1
Dramatic Disney Personality Disorder
Disney is a universally loved company, producing media that can be enjoyed by all ages.
It’s hard not to be a fan of the infectious songs, adorable characters, and the positive messages
they convey to children with their movies. Most people are particularly fond of Disney when
they are younger, and as they get older, they move on to more age-appropriate interests.
However, my entire life, I have suffered from a crippling and pervasive obsession with The Walt
Disney Company. It started when I was a baby, with my Winnie-the-Pooh themed bedroom, and
a Winnie-the-Pooh themed stuffed animal and blanket that I slept with every night for comfort.
As I aged, I did not grow out of my abnormal behaviors as some might, instead you might even
say that they grew stronger.
As soon as I began to receive paychecks, my spending became reckless with Disney
merchandise and vacations to Disneyland and Walt Disney World, which as we all know is not
cheap. My house became decked out with this merchandise, becoming my own personal Disney
haven. I have everything from Disney mugs to a Disney raincoat for my dog. I started to color
my hair an unnatural bright red color so that I resembled my favorite Disney princess, Ariel from
Disney’s The Little Mermaid, more closely. I’ve seen every movie that’s been released,
especially since my adulthood. I even sat through Disney’s The Good Dinosaur, which most
would say was not an enjoyable movie, especially for adults. To stay up on all the new releases, I
am a subscriber to Disney’s streaming service, Disney Plus. I know the words to all of Disney’s
hit songs and you can even find some of them on my Apple Music playlist. During the holiday
season, my favorite way to get into a festive mood is to break out my multiple Disney-themed
ugly Christmas sweaters and pop on one of Disney’s many Christmas movies. I even have a
Disney-themed cookbook so I can make all my favorite Disneyland Park treats at home!
2
Based on my lifelong experience with my symptoms, I am diagnosing myself as having
“Dramatic Disney Personality Disorder.” Based on what I know about the DSM categories, I
would place this obsession with Disney in the category of a personality disorder. A personality
disorder, according to the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual, is both a “pervasive and inflexible”
pattern of thinking and feeling that has a negative impact on one’s life (American Psychiatric
Association, 2013). It can result in an inability or limited ability to function in relationships and
work or school. Those with personality disorders may have difficulty recognizing their own
behavior as being a problem. One of the most notable aspects of my Disney obsession is that it is
a long-lasting, pervasive obsession- one that has spanned my entire lifetime into adulthood.
Because of this, it meets the definition of both pervasive and inflexible. My Disney obsession
can negatively impact my life; particularly it impacts my wallet as Disney is rather expensive to
travel to, and it can impact my social life as some people think I am strange for my obsession
with Disney. I personally do not see my Disney obsession as being a problem, and I do not feel
like I need to change. This is characteristic of those with personality disorders as well. If I had to
categorize it as a specific cluster of personality disorders, I would also probably put my Disney
obsession in Cluster B- as personality disorders in this cluster tend to be described as
“emotional” and “dramatic” (American Psychiatric Association, 2013). Based on my symptoms,
I meet the criteria both for being overemotional and overdramatic about Disney.
There are a variety of factors, from my gender, my sexuality, to even my marital status,
that could have potentially resulted in my development of a mental disorder. When exploring the
difference between boys and girls and how those differences cause the development of mental
disorders, Gove and Herb found that, "Girls, in contrast, are generally quite dependent on others
and tend not to establish an independent identity and self-esteem" (Cockerham, 2017). As Gove
3
and Herb hypothesize, this dependency results in higher levels of stress in women that in turn
result in higher rates of mental disorder (Cockerham, 2017). Also, because I am a woman, my
job is more likely to be a source of emotional distress. According to Cockerham, seeking
employment as a woman can be unfulfilling because I may receive a less "satisfactory" job in
comparison to a male counterpart or less pay for the same job (Cockerham, 2017). Cockerham
states “perceived discrimination on the job by women can promote emotional stress,” also
increasing my chances of developing mental illness (Cockerham, 2017).
