Animation Source Forums

XD It's not like I'm saying Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck needs them...but rather the more realistic characters like Simba or Bambi. Just because they can talk doesn't change the fact that they are based on real animals. They don't walk upright, cook food or wear clothes like Disney's earlier characters. They fought like real animals, ate like real animals and had realisitc characteristics (like walking on all fours and licking each other to show affection).

I applaude Dreamworks for making Spirit anatomically correct.
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Forget Disney for a moment...take the live-action version of Scooby Doo for instance. The movie made several mentions to Scooby being unneutered...yet when they show him on his back...nothing is there to indicate that he's a male, let alone being intact. (They can show Daphne's cleavage with no problem, but heaven forbid them showing Scooby being a boy ) It's silly, really. Especially being that the movie was rated PG...there was no excuse for not giving Scooby or Scrappy boy parts.

(I want to let people know again that I'm trying to be perverted, but simply think that it's very dumb to not show male animals with male parts.)

I said more or less anthropomorphic. Yes, that includes Simba, Bambi, and other ones that resemble animals. Those animals do have facial features which definitely are not of animals.

And actually, they are based on humans. Jenna was based off of Audrey Hepburn. All of these animals have non-animal-like personalities, and their faces are fitted for their personalities. They've all got humanlike qualities.

Good answer. We shy away at privates because we pretend they're not there. So when they are shown, it screams in our faces. If we included privates on a regular basis, people will hardly notice.

If you look at European films, nudity is very present, but not in a pornographic style; it's just there. American films try to make nudity pornographic because the American public is not used to it, so seeing those naughty-bits is a big deal. To a European, nudity is "So what?".

I think we should adopt the European mentality. I believe it's just mentally healthier. Americans are very self-conscious of themselves and it's stressful. Europeans can walk into a sauna naked without thinking twice and his or her friends will hardly even notice. Now who's mentally healthier? The American who is constantly trying to hide their body out of fear of embarrassment or the European who thinks nothing of it? American girls also want to look sexy as possible. They think more skin will do it. Unfortunately, this works with American eyes; more skin is a rare treat to them. It also seems Europeans dress very normal, sometimes more modest than their American counterparts. Why is this? They have the mentality that more skin is just more skin, nothing more nothing less. I see pictures of people in European nightclubs and their clothing could easily pass my school's dress code, even the women. If you go to America, a lot of nightclubs have half-naked women running amuk. It seems Europe has a better grip on nudity than America.

Good point Gauntlet, but we can't just "adopt European mentality". We're at the point where it's irreversible - Americans will always be insecure and self-conscious. Everyone's used to shunning nudity, so if we tried to adopt it, there would be some pretty ugly protests. *Imagines a pro-nudity protest* Hmm...

That's the issue as it stands though. It's not easy to just change.

Well here's the stumper. If they had given balto a, well..... twinkie.
Well.....I really wouldn't like his Twinkie on the plush. A Anatomically correct plush wouldn't be made... and then the little kid would ask... "Hahaha mommy look! balto turned into a girl" And if they had put his twinkie on the plush I doubt people would buy it.

Also, it's not like kids Need to see it.
We don't need our clothing ripped off to see what gender we are.
And I don't really think it is necessary to add gentials to kids cartoons.

It would feel to weird to give mrs.piggy a snatch....or Bugs bunny a twinkie.......

Or could you imagine STITCH?
Ewwww.... I don't think they need to start adding male and female parts ANYTIME soon.

I agree with Jordan. Since the dawn of mankind, infants have grown into adults without needing cartoons to explain the anatomical difference between genders, why should that change?

Gauntlet - the grass is always greener on the other side. I have just been to Spain and the girls all sunbathe topless on the beach.. fantastic but the Spanish guys just walk on past without looking twice.. why? Cos they are used to it. Perhaps your right in Europe it isn't a big deal, in my opinion we also handle alcohol (another taboo) better than the US but I am sure the US handles a lot of things better than us... perhaps like looking after its' own people etc. Anyway I digress

Can you imagine if animators had to draw animal genitals? In animation school there would be a whole class devoted to it.. how to make them swing around in a believable way, people would have to study them in close detail in the same as animators study a paw, a tail or an eye. Do you all wanna get that close to an animal spaz hole? No wait don't answer that.

Cat - what do you mean a fixed horse is more obviously a male than a fixed dog? Castration only removes testicles so the majority of the system still remains, both fixed dogs and horses still retain a penis.

OMG... I TOTALLY agree with you. In the scene where Scrappy pees on Daphne, the car stops suddenly, and Scrappy is thrown against the window. And there are no genetials whatsoever. Where did the pee come from then?! Honestly..

This is an extremely interesting and true topic. Spirit was perfectly anatomically correct, with a small but visible bump to prove that he was male. Go DreamWorks xD Balto would've also been slightly better if the male dogs had been more... male... y'know? For instance, when Balto is fighting the bear, and the bear is cornering Balto and he's lying on his back, it is easy to see in-between his legs. But there is absoloutely no proof he is male. And then you think: how did Balto 2 come in, when Balto didn't have any special 'tools' to help the puppies come to be?! Yesh, sorry that's su gross, but admit it, it's true! Here's a pic to show what I mean:





-- Rebel

Okay, really. Scooby's Pen15 isn't needed in the movie.
Does it serve a purpose in the movie? No.
Do we really need to see scoobys equipment? God no.

Why doesn't fred, or daphne have their clothes off? [sarcasm]I really can't tell what gender they are[/sarcasm]

That's why they make makeup, longhair.... or deeper voices for guys so they don't end up making pron.

Really though, We don't need to see someones parts to distinct their gender in the movie so why would we need them now?

It doesn't serve a purpose in the movie at all.
Animators already got things to distint the charecters genders with, and I say it's working just fine.... As I can easily tell Dora the explorer is a girl and Boots is a boy.

Nuff' said.

I am suprised this topic has lasted this long...I mean, does it really matter that much if Balto or any other animated character is anatomicly correct (or even has a "bump" or whatever)?NO
Does it take away from the movie? NO
Does it cause the world to explode in a fiery ball? NO


As for the US adopting a "European mentality", would be almost impossible because...well...just see how hard it is for the US to adopt the Metric system...

This topic doesn't really seem to have a very good point...and besides, this is a kids site (well...last I checked it was open to all ages)...

I believe this topic should be locked

I agree. Besides, the rant board is suppposed to be for rants about the site, not whether animated characters are anatomically correct or not.

In the movie Watership Down,Blackberry is a male rabbit,but in the T.V. Series,Blackberry's a female rabbit.

What makes me laugh is when someone gives an argument for showing correct genitalia, you can't even bring yourselves to say PENIS! If you can't bring yourselves to say the word and cover it with 'bump', 'twinky' etc then what will you do when you actually see one?? No wait again don't answer that!

And hey it is natural, really it is but when I look at an animal I don't check between its legs, if the dog is called 'Dave' then it must be a boy.. that is good enough for me.

Finally children don't look at genitalia for being male and female, they look at clothes, hair and beards. If a child draws a naked person they put a belly button on it not genitalia. Fact.

Thank you, Tikky!

First off, I'm not saying they need to draw a p3nis. Just the 'sheath' or protective casing. A lump of fur is fine. Sheesh, no need to act like 4 year olds.

If you people think dirty thoughts from seeing animal genitalia, you have some real beastality problems.

Like Tikky said; it's a natural thing that doesn't deserve to be ignored or tabooed.

As for locking the topic; it may have nothing to do with the site, but I don't think it deserves to be locked. (Moved maybe, but NOT locked).