Fairy Tale Rapes

Seems like the question would have come up when these tales where told orally on cold evenings around the fireplace.

“Hey, Dad . . . wasn’t that her father she just married.”

“I dunno, son. It’s just how the story goes.”

“Oh, no no!” Mother insists, sitting aside her sewing. “It was another king.”

According to some people Rumpelstiltskin is a warning against female masturbation.

And in Cinderella, it’s not a GLASS slipper, it’s a FUR slipper, which is about as obvious a symbol for female genitalia as you can get.

This would make a lot of sense in french, since the words “verre” (glass) and “vair” (on uncommon and old word refering to a kind of fur) are pronounced in the same way, so the mistake could have been easily done, story tellers mistaking one rare word for another much more common.

However, why would the same mistake be done in non french versions of the tale?

according to snopes this is wrong - http://www.snopes.com/language/misxlate/slippers.htm

the original was always glass, though may have been borrowed from earlier oriental tales with a gold slipper

Actually, the earliest version (Giambattista, again) says it’s a pianelle which “Cinder-Cat” loses. They were a sort of galosh which protected the shoe from the mud-- the overshoe rests on a foot-tall stilt with a wide circle base. (They’re also known as *chopines. *

Here are some images of them, and a page that discusses their use.

That’s just an urban legend. The earliest extant copies clearly refer to Versace slippers, which makes a lot more sense.

[QUOTE=irishgirl]
According to some people Rumpelstiltskin is a warning against female masturbation.

QUOTE]

How?

(Note this is my being curious, not my challenging the assertion. Internet clarity is oh so important :smiley: )

Giambattista’s stories may be the earliest written versions of many fairy tales, but there is no reason to suppose that they’re “original” in the sense of being closest to the oral history versions.