In addition to being a woman, I am also a member of the LGBTQIA+ community, which
also makes me more vulnerable to developing mental illness. Research done by Ian Meyer found
that “stigma, prejudice, and discrimination create hostile and stressful social environments for
same-sex and bisexual minorities,” a stress which he calls “minority stress,” which in turn results
in a “higher prevalence of [psychological] distress in sexual minorities than heterosexuals”
(Cockerham, 2017). In addition to being a sexual minority, I am also unmarried, which is
another factor that could increase my likelihood of developing a mental disorder. Married
people, in contrast to unmarried people, “have greater social and emotional support and are better
able to cope with psychological trauma and stress because of it” (Cockerham, 2017). Pearlin and
Johnson, in their research on married vs. unmarried people and rates of mental illness,
determined that marriage “functions as a protective barrier against threats (e.g. social, economic)
outside the marital relationship” (Cockerham, 2017). Not only am I at a disadvantage for
developing mental illness because I am LGBTQ+ and a woman, I at a disadvantage because I do
not have a partner to protect me.
There are a variety of theories that could potentially explain how my mental illness came
to be. The first model, the Medical Model, is the prominent view held by most psychologists
4
today, and posits that “the major psychiatric illness are diseases… caused principally by
biological factors, and most of these factors reside in the brain” (Horowitz, 2002). Based on the
Medical Model, my condition is a result of abnormalities in the functioning of “neurochemicals,
receptors, and genes” (Horowitz, 2002). However, as Horowitz illustrates in his essay The
Biological Foundations of Diagnostic Psychiatry, the Medical Model tends to overstate the
influence on things like genes on behavior. According to Horowitz, “While the genotype is fixed
in nature, the phenotypical expressions of the gene are variable. Traits that stem from identical
genes can have quite different manifestations because of different cultural and environmental
conditions” (Horowitz, 2002). Therefore, it is likely that the development of my mental illness
relied on factors that were not biological.
Another theory that may explain how I developed my mental illness is the Stress Model.
According to the Stress Model, mental illness is a result of stressful life events and our ability to
cope with these stressful events. In Rudder’s research on locus of control, he found that some
individuals may have an external locus of self-control, where they feel the environment controls
their life, while others may have an internal locus of self-control, where they feel they are
responsible for what happens to them (Anderson, 2021). Those with an external locus of selfcontrol tend to feel the effects from stress more strongly and therefore have a harder time with
coping (Anderson, 2021). Additionally, an individual’s social support system has “a mediating
function on the stress process” (Pearlin, 2010). Those with a stronger social support system tend
to be able to cope with stress better. As someone who has an external locus of self-control, that
tends to view my problems as being a result of my environment, I likely am more effected by
stressful life events than others, which could have resulted in my development of a mental
disorder.
5
Contrary to the Medical Model and the Stress Models, the Interactionist Models of
mental illness, namely the Societal Reaction Theory or labelling theory and the Family
Interaction Theory, submit that mental illness is located within the social interactions of
individuals. In the Societal Reaction Theory, also known as the labelling theory, an individual
being labelled as mentally ill is what results in his abnormal behavior. In Scheff’s original
labelling theory, Scheff postulates that “In a crisis, when the deviance of an individual becomes a
public issue, the traditional stereotype for insanity becomes the guiding imagery for action, both
for those reacting to the deviant and at times, the deviant himself” (Phelan & Link, 1999).
Essentially, once an individual receives a mentally ill label, all their behavior gets viewed under
the lens of being “crazy.” Additionally, Scheff’s labelling theory suggests the idea of “residual
deviance,” or that all madness is the breaking of unwritten rules (Anderson, 2021). My own love
for Disney past a certain “acceptable age” could definitely be seen as a residual deviance, as it is
considered an “unwritten rule” to no longer participate in children’s interests as an adult.
Therefore, the social reaction theory is highly applicable in my own development of a mental
disorder.
The Family Reaction Theory, much like the Societal Reaction theory, emphasizes how
unhealthy social interaction between family members can result in the development of mental
disorder. In Bateson’s research of the double-bind, he presents the idea that “psychotic behavior
might make sense in the context of pathological family communication,” or that a patient’s
“crazy” is an extension of their family’s “crazy” (Nicols & Schwartz, 1998). Because I came
from a family that grew up going to Disneyland together and my mom also really loved Disney,
it’s likely that my own behaviors developed as a response to my family’s behavior.
