I don't feel there is an option for "the classic princesses are just as strong as people say they are". People have been complaining for years that the classics aren't given enough attention and that they are bashed except I never hear anyone bash them (at least on fanpop).
Personally I'm glad Cinderella and Snow White have 'emotional' strength, although Snow White's is almost inhuman and painted more as how a woman should act, not natural. Cinderella's is more realistic. I don't want to go giving the classics too much credit because there's a lot of negative stereotypes associated with the princess movies.

Yeah, it's one of the biggest reasons why I've been a fan. People seem to not understand strength isn't limited to being a warrior or sassing your oppressors, it's not a binary. And it's just sexist, considering I've only ever seen this happen to women and non-macho men.

And I still see it a l l the time. Facebook, YouTube, forums, IMDb, Reddit, even Tumblr where they've been slowly starting to get more love. It's usually from fans of the other DPs (I'm gonna be honest, usually Elsa and Mulan fans, since the former has gained an image of being anti fairy tale romance and the latter is a warrior which apparently makes her better than them, even though I think Mulan would hate that attitude). People still call then doormats who "need a man" and have no personalities. As if not sinking to your abusers' level or putting your kingdom ahead of your own wants with dignity is easy. I think the worst critics are usually privileged Westerners and don't really understand how oppression works, or have had to make big sacrifices.

I'm tired of arguing that they are, not because I don't think they deserve it, but because holy crap it's 2018 can we please get over this cringy misogynist idea that only tomboys or women in positions of power or whatever are strong? It's like some fans never left the second wave 90s idea of feminine strength, that you need to be one of the guys or scorn romance to be strong. It's old.

Besides, if they don't deserve credit for that, then neither do any of the other girls. Belle is put on a pedestal and pitted negatively against every other woman in the movie, Jasmine and Merida need rescued a lot (and the former is hypersexualized), Pocahontas is sexed up and as UN noted fits some questionable race tropes too, Ariel to a degree as well plus how she has to win a guy over without ever speaking her mind, and that's just a few.

People in the fandom are coming around to the idea that Cinderella at least is stronger than she gets credit for. But outside of disnerds like us the consensus is still pretty much that the classic princesses are weak damsels compared to the newer heroines.

A lot of it is rooted in a really narrow understanding of what strength in women is (or should be): You have to be a fiery hardass, able to physically do battle with the bad guys, act like you don't want/need a man, etc. Maybe this was a progressive idea in 1991 or whatever but it's painfully retrograde now.

And it's mostly just empty posturing. Like, the women who openly scorn romance, or aren't as into it as the classics are, almost always end up with a guy anyway: Ariel, Jasmine, Belle, Poca. Mulan winds up with Shang even though it's a totally unnecessary plot point. I don't get why they're "stronger" for acting like they don't want it at first when their narratives still have "gets a man" as a mandatory pit stop on their path to personal growth.

Snow's sweetness and optimism may be hard to relate to, and may push the "woman as morality device" trope a little too hard, but frankly it's way more true to life than Mulan burying literally the entire Hun army under an avalanche, or a lot of the other "wowww so badass!!!" shows of strength that newer princesses perform and people just lap up like the sweetest most feminist nectar.

Maybe what Snow does isn't your cup -- and that's fine, she bugs me too -- but I feel like the things people point to to prove how much stronger all the other women are are just...really arbitrary. How is Snow constantly dinged as weak for being a Pollyanna but Pocahontas is a strong Amazonian badass when she plays into some of the grossest and most anti-feminist tropes out there? (Strong Female Character Syndrome has never been progressive for women of color btw.) Why does physical strength count for more than emotional strength? Why is acting like you don't need no man better than being upfront about it and admitting you're a total romantic? Why is being cold and guarded in the face of adversity stronger than being soft and emotionally vulnerable and kind? How does being free-spirited/ selfishly going off to do whatever flips your switch make you stronger than acting grown and facing up to your responsibilities?

Honestly idgi.

Ugh, Strong Female Character Syndrome is just as bad. even more personally frustrating to me. Because it came from a rise of people/women complaining about women always being damsels in distress and being poorly written. So there was a chance to rectify mistakes and instead they just created ANOTHER stereotype. they should have learned by then.

None of them are technically strong, but at least I consider Cinderella was emotionally strong as how she survived from her horrible life. And maybe Snow too as she still being positive outside of the fact that her life was threatened.

I'm not sure why peoples pick all of them are strong, I can see why Snow and Cinderella are, but Aurora? She clearly didn't do much how can you consider her strong?

In fact, I don't think people ever complaint how the Classics are lack of strength; most just keep ignored them and a few of fans just conplaining how they're less appreciated and bashed as "the girl who did nothing beside waiting the prince". I agree with Princesslullaby's first comment.

One of the oldest "tropes" in popular culture for women, that became normalized was, unfortunately, that women had to assume characteristically "male traits" in order to be respected: i.e., we had to play hard to get/ disinterested in romance, shun our social life to become workaholics, and constantly be climbing the social or workplace/corporate ladder in order to achieve positions of power for ourselves.

In the process, women in film and in society have become distortions of ourselves: now we aren't allowed to be vulnerable, not allowed to be upset or to swear sometimes, not allowed to be lazy, not allowed to "want a rescue," not allowed to pursue our heart's desire without some self-righteous idiot accusing us of being unfeminist and weak in the process.

I don't see how the Classics aren't feminist. I just see how my society and the worldly society of this planet has pigeonholed women for an insanely long time-- and much to my disgust-- continues to do so.

^agree with everything wavesurf, basically. the women almost become inhuman and have no flaws (rapunzel, esmeralda, moana are less potent examples-- characters like black widow are more obvious) and that's to me, worse than damsel in distress tropes.

@princesslullaby, in my opinion Esmeralda has flaws.

Definitly ! And if they werent that would be perfeclty fine !snow white and Cinderella are victim of abuse not princess who fight with their dads , we should not blame them that they are not enough "strong"
As for aurora i just dont understand why people consider her weak ! Because of maleficent ? Because she wanted to follow the fairies ?

I only find cinderella to be a closer character to reality. Snow and Aurora are too unnaturally sweet, obedient, optimistic that i just cant relate to them. They are good role models but to associate with them in real life is way too difficult for me.

I think these two are a little stronger than most people probably think. Aurora isn't exactly weak, but I wouldn't call her particularly strong, either.