You can purchase an autographed copy of Anything But Straight by sending a $35 check or money order to:
-------------------------
Wayne Besen
PO Box 25491
Brooklyn, NY 11202
Jim Burroway at BoxTurtleBulletin has found the cover art for a new homophobic Anglican book on gay people and the church. As Jim pointed out, does the picture not look peculiar?
18 Comments:
This reactionary trash is because the haters are losing ground, especially in the Episcopal church in North America and much of Europe. Someone should point out the blow-job art work on the book's cover to the authors, just to fuck with them. The painting is obviously a priest giving the white stuff to an altar boy, and I dont mean a communion wafer.
posted by Anonymous, at
2/16/2008 2:42 PM
Nothing strange about it from the perspective that a man is kneeling and being held by another. Unless you sexualize it - then yes, but I don't think (from other religious paintings) that this is out of the ordinary. I've seen women and men being prayed over in such a manner many times. (granted it is also the position for felacio) but that is sexualizing a rather benign posture. So I guess it matters where your thoughts and experiences are at.
posted by Anonymous, at
2/16/2008 3:18 PM
Girlfriend, we KNOW it's not supposed to be a blowjob, it just looks like one, especially given the title of the book.
posted by Anonymous, at
2/16/2008 3:44 PM
You hardly need me to "sexualize" the conservative church. They do quite a good job on their own.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
2/16/2008 6:13 PM
I agree with the first anonymous post, because the painting is of the "prodigal son" returning to his father, asking for forgiveness. that is why he is kneeling before him.
The problem HERE is that the pose can easily be interpreted sexually because the book is of a sexual nature, and a gay one at that.
posted by Emily K, at
2/16/2008 10:44 PM
Wayne - if you don't need to sexual the church - then why did you sexualize this work of art? Do you even know the title?
posted by Anonymous, at
2/16/2008 11:41 PM
We know that ALL religion is about sex and the repression thereof. Those who hide behind it usually are the worst offenders and biggest hypocrites and bigots of all. It will always be that way. They have a monopoly on the double-standard that's for sure. Why anyone in their right mind would want to bother with a belief system is beyond me, its insane and irrelevant to 21st century living, totally incompatible and out of touch with reality. Serves absolutely no purpose.
posted by Anonymous, at
2/17/2008 8:30 AM
I have studied sex. I have studied art in college. That, my friends, is a good old fashioned B.J. Grow up and just deal with it. Religious fantastics have more sex than anyone I know. The only difference is that they feel guilty after they have finish the job.
Stop humoring me hypocrites. We all know what goes on in conservative churches. Can we say Ted Haggard?
posted by Wayne Besen, at
2/17/2008 12:24 PM
Actually Wayne, it's not. I have studied art in college. At art school, actually. for nearly 5 years. And this much clearer pic http://www.rembrandtpainting.net/rmbrndt_1655-1669/1655-69_images/prodigal_son.jpg shows that he's clearly not blowing anything. The son's head is against his father's chest, perhaps to hear his heart. The father embraces the son. The problem is not the painting but the context. There is no title and nobody knows what's going on, plus the reproduction itself is just awful. No one can see the son's head clearly.
posted by Emily K, at
2/17/2008 2:47 PM
Nah - the face of the preacher man is one of pure pleasure...he's getting some action.
posted by Wayne Besen, at
2/17/2008 8:26 PM
While, yes, technically, the painting is Rembrandt's "The Prodigal Son" - the image itself is sexualized by the text on the cover, and no, the son's face is not on his father's chest, but belly.
The idea of linking 'the prodigal son' with homosexuality is deeply insulting, to begin with. Second, the pose is highly suggestive, particularly in a poor reproduction, and considering how many other portrayals of the Prodigal Son exist - without either figure being on his knees in front of the other - the choice here was an imflammatory one. As an artist, that particular pose comes extremely close to portraying fellatio. Rembrandt was exploiting biases and preconceived notions about male-on-male fellatio to communicate an abject submission of one man to another; to whom, according to the story, such submission is due.
The title 'Human sexuality and experience . . .' located next to such a pose further exposes, intentionally, the sexual implication.
The pose, and the story,convey what 'ex-gay' groups really seek - submission and dominance, surrender instead of equality.
In the parable, the younger son of a wealthy man comes of age and demands his inheritance while his father is still alive, and then leaves home to waste it in drunkenness and debauchery. Only when he is reduced to subsisting on the scraps of food left behind by pigs, does he examine his life and its consequences, deciding it is better to be a slave to his father, than eat pig slops.
The idea that GLBTQ people are selfish wastrels who have harmed their families, wasted their family's wealth, our relationships and lives and faith the equivalent of pigpens and slops, who should return as starving beggars, to make ourselves slaves to the Anglican church, is sick beyond belief.
This image is very clearly communicating very ugly ideas about our lives, with the desire that we submit on our knees to 'church' authority, enslave ourselves and service the Anglican church.
I'm an artist by the way, and my education in art continues every day, as it has for more than 40 years.
posted by Friend of Jonathan, at
2/18/2008 2:33 PM
since the prodigal son is about the sinner repenting and returning to G-d, that's probably more the point the church was trying to make: that gay ppl are children of G-d led astray by gayness and can repent and return to Him.
posted by Emily K, at
2/18/2008 2:51 PM
the parable of the prodigal son is meant for everyone. perhaps - it is about how the church has been?
posted by Anonymous, at
2/18/2008 8:06 PM
There are many religious paintings that have painfully obvious sexual undertones (obvious to everyone else besides the mesmerized followers, that is).
What about that sculpture by Bernini, the Ecstasy of St Theresa? Theresa is being pierced by an arrow and it's giving her joyous, ecstatic seizures, which many perfectly qualified art historians interpret as being a thinly veiled orgasm.
yeah in renaissance art history class we used to joke about St. Theresa's earth-shattering orgasm - FROM GOD.
posted by Emily K, at
2/18/2008 11:58 PM
"You hardly need me to "sexualize" the conservative church. They do quite a good job on their own." -Wayne
LOL!!! No shit!!! Those people are OBSESSED about sex and homosex. It would be one thing if they loved their spouse/partner and were obsessed about the sex life they had with THAT person. But no, they are concerned about what YOU are doing in YOUR bedroom. And it's on their minds 24/7.
The picture of this book just shows how perverted these people are. Why are these freaks so obsessed? Can they not even publish a book without flashing off their altar boy fantasies?
posted by S., at
2/19/2008 7:54 AM
