There are few real cases of actual "nasty" (what is nasty about a naked body?) imagery or words in Disney movies. Many of the rumors are clearly false, some are ambiguous and very few are true.

One true case of nudity in a Disney movie is "The Rescuers", where a scene with a topless dancer was hidden in the background. However, the examples you cite are mostly false. Much background information can be found at the Urban Legends Reference Page: Disney: <>. The page also shows screenshots and has audio-examples. With regard to the "penis-tower", it says:

Claim: One of the castle spires on the cover of Disney's The Little Mermaid home video was deliberately drawn as a phallus by a disgruntled artist.

Status: False.

Synopsis: One of the castle spires in the background of the The Little Mermaid promotional artwork bears an unmistakable resemblance to a penis, so much so that many people are unwilling to dismiss the drawing as mere accident or coincidence. Rumors started circulating shortly after the release of the videocassette edition of The Little Mermaid that the phallic object had been deliberately drawn as a last act of defiance by a disgruntled Disney artist who was miffed at being notified that he would be laid off at the conclusion of the project. The plain truth is that the resemblance between the castle spire and a penis was purely accidental, and it was drawn by an artist who was neither disgruntled nor about to be dismissed.

First of all, the artist who created the video cover art did not work for Disney itself, thus he was neither "disgruntled with Disney" nor "about to be fired." We questioned the artist, who also drew artwork for Little Mermaid theatrical advertising, pop-ups, greeting cards, Happy Meal boxs, and CDs. The theatrical posters were done before the original release of the film, but the video cover art was not created until a few months before the home video version hit the market. Rushed to complete the video artwork (featuring towers that were rather phallic to begin with), the artist hurried through the background detail (at "about four in the morning") and inadvertently drew one spire that bore a rather close resemblance to a penis. The artist himself didn't notice the resemblance until a member of his youth church group heard about the controversy on talk radio and called him at his studio with the news. The later laserdisc release of the film was issued with a cover containing an altered version of the infamous spire.

It is remarkable that many of these rumors originate from conservative action groups and parents. It seems that the perception for nudity increases as the exposure to it decreases, up to the point where sexuality is seen in buildings, swarms of dust, background noise, unidentified shapes under clothes ..

Who's the pervert here?