Skip to main content

Lefties Losing It: Snow White actress Rachel Zegler’s ‘massive backflip’


Once Upon a Woke Time…

There was a time when Disney enchanted audiences with stories that transcended time—tales of courage, hope, and yes, true love. But in 2025, Snow White—a reboot of the beloved 1937 classic—hit the box office not with a magical bang, but a dismal thud. Critics panned it, audiences stayed away, and even loyal Disney fans were left scratching their heads.

Why did it fail? Was it poor marketing? A saturated market? Or could it be that Disney forgot the golden rule: stay out of politics, and let the story shine?

When the Princess Doesn’t Believe in Princes

Much of the backlash can be traced to the film’s star, Rachel Zegler. Long before the movie hit theaters, clips surfaced of Zegler dismissing the original Snow White tale. She stated in interviews that the story was outdated, mocked the idea of being “saved by a prince,” and emphasized that her version of Snow White was “not dreaming about true love.”

Now, let’s pause for a second.

It’s one thing to adapt a story with a modern twist. But it’s another thing entirely to insult the heart of the original—and by extension, the audiences who cherished it. Millions of viewers grew up watching Snow White find love, overcome evil, and live happily ever after. Stripping that away and replacing it with a politically charged narrative felt less like progress and more like propaganda.

Fairytales vs. Feminism: Must It Be Either-Or?

Of course, there's room for strong female leads—Disney has done it well before with Moana, Mulan, and Belle. But strength doesn’t have to come at the cost of love. The idea that a woman wanting to fall in love makes her weak is not empowering—it’s limiting. It tells young girls that romance is regressive and that femininity must be sacrificed on the altar of political correctness.

Ironically, by trying to make Snow White “strong” through scorn and skepticism, the film robbed her of the very strength that captivated audiences in the first place—her kindness, her hope, and her belief in something greater.

When Disney Picks Sides, It Loses Everyone

Disney used to be the company that brought families together, offering stories that appealed to children and adults alike. But lately, many feel that the House of Mouse has been drifting too far into ideological waters—pushing divisive agendas instead of universal themes.

Snow White’s failure is a warning shot: when a story becomes a lecture, when beloved characters become mouthpieces, and when timeless values are mocked for modern ideologies, people check out.

The Moral of the Story?

Disney doesn’t need to be political. It needs to be magical. It needs to remember that people don’t come to fairy tales for lectures—they come for wonder, escape, and timeless truths.

Audiences are sending a message loud and clear: We want beauty, not bitterness. We want stories that inspire, not divide. And maybe, just maybe, we still believe in true love.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Dr. W. B. Clark and the 1909 Cancer-Public Health Debate: Parasites as a Cause?

In the early 20th century, as medical science continued to evolve, a variety of theories emerged about the origins and causes of cancer. One of the more controversial voices in this conversation was Dr. W. B. Clark , a physician who, in 1909 , boldly declared that parasites were the primary cause of cancer . His views sparked both intrigue and skepticism within the scientific community, highlighting the tensions between emerging medical theories and established norms of the time. Who Was Dr. W. B. Clark? Dr. W. B. Clark was a practicing physician in Indiana, active during a period when cancer research was still in its infancy. Although not a household name today, he contributed to the growing body of medical speculation and debate surrounding the nature of cancer. At the time, cancer was poorly understood, and treatments were rudimentary at best. Researchers explored a wide range of causes, from environmental factors to heredity — and in Clark's case, infectious organisms . The Par...

The Atrocity of King Leopold: The Horrific Torture of Congolese Children

The Atrocity of King Leopold: The Horrific Torture of Congolese Children History often glosses over the true horror of colonial rule, dressing it in the garb of “civilizing missions” and economic development. But behind the veil of so-called progress lies a chapter soaked in the blood of innocence. One of the most brutal and chilling examples is the reign of King Leopold II of Belgium over the Congo Free State — a period marked by unimaginable cruelty, especially toward children. A Kingdom of Terror From 1885 to 1908, King Leopold II personally owned and ruled the Congo Free State, not as a colony of Belgium, but as his private property. Under the guise of humanitarianism and philanthropy, he established a reign of terror that stripped the land of its resources and the people of their dignity. The primary goal: rubber and ivory. The price: human lives. To maximize rubber production, Leopold’s private army, the Force Publique , enforced brutal quotas on villages. Failure to meet the...