Disney’s Princesses Vanish, Leaving Fans in the Dark

Disney, our favorite left-wing corporate punching bag, is having a(nother) bad ⁢month. The company just reported fiscal fourth-quarter ⁤losses of a cool $710 million.

Don’t worry, I’m sure its new woke live-action version of “Snow White” will fix things. Let’s see what the new Snow White, the ⁣outspoken Hispanic feminista Rachel Zegler has to say ⁢ about the new movie⁤ that will save Disney from disaster.

“It’s no longer 1937,” Zegler​ said. “She’s ⁣not going to be ‍saved ⁢by the prince ​and she’s ‌not⁣ going to be dreaming about true ​love. She’s dreaming ⁣about becoming the leader she knows she can be.”

Sounds like President Snow White’s ⁣been ⁢on ​Tinder too long!

Well, at least there⁤ will be⁢ those cute little dwarves, right? Everyone⁢ loves‍ shawties in funny outfits!‍ Sleepy, Dopey, Doc — kids love ⁣those guys! Unfortunately, Disney may⁣ be falling short here. The New York Post reports, “Disney’s live action ​‘Snow White’ under fire ‍for replacing seven dwarfs with ‘magical creatures’ of ​all sizes, genders.”

Just‍ what every little girl loves:​ a bunch of weird grown-ups⁣ dressed like homeless Antifa junkies, sharing a home with a ‌14-year-old princess. “Snow White⁤ and the Non-binary Polycule House.” You know, for kids! Excuse me while I short Disney stock.

At⁢ this point, we must anticipate that the upcoming​ live-action version of “Rapunzel” ‍will be an R-rated gritty⁢ reboot starring rapper Ice Spice ‌and her orange afro. After all,​ who says⁢ Rapunzel needs to have long, blonde Becky hair? Time‍ to get with the times, Grandpa.

Disney Plus Gets Sus

It‌ seems most of the bleeding ⁣is coming from its streaming platform,‌ Disney Plus. “Disney’s streaming operation ‍lost $512⁤ million ‌ in the most recent​ quarter, ⁤the company ‌said,​ bringing⁣ total streaming losses since 2019, when ⁣Disney+ was‌ introduced, to‌ more⁢ than‌ $11 billion. Disney+ lost roughly 11.7 million subscribers worldwide in the three months that ended ⁣July 1, for a new ​total of 146.1 million.”

Are you telling me no one wants to subscribe to Disney ‌Plus to watch yet another ‍beloved fairy tale slaughtered and worn as ⁣a⁢ skin suit by corporate harpies?

Nearly 12 million subscribers canceling in three months seems like a lot, especially‍ because Disney Plus is not exactly a luxury product. In economic hard times, Disney Plus is still the⁣ most affordable Disney experience a family can indulge in. It’s not a⁤ cruise or a week at Disney⁣ World or even four tickets to “The ​Little Mermaid.”

Because it’s ⁣the entry-level product, Disney Plus is the animatronic canary in the ⁤coal ‍mine. If you⁢ have kids at home and they like Disney stuff, eight bucks a month for the cheapest tier ⁢is‌ an OK deal, especially if you have kids⁤ who want to watch their favorite movie every single day. I was ‌happy to subscribe when my⁤ kids were obsessed with “Star Wars,” ⁤“Moana,”‍ and “Frozen​ 2.”

But something changed in the last few years. There is no longer a single new movie or show⁤ on Disney Plus they want to watch. My⁣ kids are over “Star Wars” and “Moana” and “Frozen ​2” — ‌and they utterly ignore the⁣ new movies. The live-action ‌remakes especially leave them cold. None of them wanted to​ see the⁤ reboots⁢ of‍ “The Lion King” or “Beauty ​and the ⁤Beast.” My 7-year-old daughter did not⁤ even see “The Little Mermaid” in ⁢the theater.

Pixar ‌movies used to be events in my house. I have seen “Cars” and “Toy Story” approximately 75 billion times. Buzz⁣ Lightyear was like my fourth son; my ‌toddler​ wore Buzz jammies every night for three years. None of them, especially my⁣ Buzz fanatic, wanted to see the giant stinking turd that‍ was⁢ “Lightyear.”

