≡ Menu

Ann Barnhardt: This question of homosexuals in art [BUMPED AND UPDATED with commentary from Ann Barnhardt]

In the comments to A 63-year-old rap song. Noel Coward asks “What’s going to happen to the children when there aren’t any more grown-ups?” a discussion over the relative merits and/or demerits of homosexuality in art emerged. While a number of commenters were on point on either side of this issue, the central discussion concerned DeWitt and Barnhardt. Both are encouraged to reply in the comments here, but all are welcome as always.

UPDATE: Barnhardt begins at her page with Art Created By Homosexuals: A Tandem Post and Discussion at American Digest Blog | Barnhardt

“I am pleased to point one and all to a €œtandem post€ between Barnhardt.biz and Gerard VanderLeun’€™s blog, AmericanDigest.org .  This post and conversation came about a couple of days ago in a comment thread under a post GvL made of a Noel Coward song.  I actually linked to another Noel Coward song, “€œLet’€™s Don’t Be Beastly to the Germans”€ in the show notes of Barnhardt Podcast #051, and then GvL posted “What’€™s Going to happen to the children when there aren’€™t any more grown-ups?”€  –€“ certainly an incredibly prescient question and diddy from some 60 years ago.

“I leave comments on blogs hardly ever, but I did leave a quick comment making the point that it is quite a commentary on today’€™s culture when a flamboyant sodomite ==€“ as Noel Coward was ==€“ displays the kind of virile moral leadership in calling out the descent of western culture that we can only FANTASIZE about today.  Put another way, things said by queeny, British fags of 60 years ago are now so far to the “right” socially that they would be characterized by the howling moonbat SJW€™s as “fascist”€ or “€œNazi”€ or whatever the non-sensical pejorative du jour is.”

The key question is this: Is it morally licit to consume art (music, painting, dance) that we know, after the fact, was made by sodomites? My thesis is this:

Consuming art created by sodomites is permissible so long as the art in question does not have a “sodomite aesthetic”, and does not point to nor glorify sexual perversion.

FROM THE COMMENTS:

ANNE BARNHARDT June 21, 2018, 1:32 PM

(Cross-posted at Barnhardt.biz with video citations)

The first point that needs to be addressed is the notion that almost no art today is produced without the involvement of sodomites or other sex perverts, whether it be in production, set building, backing or orchestral musicians, etc.  My answer goes directly back to my original thesis:  the issue is whether or not the art itself projects an aesthetic of sexual perversion, or points to or is perverse and obscene.  Can I promise you that every contractor or laborer that worked on the building or remodeling of the house I live in was sexually normal and pure?  Of course not.  If the man who installed the bathroom tile were a sex pervert, how could I know that, and even if I somehow did, does that mean I should move out of my house?  Well, not unless he arranged the bathroom tiles in the shape of a phallus.  In exactly the same way, we can’t know who every orchestral musician or set builder was, but what we can know is whether or not the ART ITSELF points to or glorifies sodomy.

And, as an aside, this is why you get your house blessed by a priest early and often – at least once per year at either Epiphany or Easter.  Not only is the sacramental a conduit of grace, but it also gives one peace of mind.  And, may I just ask, have you ever slept in a hotel?  At this point, every hotel room in the western world is pretty much guaranteed to be a crime scene – because remember, sodomy is a crime.

This reminds me of the heresy of Donatism, which is a MASSIVE problem in The Church today.  Many very pious people are tempted to believe that the interior state of the soul of the priest determines whether or not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is offered.  Hence, many people fall into the heretical trap that all Masses and sacraments performed by sodomite priests (or heterosexual fornicator priests, etc.) are invalid, and that any priest in the state of mortal sin is incapable of confecting the Eucharist.  This is, of course, TOTALLY WRONG.  Considering that it is, by definition, impossible for any of us to know the state of the soul of anyone else, much less a priest, how IN THE WORLD could Jesus Christ hold us responsible for that, and how could Jesus Christ establish His Church and His Sacraments such that they would be not just illicit, but INVALID a non-trivial percentage of the time with it literally impossible for the faithful to know either way?  This argument maps closely to what we are talking about with art.  How could people be held responsible for what Tchaikovsky did, or whatever sodomite Renaissance painter?  Can one determine from the 1812 Overture that Tchaikovsky was a sodomite?  Of course not.  Nor can one determine from da Vinci’s Annunciation what da Vinci’s sins were.

