Oh yes, I totally agree with both those things. The thing with Disney Princesses, for instance, is that they're going back to the 1940s so you're totally seeing the changing of society and the way women are presented in movies in general. But I think there's also the issue that they're mostly based on real fairy tales which almost always end in marriage, even the ones with male protagonists. So sometimes giving the heroine other interests would just bring nothing to the plot. Like Tangled, the Rapunzel story, could be seen as a step back since the heroine isn't Mulan or Tiana, but it's probably more about the plot structure of Rapunzel staying somewhat intact. The princess herself is still more proactive and it's still a story of her gaining her independence and control over her life etc.

But still, yes, there's a whole conversation about how they're perceived so I don't think it's a bad thing to keep doing that. And you can't always just be happy with progress. Like, just because Tolkien barely had any female characters doesn't mean I have to love Bella Swan etc. But I think sometimes people can almost just getting into the habit of using that kind of language that makes things more restrictive of women instead of more. Since ultimately we want women to be able to be flawed and weak because male characters can also be flawed and weak. We just don't want 'flawed and weak' to be a comment about their being women.