Hello everyone! I changed the title on this video due to receiving multiple comments about how it makes it seem like I’m trying to claim this film as controversial, that it shouldn’t exist, or how it just seemed shallow in general. Which isn’t how I wanna come off at all.

I’ll be honest I did struggle a bit trying to figure out what to title the video that 1 explained what it would be about and 2 made it sound interesting.

Thank you all for the feedback! 🖤💫 I always wanna improve my videos and I hope this title sounds better!

It was a very bold move on Disney's part to show this. A homeless child is more likely to fall prey to perverts and abusers, and showing it, even in a veiled way, was worth it.

Remember kids, media isn't just about entertainment. It's a way for parents to discuss with their children the reality of the world in a controlled setting. If you know you know.

The "That's my boy" was definitely directed at Tramp, not Scamp. He's rubbing it in his face that he's essentially stolen Tramp's position as Scamp's father figure. MY boy, not yours anymore.

Angel is a small, cute dog, very girly and fluffy, which makes the story of her being abandoned 5 times very believable. She looks like a perfect teddybear, but is still a living being with her own thoughts and feelings. Many people will adopt a cute, small dog, expecting it to have no personality and not requiring training whatsoever. A small cute dog with behavioral issues could definitely get adopted and abandoned over and over again by people who only adopt with their eyes and don't actually understand what they're in for.

I always took it as a metaphor for gang violence and how messed up it can get when children are introduced to that type of environment. Girls being hypersexualized, boys being made to harrass people and their own families, all so they can "belong" to this other "family", who won't care if they get hurt or caught at the end of the day.

I think sometimes people mistake grooming for it being only sexual reasons. Grooming can happen for any reason the person grooming wants. As long as they are using the person and in a position of power over them it’s considered grooming. Oddly enough, it’s one of those terms I actually see used correctly more often then not.

I used to work at an animal shelter and it would not be uncommon for people to return or abandon a pet within a day or two of getting them for ridiculous reasons. A surprising amount of people don't know that animals ;especially young animals, have to be potty trained.They returned the animal within a few days complaining about how they don't know how to use a litter box or to not pee inside. So I 100% believe Angel is a young puppy around the same age as Scamp who just got unlucky when it came to people.

I’m so glad to hear you mention that Scamp was groomed and manipulated too! I feel like too many people think grooming is only sexual but it’s not. Buster groomed TWO kids in the movie (yes, Angel is a kid. The directors themselves call her a puppy in the making-of video. And anyone who works in animal rescues will tell you it’s not unrealistic for a dog to be abandoned five times in the span of a few months)

This was my favorite movie as a child, I related to Scamp heavily. Glad to see this video :)

This isn’t the dog grooming I wanted 🥺

I've always liked Buster as a villain simply because he's a down to earth villain. He doesn't wield magic, he isn't in political power, he doesn't have hordes of henchmen that would kill and die for him, he's just a stray dog trying to fend for himself. However, he is a fantastic portrayal of grounded and realistic grooming and manipulation, something we see in the real world every day, and I appreciate that Disney tackled this sort of topic the way they did. They never tried to justify how Buster acted, he was always portrayed as unreasonable and flat out wrong. Not someone to root for. It's a mature take on the topic and if people found his behavior towards Angel was weird or gross or uncomfortable, GOOD. That's the point of his character. I also appreciate how his grooming isn't inherently sexual as sexual grooming isn't the only type of grooming there is. Here it's more likely that his grooming of the other dogs is a source of fueling his wounded ego rather than him getting any sort of sexual pleasure out of it. It gives him a sense of power over others and that's good enough for him.

I also like how Disney portrayed the effect of Buster's grooming on everyone around him. The other junkyard dogs were always too afraid to stand up to him. Angel was frequently outspoken against being called "his girl", and yet put up with it out of fear of him kicking her out after he manipulated her into thinking she had no where else to go. Scamp constantly felt like he was stepping on eggshells trying to prove himself to Buster after constantly being spoken down to with condescension. Conversation always happened behind Buster's back. Do I think LATT2 is a great movie or anything like that? No, there's definitely better. But it is a solid movie with solid theming and a good villain.

honestly its a good way to show people how grooming can happen and how it isnt always how people view it

I knew I liked this movie, but I adore it now. This is such an important lesson for kids coming of age. Groomers will sweet talk you, tell you they’re your only option. Threaten you with losing a rare opportunity, when really you should walk away. We NEED the discomfort Buster brings so we recognize it in others.

As a kid, I didn't like this movie because every time Buster and Angel would interact, I'd be uneasy but I didn't really understand why. As an adult, now it makes sense.

I have another video suggestion, which is ironic about another dog movie from Disney, and that’s Bolt. To many people it’s just another dog movie, but if look under the surface, the movie tackles a lot of issues like the emotional manipulation of child and pet stars, separation anxiety, and grooming because of how Penny and Bolt were going through a lot of emotional and psychological manipulation because the crew members behind the show they were in only cared about the ratings and money that the show brought and was willing to do anything to keep their show successful.

I know dogs don’t really have a “teenager” phase, but it’s a cartoon. I think both Scamp and Angel represent teenagers. With Scamps rebelliousness, combined with the fact that a lot of teenage girls who live on the street have to grow up way too fast because of all the things that happen to them, I think they’re not puppies as in the few-month-old dogs that we think of in that sense. But they’re more like teenage kids

It is incredibly frustrating when people argue about the right for media about grooming to exist.

Just because it makes them personally uncomfortable, doesn’t mean it doesn’t have merit.

It is SO important to show content that is uncomfortable, especially to young audiences (though age appropriate), because they are the ones that benefit most from the lessons it teaches.

The target audience for this movie is exactly the kind of people this message NEEDS to get to. Being uncomfortable witnessing the way Buster treats the pups is GOOD, it is supposed to make you uncomfortable, it is supposed to teach kids that this kind of behavior and manipulation is bad.

Kids may not entirely understand all of it, much less the intentions of the abuser, BUT they will recognize from it that terms of affection and compliments don’t mean someone has good intentions, and to not be fooled by someone like Buster.


No, this movie should not have been changed. They should not have toned it down. They should not have removed or changed Buster’s role. His role is exactly the role he was intended to have, he is the foundation to the message being sent to the audience. Such an important lesson should not be censored in favor of making the movie more palatable.

When I was younger, it took me a few rewatches to realise that Angel was a puppy and Buster was an adult so, seeing him call her "my girl" which is often reserved for something romantic, it felt uncomfortable for Buster to keep her. Now, I have the words for what he was doing to her: grooming and manipulation.

It's surprising how Lady and the Tramp 2 is way ahead of its time with its cautionary tale about grooming. Buster is a villain that is supposed to make you feel uncomfortable, with the way he flirts with Angel and grooms her and Scamp for his own ego.

I get that people are uncomfortable about Angel and Buster's power dynamic, sense she's a puppy while he's an adult. I think many forget that Buster is not supposed to be Angel's secondary love interest. Their dynamic is one sided and Angel has no romantic feelings for Buster, except for Scamp.

This always felt like gangs and street violence and city kids getting wraps up with bad people... including creeps like buster calling you "baby" and being weird, but no one says anything. Ive heard stories in foster care a lot like this movie. Angel makes me think of a foster kid running away and living on the streets because whats the other choice? Going back to bad houses and being thrown around like you mean nothing? I know that feeling, and that's clearly what they were doing with her.