I’d also like to revisit a point I made not too long ago, namely that up until just a few short decades ago, many people literally did not know about sodomy, homosexuality, transvestitism, pedophilia, bestiality – none of it.  At all.  Lots and lots of people in the Christian world went through life never knowing that there were people who engaged in same-sex sins.  I cited a clip from the 1980s sitcom “The Golden Girls”, in which the promiscuous, Jezebel character Blanche, confuses “Lesbian” for “Lebanese” and has to have it explained to her.  It got a huge laugh not because it was implausible, but because it WAS plausible.  THIS is why the flamboyantly gay pianist Liberace was as popular as he was, and with the demographic that he was popular with – old women.  When Liberace came mincing out out on stage in a pink sequined tuxedo, it literally NEVER OCCURRED to most of the elderly women in the audience that Liberace was a sodomite because a non-trivial percentage of them were totally unaware that sodomy existed on earth – and I’m not exaggerating.  And THIS ties back to the piece I just wrote on how Diabolical Narcissists (when all sex perverts, by definition, are to one degree or another) derive their greatest satisfaction from watching people watch them as they act out.  Liberace got his biggest rush from the fact that a bunch of old women who went to the United Methodist church every Sunday and probably taught Sunday school were his biggest fans, and that he was rubbing his sexual perversion in their faces, and they were too “stupid” and “unsophisticated” to even realize it.  Should they have at least been off-put by Liberace’s aesthetic, especially when he stopped wearing normal black tuxedos in the 1960s and started wearing the ridiculous outfits that he did?  It is hard to say.  Given how jaded and steeped in perversity we all are, it is pretty much impossible to revert back to a mindset innocent of all of the filth we now know.  This is a perfect example of how only Christ can judge the soul of man.

The next point is the notion that ONLY sodomites are good at certain types of art.  Again, this is false, and the best example of this is ballet and dance in general.  First, ballet.  It is taken as axiomatic that all male ballet dancers are sodomites just by virtue of the fact that ballet is intrinsically graceful.  But this notion is false – a product of the fact that sodomites infected, were tolerated and then pretty much took over ballet.  But isn’t it interesting that the two best male ballet dancers of the 20th century were totally heterosexual – Mikhail Baryshnikov and Fernando Bujones.  Both were incredibly good dancers, graceful yet powerful and almost preternaturally athletic, and also compelling in their roles as male leads, interacting romantically with the ballerina, as almost every ballet entails.  Isn’t is telling that in a field as saturated with sodomites as the ranks of male ballet dancers is, that it was the heterosexuals that were head and shoulders above the rest.

Two other great male dancers of the 20th century also bear mentioning: Fred Astaire and Gene Kelley – both straight.  Astaire projected masculine elegance, and was at his best serving as a mobile stage decoration for Ginger Rogers, while Kelley was the all-American athlete-dancer.  Donald O’Connor gets an honorable mention here, too.

In my next entry on this topic, I will specifically deal with Michelangelo, who seems to always be cited in conversations about this subject.

RTWT @ Art Created By Homosexuals: A Tandem Post and Discussion at American Digest Blog | Barnhardt

A NOTE ON COMMENTS– DON’T PANIC. IT HAS NOT BEEN LOST: When discussing topics in the sexual realm the spam filter here can become quite persnickety. It MAY/MAYNOT place your comment in moderation and not immediately display it. When that happens I need to approve it manually. I check for these moderated comments several times a day and approve them and move them into the stream. I regret this happens but the spam filter is an imperfect robot.


Ann Barnhardt: Noel Coward was, of course, a sodomite. When the British fags of 60 years ago are a completely unrealistic fantasy of the kind of virile moral leadership we would like to see in today’s world… well, stay confessed, and as St. Peter said, “Be sober and watch…”

Rob De Witt: It is absolutely undeniable that if you demand a life absolutely free of homosexuals, you will condemn yourself and your loved ones to a life without art. For some of us, the necessity of including art in our daily lives has meant a lifetime of struggle against the narrow-minded philistines who raised us.

I sing classical music professionally in San Francisco. Do you have any idea of what that means, or will you willfully deny the evidence of your senses? I’ve known homosexuals of every stripe for 40 years; some of them have been honorable (if horribly misguided in my view) men and women who struggled to live an ethical life having been dealt a very painful and difficult hand. Some have been bitchy assholes who lived to share their misery with others. They’ve all recognized that I like girls, and some of them just couldn’t stand it.

