why was the little mermaid cover banned
The original The Little Mermaid VHS cover was banned (more precisely, recalled and discontinued) because of a piece of artwork on King Triton’s castle that looked like a penis, which many parents and retailers found inappropriate for a children’s movie.
What Actually Happened
When Disney released The Little Mermaid on VHS around 1989–1990, the cover art showed Ariel, Eric, Ursula, and King Triton in front of Triton’s grand golden castle.
On closer inspection, one of the tall golden spires in the middle of the castle looked unmistakably phallic to a lot of viewers:
- The spire had rounded shapes and detailing that made it resemble male genitalia.
- Because the castle sits right in the center of the cover, the shape was hard to ignore once noticed.
- Parents, church groups, and local media began calling it out as inappropriate “hidden” adult content on a kids’ tape.
The backlash pushed Disney and some retailers to act:
- A supermarket chain briefly pulled the tape when they realized the art was official and not vandalism.
- Disney ultimately recalled the original sleeve and re‑released the VHS with new, cleaned‑up cover art that removed the suggestive shape.
Was It Done On Purpose?
This is where the urban legend really took off: people claimed a rogue or angry artist hid a penis in the castle on purpose as a prank or revenge.
Over time, a few key points emerged:
- Disney has never officially confirmed any “intentional” dirty joke in the cover art.
- The artist associated with the cover has said the resemblance was accidental and that they only noticed it after people pointed it out.
- Some articles still repeat the rumor that an annoyed artist snuck it in shortly before leaving the job, but that remains unproven story‑fuel rather than verified fact.
So there are two main narratives:
- Accidental design mistake
- Late‑night rushed illustration, complicated castle shapes, and an unintended suggestive outline.
- Intentional prank/“Easter egg”
- A disgruntled artist purposely slipping in adult imagery to “get back” at Disney.
Most credible reporting leans toward “unintended but embarrassing” rather than “confirmed act of sabotage,” especially given Disney’s family‑friendly brand and how quickly they replaced the artwork.
Why People Call It “Banned”
Technically, what happened is closer to a recall and redesign than a formal, legal “ban,” but in pop culture the word “banned” stuck.
- The original cover was discontinued after the controversy broke.
- New VHS releases used updated art without the phallic spire.
- Because the original run was pulled and replaced, collectors later began calling it the “banned Little Mermaid cover,” which made it sound even more notorious and boosted its status as a rare VHS variant.
Today, that first version has a reputation as a weird piece of 90s media history and can sell to collectors for significantly more than a normal Disney VHS tape, depending on condition and edition.
Other Related Controversies
The VHS cover wasn’t the only time The Little Mermaid got caught in “adult content” debates:
- In one wedding scene, the priest’s robe folds were interpreted by some viewers as an erection, leading to a lawsuit and later edits in certain releases.
- Over the years, this and other alleged “subliminal” moments in Disney movies (like jokes in Toy Story 2 and Frozen) helped fuel the broader narrative that animators sneak in adult Easter eggs.
Whether or not those claims are overblown, the VHS cover remains one of the most famous examples people cite when talking about “hidden” adult imagery in family entertainment.
TL;DR: The Little Mermaid VHS cover was pulled because one of the castle spires looked like a penis, sparking parental outrage and media attention. Disney replaced the art, the original sleeve went out of print, and that’s why people talk about the “banned Little Mermaid cover” today.
Information gathered from public forums or data available on the internet and portrayed here.