With the new live-action Aladdin movie coming out, there have been lots of complaints about the adjustments to Jasmine's character. Rather than a naive princess who is ignorant of life beyond the palace walls, this version of Jasmine will be more of a social justice warrior, crusading for the rights of her people. Disney has most likely revised Jasmine's character as a way to best appeal to today's audience. But is this really the best move?
This is reminiscent of the live action Beauty and the Beast movie, in which the Belle, rather than being an outcast solely for being a reader, don't fit into her town because she teaches women how to read, has moved to her small town from Paris, and is an inventor herself (rather than her father in the animated one). One of the main criticisms of this was that the writers rewrote Belle to better fit the real-life experiences of actress Emma Watson, who is an outspoken feminist and grew up in Paris. Critics claim that Emma should try to make herself more like Belle when playing her and not the other way around. Making Belle the inventor instead of Maurice was supposed to make her more modern and accessible to today's audience when really there was nothing wrong with just keeping her a reader.
Right now Disney is too concerned with having their female leads be "relatable" and "role models" to the girls watching to realize that there's nothing wrong with the original characters. Jasmine's longing to escape her royal life and actually taking steps to get that freedom for herself is empowering, not to mention her ability to handle herself. Belle's unabashed interest in reading despite what everyone in her town thought is a great example of girl's- an extra talent to make her more "modern" isn't needed. The princesses were feminist heroes the way they were initially- there's no need to change them to match today's environment.
