work, and I'd like to hear iSm explain that. I don't think I understand it, unless you're talking about race, which obviously, he is not.

I also don't think the costumes should represent 1955.

What I'm talking about is the inescapable fact that a restaurant that hires "attractive" waitstaff makes more money than a restaurant that does not. This has been proven over and over again in studies. It's the same reason that attractive people get acting jobs on stage and screen. You do not see overweight dancers, or overweight models. Yes, there are exceptions outside the mainstream, but they are just that.

I'm not saying society's standards are fair. But they do exist. If you built two identical Disneylands next to each other, and staffed one with hunky guys and big busted bomshells while the other had more normal types, which do you think would pull in more guests? I know I'm a weak human and have felt the affect of having a really cute waiter attend to me. I also am more likely to see a movie if it features Johnny Depp. Such is the human condition.

I'd like to reiterate that obviously looks shouldn't be the main hiring point. CMs need to be intelligent, capable, and friendly, whatever their position. Once they meet these qualifications though, it wouldn't be surprising that Disney would go for a more attractive employee, the same way a restaurant/theater company/Hollywood studio would.

On a pratical note, I don't understand the aversion to more universally flattering costumes. If costume A with a pleated, above-the-knee skirt is only flattering on a size 6 and costume B with an a-line, at-the-knee skirt is flattering on a range of sizes, why not go with the a-line skirt? I don't buy this notion that moving to styles that flatter more shapes is automatically equivalent to dressing everyone in shapeless sacks.

This depends on the focus of costuming. Are they shooting for something that shows off the person's body, or something that's simply flattering? There's a reason why the canoe guys have those fitted shirts with rolled up sleeves. They could easily do their job in more standard clothing that fits well, but they wouldn't look as good doing it. As the focus moves away from such things that will change.

Furthermore, why not make sure costumes actually fit? Don't CMs have their "own" costumes now? That they take home and launder? Why not have them tailored ?

CM turnover is huge. I don't see Disney condoning CMs customizing their garments when they're pretty sure the CM will quit in 3 months.

[Giant Chicken]

hahahaha!!!! Pancakes to America....you are just insane.