Because I didn’t have a good place to start, I’ve had to decide for myself what matters, and what matters is getting as close as my talents will allow to the real thing, the highest level of music. I came here with a backpack and I’ve made it all up myself. I find myself at this age able to separate the art from the artist, but it’s been a long ride.

None of this is new; Mozart and Bach had to deal with homosexuals too, you know. Guys and girls who loudly insist that they’re “normal” are always the ones you learn not to trust because their fear of themselves makes them dangerous.

Ann Barnhardt: This question of homosexuals in art is a very good and worthwhile discussion. Might I recommend to GvL a separate post? It certainly isn’t limited to the 20th century – Tchaikovsky, Michelangelo (probably, but repented), really half of Renaissance Florence. I would submit that the moral licitness of consuming art created by sodomites (male and female) is contingent on the work itself – specifically, does the work put forward a “homosexual” esthetic or glorify sexual perversion in any way? The trouble with Noel Coward was that he was flamboyantly camp, and inspired “West End chorus boys” to act out in public. Does Dusty Springfield singing “Son of a Preacher Man” present or glorify a “lesbian esthetic”? I would say no, but it is worth discussion.

Rob De Witt: First of all…..

Ann, I’m flattered to begin a possible colloquy with you; I have long admired your work and your insistence on the truth. I too have become a Catholic – at age 66 – and your writing was a powerful influence. I completely agree that Noel Coward and his ilk are/were the perfect example of the English glorification of flamboyant homosexuality. It’s mostly just superficial and distasteful to me, and keep in mind this is the opinion of someone who has undoubtedly known more homosexuals than anybody you’ve met.

Beyond that, to all of you: I have been rescued from a life of pain and abuse by the music of J.S. Bach, a composer who dedicated his life and work to worship. When Johann Bach was satisfied with a piece of music, he wrote the letters SDG at the bottom of the page – Soli Deo Gloria – For the Glory of God Alone. Frankly, to compare this work and this world to the likes of Noel Coward and Kevin Spacey in any way is to resoundingly miss the point. It pleases me see that Paul Bois, in the piece linked by Bunny, sees this distinction clear, and has the humility to cite both St. John Paul II and the medieval artists who literally created the world we hope to save.

In my adult life, wherein I have become apparently the only self-taught musician in a world of family-supported, conservatory-trained artists, I have known a great many dedicated Bach proponents who were homosexual. What I know about singing Bach is that it only takes everything you’ve got, and no serious practitioner is superficial in any way I’ve been able to identify. Art on this level has saved my life, which was founded upon a childhood that more than one psychologist has told me was destined for self-destruction – “You have the background of a serial killer” was the final characterization. I thank God hourly for the ability and opportunity to hear the truth and to recognize the fraudulence of modern “culture,” which most certainly includes any and all television and any and all “music” since the dawn of rock-n-roll, which is transparently the glorification of the worst of Negro culture.

If Orwell’s notion that “all art is propaganda” is correct, then it’s necessary to recognize that the purpose of the “propaganda” of the Renaissance and the Baroque was to advertise and glorify the existence of God and the truth. Catholics recognize that some human beings are born with problems to address, among which is homosexuality. The issue is how that problem is expressed and hopefully solved. It’s a knotty problem, and one I’m grateful I don’t have to deal with.


Alert the Authorities!

Comments on this entry are closed.

  • Sam L. June 18, 2018, 10:10 AM

    Rob seems to be claiming there would be no “art” if there had never been homosexuals, which seems highly unlikely to me.

  • John Venlet June 18, 2018, 10:19 AM

    It is absolutely undeniable that if you demand a life absolutely free of homosexuals, you will condemn yourself and your loved ones to a life without art.

    Rob, I think your statement, above, is patently untrue. While there are definitely artistic individuals who are homosexual, I do not think we would be condemned to a life without art if the world was free of homosexuals.

    I base my statement on the percentages of individuals who identify as being homosexual or lesbian.
    See here.

    Now, one could argue, I suppose, dubiously, that individuals who identify as homosexual or lesbian may be more artistically inclined, but to claim that the world would be without art because there were no homosexuals or lesbians is far fetched.

