Examples of Stockholm Syndrome in Disney

wordswehavesaidworld:

victoriamarcus:

fairytailpeach:

my-truestself:

toasterlyreasons:

spiritsonic:

onlyleigh:

trademarkednothing:

 Frollo and Quasimodo

Mother Gothel and Rapunzel

Frollo and Mother Gothel convince Quasimodo and Rapunzel that their lives are dependent on them. The two villains claim the outside world is a terrible place even though they know this is not true. They also constantly emotionally abuse their victims by implying their worthlessness and destroying their self-esteems. Quasimodo and Rapunzel sympathize with their captors and even believe their captors are protecting them and treating them with kindness. However, both captors are merely using and manipulating their victims for their own selfish purposes.

NOT:

The Beast and Belle

 Belle does not sympathize with the Beast when she is treated poorly. She becomes angry and leaves the castle, only returning by her own wish so that the Beast (who saves her) does not freeze to death. She does not respond nicely towards the Beast until he treats her with respect. In this situation, Belle has control and is not manipulated into feeling for the Beast, nor does the Beast treat her disrespectfully after the first night. While the Beast does have an underlying motive as to keeping Belle in his castle, he abandons this idea and sets her free to make her happy. If anything, this story is a case of Lima Syndrome where the captor starts to sympathize with the victim.

Check out this post which refocuses the purpose of Beauty and the Beast from merely (and wrongly) being about Stockholm Syndrome to it’s original purpose.

FUCKING FINALLY

I don’t usually reblog stuff like this, but Beauty and the Beast is my favorite movie and I’d like to have this on my page!

this is actually a very good analysis. I take back all the times I’ve called Beauty and the Beast a ‘stockholm syndrome’ romance. 

I didn’t even know about any of this until I read it here.

THANK YOU THANK YOU

thank youuuuuuu

Another difference too is that the Beast never pretends that this is for Belle’s own good or anything like that. He makes it very clear that this a trade for her father, and that she is taking on her father’s punishment for trespassing. I’m not saying locking Maurice up in the first place was a good thing (obviously not) but there is no trickery here, and when the Beast finally embraces the goodness inside of him he freely lets Belle go even knowing that to keep her would benefit himself. He realizes how selfish and wrong that would be, unlike the actual villains on this list.

Frollo appoints himself as Quasimodo’s guardian, Gothel convinces Rapunzel she is actually her real mother (which honestly makes her one of the most groundbreaking Disney villains to date imo, showing children that just because someone is in the ultimate authority over them doesn’t mean they shouldn’t be questioned; unfortunately in this world, not all parents are automatically “good guys”), but the Beast is Belle’s captor until he lets her kindness start to transform him. (And also take note: Beast changes because he wants to change, Belle is who shows him how.)