Amanda Putnam: Transgendered Villains?

Before I get into my personal view on the topic at hand, I would like to applaud Amanda Putnam for such a creative and thought-provoking essay. I found her piece to be both extremely well-written and engaging. I loved the way she framed the piece with her daughter's naïve point of view, and found that her style of writing was well organized and fluid. However, despite my interest in the idea of her piece, I do not share Amanda Putnam's view that Disney portrays its villains in a transgender way. While I can clearly see that Disney portrays its villains in a very different, more negative light than its other characters, I do not find this portrayal to imply that villains have transgender attributes.

Putnam used a plethora of examples to try to justify her point that these villains had transgender qualities. I fully agree with her evidence that proves Disney does not depict its villains to be as attractive as its protagonists. For example, the short and pudgy Governor Radcliffe is nowhere near as handsome as the lean, toned John Smith. However, I don't think that the details Putnam cited adequately prove that the villains' differences make them somehow transgender. With the example of The Lion King, Putnam claims that Scar possesses feminine traits. When discussing Mufasa's proposal that Simba will become king, Putnam states "Scar's sardonic "I'll practice my curtsy" reiterates his acerbic personality, but also adds a transgendered as it locates Scar again in the female role" (156). I believe that Putnam stretched the meaning behind this quote in an attempt to prove her point. Scar's snarky response is merely a testament to his hostility. Putnam mentioned Scar's "acerbic personality" but tried to brush this off as not being the actual explanation for his rude quip. However, I truly believe that Scar intended to be sassy and bitter towards Mufasa and Simba. I don't think that him mentioning the idea of curtsying makes feminizes him in any way. In fact, it seems more to me like Scar is mocking the idea of curtsying. In this regard, Scar making fun of the curtsy would disprove Putnam's theory by depicting Scar as ruthless and insensitive.

Similarly, Putnam claims that the stepmother Lady Tremaine in Cinderella is masculine because of her facial features. Putnam "Her nose is crooked and large for her face, more reminiscent of 101 Dalmatians male villains Horace and Jasper, rather than typical Disney female features. Her over-plucked, arched eyebrows characterize her expressions as surprised and menacing" (153-154). Putnam is trying to show how Lady Tremaine's physical appearance makes her more masculine, but I find this to be, yet again, quite a stretch. I don't find the shape of the stepmother's nose and eyebrows to be sufficient in proving her to be male-like. I agree with Putnam that these features clearly contrast those of Cinderella, but I don't think that it is fair to associate these differences with having transgender implications. I can see how Disney is depicting Cinderella as being more beautiful than her stepmother, but I don't think that doing so gives Lady Tremaine any transgender characteristics.

Although I thoroughly enjoyed this essay and appreciated the creativity of the concept, I did find the overall argument to lack sufficient evidence in proving that Disney has given its villains transgender qualities by making them different looking than its main characters.