  • PA Cat June 18, 2018, 11:59 AM

    Transgender activism complicates the matter (of gay people in art) still further. GvL leaves comments over at Neo-Neocon’s blog fairly often, so he probably knows that she had a post recently on a male “gender fluid” ballerina named Chase Johnsey, with clips not only of Johnsey’s dancing but also of the British music hall tradition of men dancing as women for comic effect. http://www.neoneocon.com/2018/06/09/chase-johnsey-the-male-ballerina/

    Of course many well-known men in classical ballet were/are gay, but I can’t help wondering what Noel Coward would have made of the current transgender fad. I expect he took the “gender binary” for granted, which we all did until we were informed by our “betters” that that’s just another form of bigotry.

  • rabbit tobacco June 18, 2018, 12:50 PM

    ‘Art is the need to create.’ ralph waldo emerson

  • Anonymous June 18, 2018, 1:14 PM

    Considering that Andres Serrano, the creator of the infamous “Piss Christ”, was purportedly raised a strict Roman Catholic and describes himself as a Christian, I suppose it’s futile to infer too much from an artist’s bio.
    For weary laughs, from his Wikipedia entry:
    “Critical reception of Serrano’s work has been mixed. In a 1989 New York Times review, critic Michael Brenson responded to Serrano’s series of Cibachrome photographs of iconic objects submerged in bodily fluids: ‘You cannot consider the content of Mr. Serrano’s work without considering his attitude toward photography. It is the photograph that breaks through convention, that makes the search possible and that enables the artist to sort out what he likes and does not like in religion and art. It is the photograph that becomes the vessel of transformation and revelation. The photograph then becomes an icon that, for Mr. Serrano, replaces the false icons in his work. The photograph is clean and purified, the reliquary or shrine in which he clearly believes that the word about the body can be stored and spread. ‘[11]”
    Who knew?
    “Reviewing later work in 2001, Guardian art critic Adrian Searle was not impressed: he found that Serrano’s photos were ‘far more about being lurid than anything else… In the end, the show is all surface, and looking for hidden depths does no good.'[7] Continuing his use of biological matter, more recent work of Serrano’s uses feces as a medium.[12]”
    So I guess we’re stuck with evaluating a work on its own merits and the old “I don’t know much about art, but I know what I like.” There’s no accounting for taste.

  • Ed Wallis June 18, 2018, 2:16 PM

    Who is this arrogant, horseblinded twit “DeWitt”?!

    “…if you demand a life absolutely free of homosexuals, you will condemn yourself and your loved ones to a life without art.”
    Yeah, maybe San Fagcisco would be pretty emptied out.
    (which, in and of itself ain’t a bad thing), but:

    That some homosexuals may appreciate great art – or even create it – is *no* justification for the damage the Rectal Clan has caused to far too many forms of Art (in the last century alone).

    …other than his Left Coast Sh!thole, the rest of us would go on in life rich in the wealth of Art in all forms, just with less of the gaystapo proselytizing and degeneracy.
    In short: a vast improvement.

  • james wilson June 18, 2018, 5:19 PM

    Goethe, no slouch, observed that “the nature of woman is closely allied to art”. But alas, not genius. Genius is reserved for a bare sprinkling of men.
    Teh gay have been shown to demonstrate characteristics of the brain which are in common only with females. Ergo connect the nature of woman with genius.

  • John A. Fleming June 18, 2018, 9:42 PM

    Finding the truth of the claim about the plentitude of art dependent on homosexuality is almost impossible in this age.
    1. I grew up middle class. I knew nothing about teh gay, just nothing, until the AIDS epidemic broke onto the scene. I was in my mid twenties, college-educated in STEM, and completely unaware. I read nothing, my circle didn’t talk about it, didn’t know about it, I had a plethora of roommates, all men, some of whom maybe were, and I suspected nothing. It was an unknown unknown.
    2. The old joke is that each generation thinks it invented sex, and gained new knowledge unavailable to the previous generation. And yet, I gotta wonder, if I and all the people I knew had been so completely clueless, couldn’t all the previous generations have been also?
    3. And no fair coming of age in the 60’s and hanging with the hippies in hippietown. The entire rest of America was not like that. All the weirds went to hippietown and left us be.
    4. There is a cultural trend to try and claim that anybody important, any historical or cultural figure, was teh gay (e.g. Lincoln, Cary Grant). Either to strengthen the claim to validity (“See, we’re important! Value us!”), or alternately to impeach the person by dint of hypocrisy. People back then wrote differently, acted differently, and using today’s heuristics to read between the lines is an exercise in cultural conquest.
    4.5 There’s an amusing and successful western cowboy movie from the days of the silents. I’ve forgotten the name. The hero displays all the effeminate mannerisms. He retired from the movies and with his partners became florists or interior decorators or some such. Apparently Roaring Twenties Mr. and Mrs. America hadn’t a clue, and found him to be a perfectly acceptable white-hat cowboy.
    5. And yet the studies still say 3%. That ends up being an awfully small number of people to create all art.
    6. Don’t treat people like an enemy. They will start to believe it and act accordingly.
    7. Our modern culture is completely bereft of truth. It’s all propaganda all the time. Best to just get on with my life as I see fit, and ignore everything not relevant.

