Talk:The Story of Menstruation

Page contents not supported in other languages.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Did You Know
A fact from this article appeared on Wikipedia's Main Page in the "Did you know?" column on April 1, 2009.
The text of the entry was: Did you know ... that in Disney's animated film The Story of Menstruation, the flow is snow white?

productor = Walt Disney ?[edit]

Hello, I modify the article because from what i know Walt Disney wasn't the producer. The studio Walt Disney Productions is the production company ... Has someone somtehing more consistant that rotten tomatoes to justify that Walt Disney IS the producer instead or someone else in the studio ? --GdGourou - °o° - Talk to me 20:16, 15 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Good job, you found an obvious mistaken wikilink. Royalbroil 03:22, 16 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

voiceover[edit]

IMDb identifies the narrator as Gloria Blondell, who'd read the role of Daisy Duck in the 1940s. knoodelhed (talk) 19:20, 10 June 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Plot[edit]

Couple of contentious, or at least arguable, points in the "plot" section.

Comment is made: "Neither sexuality nor reproduction is mentioned in the film."

I've just watched it. Towards the end of the short at least, expression "reproductive organs" is used.

Further comment in same section: "...an emphasis on sanitation makes it, as Disney historian Jim Korkis has suggested, 'a hygienic crisis rather than a maturational event.'"

In the earlier section in which the pituitary gland is being explained, leading to the first mention of menstruation, narration specifically says that as the girl ages (as in heading towards adolescence) the pituitary gland sends messages to the body to make it mature. It's fairly clearly delineated as a process of maturation.

Also, unless I'm misunderstanding some medical jargon use of the term by the cited historian, the term "crisis" seems very much out of synch with the tone of the film, which is not hysterical or alarmist in the least.Leapso (talk) 14:26, 26 March 2013 (UTC)[reply]

I agree. The film's tone is very much to de-emphasisze the crisis or sensational nature of oncoming menstruation. The film explicitly calls it part of a routine.
And early in the film, eggs in the ovaries are described as "any one of them has the possibility of someday becoming a human being". It never mentions sexual activity, but clearly the idea of babies is contemplated when the film describes, "if the egg is impregnated, which happens when a woman is going to have a child", the uterine lining, budding human being, development, etc. Wolfram.Tungsten (talk) 16:30, 17 July 2013 (UTC)[reply]