(01-21-2015 04:26 PM)BettyO Wrote:  I am using Chrome - and have never seen a pop up on any of these sites....

Genna; you could have malware on your PC. Malware behaves differently than a virus usually, but it is just as annoying. Sounds like malware to me. Some antivirus does not pick it up. MalwareBytes is a great free program to download and install. I use it all the time. It will take care of things that sometimes antivirus does not. I use Kaspersky antivirus in addition to MalwareBytes.

You may also want to go into your browser settings and go to "Advanced" and then go to "Privacy" and make sure that "No Popups Allowed" is checked. Still, there are no pop ups or advertisements here on the Forum. But it's safe to make sure that no pop ups are allowed on your machine.

Thank you so much for this info, Betty. It probably is the Malware problem. I will try your suggestions. I am so not very computer savvy.

---

(01-21-2015 07:05 PM)L Verge Wrote:  I use Chrome at home and Yahoo at work and have never had a pop-up on this forum. I don't know enough about computers to offer a suggestion, but it would seem to be a problem within your computer.

I am not real smart about computers either, Laurie but Betty O has some good suggestions that I will try.

This is not the first time this question occured to me, but this time within one book, in which the claim also serves to base an argument upon.

I often find women labeled as "beautiful" who don't seem more beautiful to me than others or v.v. of whom the opposite is said.

P. 138 reads: After all, she [Fanny] was a shy woman who was also not beautiful."
P.156 reads: "Lucy was the beautiful daughter of NH senator John P. Hale."

So my question is why was Fanny not (considered) beautiful but Lucy Hale was?

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but is it just to my eyes that none of the two ladies was inferior in this regard (in any case not Fanny IMO)? What was the ideal Lucy Hale matched but Fanny didn't?
    .    
What features make/ made the difference?

Thanks for any thoughts on this!

(02-10-2015 09:03 AM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  This is not the first time this question occured to me, but this time within one book, in which the claim also serves to base an argument upon.

I often find women labeled as "beautiful" who don't seem more beautiful to me than others or v.v. of whom the opposite is said.

P. 138 reads: After all, she [Fanny] was a shy woman who was also not beautiful."
P.156 reads: "Lucy was the beautiful daughter of NH senator John P. Hale."

So my question is why was Fanny not (considered) beautiful but Lucy Hale was?

Of course, beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but is it just to my eyes that none of the two ladies was inferior in this regard (in any case not Fanny IMO)? What was the ideal Lucy Hale matched but Fanny didn't?
.
What features make/ made the difference?

Thanks for any thoughts on this!

I believe that beauty does not necessarily refer to facial features or body form, but rather to inner beauty that shines through in personality. Miss Hale appeared to be a vivacious and lively personality in her day while Fanny was more shy and retiring???

It also depends on the period in which one lived as to what was considered a beautiful countenance.

In the Victorian era, there were "different" standards as to beauty; feminine and otherwise.

The standards proclaimed beauty was a well-groomed look (remember, NO makeup - period!) with a "well scrubbed face and every hair in place!"

Women were also supposed to be plump; thin was NOT in - there were corsets to remedy (somewhat!) that particular situation. A plump lady was looked upon as having enough to eat and being a somewhat, "lady of leisure"; i.e. she had enough to eat and having servants to attend her. A thin lady was viewed as usually having to work hard, fend for herself (no servants) and not having enough to eat in some circumstances. Plump was in.... as long as a lady was quiet, unassuming, meek and proper, she was considered a proper "lady" and therefore, "beautiful."

Laurie is more or less right. "Plump" Lucy was vivacious and outgoing and Fanny was somewhat shy and retiring - and very intelligent and bookish to boot. Victorian gentlemen seemed to value an outgoing personality rather than brains and a "shy and shrinking violet...."

Thank you, Laurie and Betty, for your replies.

Re: "I believe that beauty does not necessarily refer to facial features or body form , but rather to inner beauty that shines through in personality" - Laurie, that is 100% my personal opinion, too. Nevertheless the word IS often generally used for facial features or body form, and this is the way I understand the author's use of the term "beautiful" since she describes Fanny's character features (which seem most good and nobel to me) seperately. (And - is shyness not more beautiful than being someone who always desires becoming the story of the day?)

Re: "Women were also supposed to be plump; thin was NOT in - there were corsets to remedy (somewhat!) that particular situation" - yes, that's often said, but then on the other hand, even Abraham Lincoln found Mary Owens too plump in the end, Mary was often criticized for being plump, the Scarletts of those days laced tight - thighter - the tightest to look like Empress Eugenie, and, as Laurie recently mentioned, had even bottom ribs removed in order to achieve the tiniest waists. How does this go together?

Kate Chase was considered beautiful, and she was certainly not plump. And, just from her images and leaving her "inner features" aside, I do understand she has that je ne sais quoi - that certain something (that, just from the existing pictures, I personally can't see at first sight in Lucy Hale to rank her that highly above other ladies).
       
I just don't understand the "hype" about Lucy Hale's beauty (not only in this book) and compared to her appearance don't understand the harsh judgement on Fanny and some other women (and the latter upsets me a bit).

(02-10-2015 07:07 PM)Eva Elisabeth Wrote:  Thank you, Laurie and Betty, for your replies.

Re: "I believe that beauty does not necessarily refer to facial features or body form , but rather to inner beauty that shines through in personality" - Laurie, that is 100% my personal opinion, too. Nevertheless the word IS often generally used for facial features or body form, and this is the way I understand the author's use of the term "beautiful" since she describes Fanny's character features (which seem most good and nobel to me) seperately. (And - is shyness not more beautiful than being someone who always desires becoming the story of the day?)

Re: "Women were also supposed to be plump; thin was NOT in - there were corsets to remedy (somewhat!) that particular situation" - yes, that's often said, but then on the other hand, even Abraham Lincoln found Mary Owens too plump in the end, Mary was often criticized for being plump, the Scarletts of those days laced tight - thighter - the tightest to look like Empress Eugenie, and, as Laurie recently mentioned, had even bottom ribs removed in order to achieve the tiniest waists. How does this go together?

Kate Chase was considered beautiful, and she was certainly not plump. And, just from her images and leaving her "inner features" aside, I do understand she has that je ne sais quoi - that certain something (that, just from the existing pictures, I personally can't see at first sight in Lucy Hale to rank her that highly above other ladies).

I just don't understand the "hype" about Lucy Hale's beauty (not only in this book) and compared to her appearance don't understand the harsh judgement on Fanny and some other women (and the latter upsets me a bit).

Did contemporaries actually describe Lucy as beautiful? Her photograph doesn't convey that to me, but perhaps she was prettier in person.