  • 카니발카지노 June 19, 2018, 2:47 AM

    If you do, you will end up surprised how much raise your
    gambling success will become. If you’re searching for virtually
    any special activity or have considered trying a fresh
    casino game proposed by a particular gambling casino just begin using this very helpful tips guide and have more enjoyable gaming online.
    This is being achieved by providing exciting and
    thrilling games in a fashion that hasn’t been done before. https://000kbs.com

  • Joyful June 19, 2018, 4:24 AM

    The thing is the acts of sex (i know ann, sexual intercourse can only take place between a man and woman, but let that a.o.s. stand for that which leads to orgasm) are a huge distraction. From the efforts to find a willing partner to the efforts to sustain continued relations for future satisfaction it is very time consuming and emotionally exhausting.

    I wonder how the quality of art would be effected if the artists refrained from any orgasm-oriented relations and redirected the effort towards their art. Would the reining in of physical desire manifest itself in the final product?

    Would the sacrifice help the artist communicate more fully with the intended audience?

  • Jaynie June 19, 2018, 4:53 AM

    DeWitt, what a blessing that your background didn’t play out so.
    I don’t know terribly much about the arts.
    You have explained to me so that I now understand the my preference for arts are those works created in praise of God or celebrations of his creation.
    For that, thank you.

  • Jaynie June 19, 2018, 4:58 AM

    JamesWilson, that Goethe quote is so great!
    Yep, genius is reserved for a bare sprinkling of men, and amazing when it occurs.

  • M Henrie June 19, 2018, 5:56 AM

    “the nature of woman is closely allied to art”
    Yes , created by the utmost genius of the Creator Himself and envied by the male homosexual to no avail.

  • Kevin Dickson June 19, 2018, 6:15 AM

    It is absolutely undeniable that if you demand a life absolutely free of homosexuals, you will condemn yourself and your loved ones to a life without art.

    The word “IF” is probably one the most useless words in the English language. There are homosexuals…….there have always been homosexuals……there will always be homosexuals. What ever the moral outcome of this discussion…….fantasizing about a world without homosexuals is a fruitless enterprise. Likewise art is a inextricable function of humanity that exists regardless of where individuals choose to park their genitals at night. This is like looking a sidewalk slug and asking……should this oddity exist?

  • rolldog June 19, 2018, 7:10 AM

    Nice quote rabbit tobacco.

    When discussing “art”, it seems the conversation automatically moves to Bach, Mozart, Michelangelo, etc. While I appreciate the masters, I find much more satisfaction and enjoyment in more modern artists, especially from the Impressionism, Realism and Abstract art movements. Not to mention other artists such as Van Halen and Rush. I think the world would do just fine without gay artists. It’s great they are around (in most cases) but we would not be devoid of art by any stretch of the imagination.

  • Vanderleun June 19, 2018, 7:50 AM

    An excellent and fascinating series of observations.

    I would only point out…. only toss a small CAUTION flag onto the pitch …

    “The ‘general’ is not the ‘universal’.”

  • ghostsniper June 19, 2018, 7:58 AM

    “Van Halen and Rush”
    ===============

    Oh dear.
    My life would have been smaller if not for these 2 giants (7 NORMAL doods) over the last 40 years.

  • pbird June 19, 2018, 8:18 AM

    They used to say art is anything you can get away with.
    At the time, I thought they were kidding.

  • Earl Tomblin June 19, 2018, 8:26 AM

    Vanderleun, you and your posse continue to have unhealthy obsessions with gays and black people in a very negative and neurotic fashion. I hear a lot of fear and disgust at even having to confront the fact that such people exist. Why is that? What is lacking in your human and spiritual understanding that causes quivering disgust at others who make up a part of our world? Do you grasp how odd and shameful that is?

