By now you have probably heard that Disney is set to introduce its first openly gay character in the new “Beauty and the Beast” movie set for release. The vehicle for the introduction is the dim witted, flamboyantly effeminate sidekick to the bad guy.
What we do know is that LeFou, the character, will have some sort of obvious gay moment. It goes without saying that such a moment does not exist in the original movie or broadway play.
Take the gay part out of this for a minute. Why must Disney add a bit of sexualization to a kids’ movie anyway? To the extent it is a romance, it is a love story of a girl and her father and of a girl’s growing love for a beast. The only other love story is Gaston’s (the bad guy) love of himself.
Dragging someone else’s sexual attraction into the story just for the advancement of gay rights is dumb and not really appropriate for or fitting within the story. Disney, along with much of Hollywood, has waged an ongoing indoctrination effort to make boys and girls both appear effeminate and unisexual as well as advancing same-sex relations as normal. So this is to be expected.
It just seems if it is relevant to the plot it would be appropriate, but otherwise it is just gratuitous agenda advancing through sexualization of a children’s movie. But again, given that it is the dim witted, flamboyantly effeminate sidekick of the bad guy they are going to do this with, I suspect a lot of kids will not connect it to anything resembling normal.
In fact, I would suspect a lot of families resistant to the advancement of the gay rights agenda who go see the movie will use LeFou’s depiction against him as a teachable moment, thereby doing more harm than good to Disney’s intentions.