I didn’t go​ to business school, but I seem to remember hearing ​that when⁤ demand goes down, prices get slashed. Instead, the smart​ Disney execs with Wharton degrees ‌decided to raise prices‍ instead!

“The monthly price for access to an ad-free version of Disney+ rose to $11 in December, from $8.⁣ Another hefty price increase is on the way. Starting‍ on Oct. 12, the ad-free version will cost $14, Disney said. Hulu, which is also controlled‌ by Disney, will begin charging $18 for ad-free access, up from $15.”

Strangely, none of the news stories‍ I read mention the glaring, obvious reasons⁤ why Disney Plus is no longer ⁤a must-have ⁤by Disney’s core audience: families with children.

It’s very simple. Disney has ⁤made the‍ purposeful decision to stop making content all kids and parents enjoy. Millennials might⁢ watch a new movie once. Little girls ⁢watch the original⁤ “Little Mermaid” animated ‌movie a dozen times.

But Disney is unbothered by the rebellion among ‍former​ Disney loyalists. To prove where its ‌new allegiance lies, it even gave ‍Minnie Mouse,‍ iconic spokeswoman for the brand‍ worldwide, ⁤ the Bud Light treatment: “Disney recently ⁢ partnered with an influencer ⁤who ⁢identifies as gender-fluid for a clothing ad, showing followers on TikTok how to dress⁤ like Minnie Mouse.”

What 5-year-old girl doesn’t want​ a grown ⁣man in a petticoat to⁢ show her how⁤ to⁤ get⁣ dressed?

The ⁤Vanishing of a Generation

The ​reason ⁣for the decline, however, goes far beyond bad content. Disney Plus, after all, ⁣still carries all the​ classics that made the company‍ into the juggernaut it​ became. You can still watch ‌the⁣ originals of all the princess movies and experience authentic children’s entertainment, albeit with content warnings on everything‌ telling you ​these old movies are full of “harmful stereotypes” and “outdated themes.”

The reason ⁤for the decline, ⁣and why its subscribers are not coming back, is that they were⁣ never⁣ born. Disney’s streaming profits are drying up because our newborn population​ is.

Plummeting ​birth rates in the United⁢ States have​ essentially wiped out huge numbers ⁤of ⁤potential ‍Disney Plus watchers. Their parents just never bothered to create them. Worse, Disney movies —​ and its feminist, pro-abortion, girlboss executives and princess stars ⁢— actively encourage women not to become‍ mothers. Snow ⁣White ​is not allowed ⁢to fall in love and marry the prince⁢ — if she did, she might not get to run for Senate, or ⁢even live her dreams as a mid-level marketing​ manager in Disney Consumer⁢ Products.

Which is,⁤ of course, why Disney has clumsily attempted to ‍rebrand ⁢itself for “Disney Adults,”​ the thirty-something childless millennials ⁤who are‍ happy to spend their disposable (child-free!) income on park tickets, rainbow Mouse⁣ ears, and ⁢Disney Plus streaming‍ services. All these​ new Disney movies ​are ⁤now targeting this⁣ demographic — which, while sizeable now, is obviously (see​ second-quarter losses) not ‌going to be enough ‌to ​close the gap. They don’t make Mouse ears in cat ⁢sizes. (Yet!) Crucially, these people are not going to ‍have anyone to pass along ⁣their ​love of the Disney brand ‌to.

Disney is suffering from a problem it helped engineer. ⁤Classic princess movies used to inspire young ​girls to⁣ want to find their prince and get married one day. All those traditional and‍ therefore bad messages‍ have been‍ “updated” to “reflect‍ the world we live in now,” of ‍course. Welcome to the ⁤dystopian, child-unfriendly ​world Disney helped create. It made this childless bed, ‌and now​ we all have to lie⁣ in it.

The Child Stats website tells the tragic tale in ​a few stark charts. In 1965, the ​percentage of the U.S. population under 17 was about 37 percent.‍ In ‌2023, it fell to roughly 22 percent of the‌ population. And the younger you go, the lower the number⁤ gets.

Disney can make​ all the ⁣live-action princess reboots it ⁤wants. But the one ‌thing it can’t make⁣ is ⁣a⁣ live human child. Yet.