  • Vanderleun June 19, 2018, 8:36 AM

    Do you grasp how much misunderstanding, rock-bottom knee-jerkism, and deep and abiding projection you embody in that comment? I think not. But others see and do grasp it. You might be ashamed at the closing of your mind, but it seems to me your mind has left shame behind it long, long ago. Best of luck should you ever encounter the judgment of the real world, but until then enjoy your warm little tent, lamp, and pipe.

  • John Venlet June 19, 2018, 8:44 AM

    Vanderleun, you and your posse continue to have unhealthy obsessions with gays and black people in a very negative and neurotic fashion.

    Earl, I think your statement here is disingenuous. As Mr. Fleming noted in his comment in this thread, many individuals knew basically nothing about the gay scene until Aids reared its head in homosexual groups. I would add, that as gay pride events became the salacious news items of the day, with in your face displays previously unseen and unimagined by many, individuals were basically forced to contemplate on the question of homosexuality. It’s not an obsession straight folks have regarding homosexuals, rather, it’s a forced notice me because I’m homosexual that must be contended with, and most individuals do not appreciate being forced to notice.

  • Rob De Witt June 19, 2018, 9:48 AM

    I can see that one statement/claim of mine is causing the most discomfort, even to the extent of inspiring a blog post by the estimable Miss Barnhardt, to wit “If you demand a life absolutely free of homosexuals, you will condemn yourself and your loved ones to a life without art.” I spoke, of course, to a world and a life of which I have extensive experience, intending to express what Thomas Aquinas referred to as “the basis of Catholic philosophy – Observed Truth.”

    To all who loudly proclaim that they have plenty of “art” without the influence of homosexuals, I would offer this question: Do you own a television set?

    Are you so naive as to believe that the macho poseurs in your favorite manly entertainment are the sole producers of what you see? You do, I’m certain, realize that there are several people behind the cameras. Who designs the sets? Who are the makeup artists, and the costumers, and the hairdressers? (and God forbid there be a rock band without hairdressers.)

    Are all the orchestra players and background singers and set dressers and union carpenters and all the other dozens of artisans who choose to live in the world of professional entertainment sufficiently binary to satisfy your stringent standards of heterosexuality?

    Really?

  • ghostsniper June 19, 2018, 11:03 AM

    ET, blow it out your ass.

  • Andrew June 19, 2018, 11:45 AM

    Just need to say that ugliness, dirt, mud, and destruction is part of my day.
    Then the other part is building beauty.
    Um an Engineer who is tired of the ugliness.
    God gave you life to breathe beauty into His world.
    All this sodomite sh!t does is suck the beauty out of His world
    Rain on a tin roof garage after you’ve just welded up a friends trailer with a beer in your hand
    That’s beautiful
    Beauty not Destruction
    Until it’s time for it…

  • John Venlet June 19, 2018, 11:57 AM

    Are all the orchestra players and background singers and set dressers and union carpenters and all the other dozens of artisans who choose to live in the world of professional entertainment sufficiently binary to satisfy your stringent standards of heterosexuality?

    Rob, I am unable to understand how disagreeing with your statement that no homosexuals means no art equates to “stringent standards of heterosexuality.” You’re not making sense.

  • Doug June 19, 2018, 1:11 PM

    ghostsniper: the only thing he blows, goes IN his ass, not out of it.

  • Rob De Witt June 19, 2018, 1:48 PM

    John,

    Seems clear to me, though I admit my language is prolix. Probably not directed at you, at any rate.
    There are those, several in this thread, who seem convinced that their choice of music or “artists” insulates them from homosexuals – and therefore from their own insecurities, I’d say.

    To simplify:

    I can more or less guarantee you that no one has ever watched a television show, rock concert or movie that wasn’t in part the product of a homosexual artist or artisan. Facts is facts.

  • ghostsniper June 19, 2018, 2:03 PM

    “If you….”
    =======

    There’s that magic “if” word again.
    If your aunt had balls she’d be your uncle.

    No one is playing into your retarded little IF game Rob so you should knock it off.
    Ann made it quite clear, as everybody else did, as long as the poofter keeps his perverted proclivities to himself we just don’t care.

    Your TV comment was even more retarded, for the same reason.
    Fuck him in the ass in your bedroom if you must but if you try to do it in my front yard you’ll meet my 12 ga. Capiche?