6
Though the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual is often seen as the clear-cut way to
diagnose mental disorders, especially in the United States, is creation was shrouded in secrecy.
Additionally, those who stand the most from benefitting off the DSM and the diagnosing of
mental disorders appear to have a hand in the DSM’s development, as Hutchins and Kirk point
out in their text, "It is less well known that some pharmaceutical companies have contributed
directly to the development of DSM" (Kutchins & Kirk, 1997). In fact, a large reason for the
editing of the second Diagnostic and Statistical Manual and the establishing of the DSM-III was
“a wish to expand psychiatric turf to capture more fiscal coverage from third-party
reimbursements, which had become much more important to the financing of mental health care”
(Kutchins & Kirk, 1997). Clearly, a large motivation behind the development of the DSM has
always been for financial gain.
As someone with a diagnosed mental illness, this likely has a large effect on my selfesteem and how I view myself. In Karp’s essay Illness and Identity, Karp describes how often
coming to terms with mental illness means coming to terms with the identity of being a victim.
Karp details the effects that this can have on a person with mental illness, “Acceptance of a
victim role, while diminishing a sense of personal responsibility, is also enfeebling. To be a
victim of biochemical forces beyond one’s control gives force to others’ definition of oneself as
a helpless, passive object of injury” (Karp, 2010). Just the act of being diagnosed with a mental
illness can lower my self-esteem, as I might see myself as weaker than others or more fragile
because of my disorder.
A variety of factors likely have come to play in the culmination of my mental illness,
Dramatic Disney Personality Disorder. The oversimplification of mental illness under just one
theory, whether it be that mental illness is a result of only biomedical factors or only
7
environmental and social factors, is not enough to explain the development of mental disorders
in and of itself. Rather, we must consider a variety of explanations for the causes of mental
disorders to prevent the oversimplification of how we treat them.
8
Citations
American Psychiatric Association. (2013). Diagnostic and statistical manual of mental disorders
(5th ed.). https://doi.org/10.1176/appi.books.9780890425596
Anderson, T. (2021). Interactionist Models—Societal Reaction Theory.
Anderson, T. (2021). The Stress and Coping Model.
Cockerham, W. (2017). Mental Disorder: Social Epidemiology. Social Class. Age, Gender, and
Marital Status. Sociology of Mental Disorder. 10th edition. (pp. 136–187). New York: NY:
Routledge.
Horwitz, A. (2002). The Biological Foundations of Diagnostic Psychiatry. Download The
Biological Foundations of Diagnostic Psychiatry.Creating Mental Illness (pp. 132–157).
Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Horwitz, A. (2002). The emergence of diagnostic psychiatry. Creating Mental Illness (pp. 56–
82). Chicago, IL: University of Chicago Press.
Karp, D. (2010). Illness and Identity. In McLeod, J., & Wright, E. (Eds.), The Sociology of
Mental Illness: A Comprehensive Reader (pp. 528–546). New York, NY: Oxford University
Press.
Kutchins, H., & Kirk, S. (1997). Pathologizing everyday behavior. Making Us Crazy: DSM—
The Psychiatric Bible and the Creation of Mental Disorders (pp. 10–16; 21–54). New York, NY:
Free Press.
Nichols, M., & Schwartz, R. (1998). Family Therapy: Concepts and Methods Download Family
Therapy: Concepts and Methods(pp. 1–16, 26–36). Boston, MA: Allyn and Bacon.
Pearlin, L. (2010). The Sociological Study of Stress. McLeod, J., & Wright, E. (Eds.), The
Sociology of Mental Illness: A Comprehensive Reader (pp. 170-188). New York, NY: Oxford
University Press.
Phelan, J. & Link, B. (1999). The Labeling Theory of Mental Disorder (I): The Role of Social
Contingencies in the Application of Psychiatric Labels. In Horwitz, A. & Scheid, T. (Eds.), A
Handbook for the Study of Mental Health (pp. 139–149). Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University
Press.