Thread:KatnissEverqueen/@comment-1672596-20131227082459/@comment-1672596-20131228023737

KatnissEverqueen wrote: Yes, I placed the ;) nearby as I was aware I was changing the line. We can't be quite sure why the townspeople (or at least two of them) seemed to favour Belle's beauty over that of the apparently more-attractive three blondes, and now that I think on it LeFou seemed rather shocked that Gaston would favour her over them (as he himself seemed more interested in the latter). Any edits I do on that section of the article will not be quite so overt and bold, I think.

I have a disturbing suspicion that you may be right about Belle. I'm not sure when you had your teachers, but back when I was a child in the '90s her aspirations seemed innocent and pure enough, and Christianity still seemed to be regarded as inseparable from true moral progress. It remains so, and thus the attempted separation of the two in this post-9/11 world has only brought misery to the lot of us. Returning to Belle, I recall that in Kingdom Hearts we found her reading in Maleficent's library; perhaps she is indeed vulnerable to corruption through the writings of the wrong people!

Well, Heather Lucas (World History up to the 1500s at GPC), Matt Dolloff (American Lit at GPC), and Thomas Anderson (Film, and while not necessarily a feminist, was certainly an overgrown 1960s anti-Vietnam War/anti-American radical and possible anti-Christian) were in 2011, Waylon Smith (who while not technically supporting feminism, did infer support for gay marriage and other things, and implied that Anthropology was a Marxist study, something I certainly would not have gone for had I known earlier) and Richard Palmer (Chaucer) were in 2012, Andrew Sullivan was during 2007 (Sophmore year, spring semester, taught World History, and boy did he really try to trash Catholicism, even implying that the St. Bartholomew's Day Massacre was a deliberate massacre rather than a plan that worked too well due to misinterpreting the bells), and I think this year there was my Education class (though to be fair to Suzanne Anastazi, she at least warned me beforehand regarding when some readings were going to be left-wing such as stuff supported by Howard Zinn), and probably to some extent my American Poetry class (as there were a few mentions of feminism and support for amoral behavior regarding some of the poets, alongside some brief allusions to us being the "American empire" by the teacher, Linda Taylor, though she was comparably tame fortunately) were all this year, and the Family course (which I only took because it was one of the few classes in my American Studies major that was available, as I need to graduate by Spring 2014) as well (though the teacher, Brad Stone, at least tried to balance things out). Spring Semester never really had any bad teachers, although I have to admit that Ms. Sandler's Historical Perspectives course was a bit suspect due to its textbooks (though to be fair to her, that was more the person in charge of that department's decision for the books, she just has to carry them out. Some of the books were Hobsbawm's materials and an account of the Algerian War for Independence that was forwarded by Sartre), and she seemed to be under the belief that the French Revolution was not comparable at all to Communism (which even if it wasn't actually Communism, you have to admit there were definitely several similarities to it). That's pretty much all I can think of. Lucas, Dolloff, and Palmer are the ones to be especially worried about, though, and they are 2011 and 2012, respectively. And its hard to tell even in the 1990s. At the risk of being rude, I don't exactly know when you were born, but I was born in 1990 (Valentines Day, as a matter of fact), and in Elementary School while growing up in Georgia (1995-2002), although not nearly as bad as during College, there were a few books that were somewhat anti-Christian in nature, such as the references to the Children's Crusade (though we never actually covered it) as well as the inference that the Spanish Christians persecuted the Native Americans as well as forced them to convert (now that one was actually covered in classes and our books). Middle School (2002-2005) also had a book about an eskimo, and it effectively had part of the passage where Christians basically threatened the eskimos with being damned to Hell if they quit singing.

Have to agree with LeFou, there, as at least technically, the Bimbettes were a far better fit in at least physical beauty for Gaston than Belle is. Funnily enough, claiming Belle's the only one as "beautiful as [Gaston]" is effectively an admission that he may not be the most handsome guy in town when putting it in that context. Personally, if I had to choose between Christians who most certainly won't try to backstab us for any reason, and what most likely was either a deist, an agnostic or an atheist who in real life her intelligence would make her moreorless arrogant and pushing for what she wants the world to be at the expense of all others, I'd go with one of the three Christian girls (based on the overall nature of the village, the Gaston reprise nonwithstanding, being implied to be Christian, I'm pretty sure the Bimbettes were of that religion as well), better chance at a good marriage overall for us both. Hey, I want women to exercise their rights and I certainly don't wish to objectify them, but that doesn't mean they should backstab or try to dominate over us. Personally, Ariel and Misty are a lot more deserving of my respect (and Ariel's implied to be a Christian convert at the end of her movie), but again, that's assuming Ariel and Misty aren't options.