  • rolldog June 19, 2018, 3:04 PM

    Rob – I agree, art would be affected by having no homosexuals. It would be affected by having no white men or women or black men or women, etc. As noted by several other commentators – most of us just don’t care. Just like I don’t care if the artist is -R or -D, Catholic or Jewish or whatever distinction you want to make. I enjoy the art for what it is and what feelings it evokes in me. If that artist brings those distinctions into the art and makes them central to their art, then I may choose to ignore them. For instance, I don’t really appreciate some of the darker forms of metal music.

    Do you think that if there were no gays, there would be a lack of those behind the curtain? I doubt it. Humans would do what they always do, adapt. And as an aside, what, do the gays have a corner on the market in makeup and costuming? That comment seems very stereotypical.

    Good comment John V. If you force me to notice and make it central to your existence, then I will act accordingly. Not just on the gays, but that applies across the board.

  • Rob De Witt June 19, 2018, 4:27 PM

    Quod erat demonstrandum.

  • Haxo Angmark June 19, 2018, 4:33 PM

    these days, sodomites have become yettanother

    Jew-groomed entitlement group.

    they and all such are going to be destroyed. This aside,

    I don’t care which orifice they use.

  • Gordon Scott June 19, 2018, 6:40 PM

    Rob DW: “Are you so naive as to believe that the macho poseurs in your favorite manly entertainment are the sole producers of what you see? ”

    Frank Sinatra commenting on Glen Campbell, during one evening recording session: “Who’s the fag with the guitar?”

    “I been walking these streets so long
    Singing the same old songs
    I know every crack in these
    dirty sidewalks of Broadway.
    Where hustle’s the name of the game….”

  • Howard Nelson June 19, 2018, 6:51 PM

    Haxo, spoken like a true bjmqrv from your own anal aperture to your rectal orifice. This is nothing to sneeze at.

  • Howard Nelson June 19, 2018, 7:10 PM

    I recollect years ago reading that about 95% of men admitted having masturbated at least once. The other 5% were liars.
    Since masturbation is an expression of homosexuality where does that leave us in our condemnations? I believe that BS (which we capitalize on) is the master bait which we too often swallow hook, line, and stinker.

  • edaddy June 19, 2018, 7:27 PM

    Everybody just needs to just settle down.

  • ghostsniper June 19, 2018, 8:24 PM

    Howards 3rd sentence at 7:10pm reads like any ordinary journalists article these days, starts with a false premise that leads into an unanswerable question.

    No wonder this country’s like it is, nobody has any sense of direction.
    Everybody is trained to be directed by others.
    Just wait til things start to get serious.
    FWIW, boys diddling each other will be one of the first things to go up in flames. If you’re around that stuff you’ll ignite too. Do as Remus suggests, avoid crowds, and fags.

  • jacque ian June 19, 2018, 10:46 PM

    It is NOT absolutely undeniable that life without homosexuals would be life without art. That statement is , quite frankly , ridiculous.
    Heterosexuals have created countless , exquisitely breathtaking works of art.
    Heyeosexuals have created MORE worthy art than an average person could digest in one life time .
    HOWEVER
    ALL art is created by SINNERS.
    Creative endeavor that glorifies sin is degraded and base and NOT Art .
    Creative endeavor that glorifies God
    is elevating beautiful and trancendant ,no matter what brand of sinner cteayed it .

  • John A. Fleming June 19, 2018, 11:21 PM

    I have always liked Tchaikovsky. So easy to like when I was young and didn’t know what I was listening to. Now, I enjoy it for the complexity and richness. There’s always something new to hear. I remain enthralled.

    I was dismayed to learn while perusing Wikipedia about Tchaikovsky’s personal choice of unconventional erotic behaviors. Once known, these things can’t be un-known. It’s put a permanent small cloud between his music and me.

    Likewise, Rock Hudson kissing a woman in a Western. Once you know it’s truly fake acting … the magic is gone.

    Heroes usually have feet of clay. God doesn’t spare anyone their personal bag of **** to deal with. It’s not important that we are all flawed humans. God’s gift is that we can create Beauty. Knowledge of the man fades, but the Beauty carries on long after.

  • Ed Wallis June 20, 2018, 2:51 AM

    Earl and Robbie seem to suffer from the “homos are everywhere, so it’s natural, accept it” syndrome.
    Cancer is natural, too…and eradication ALSO desirable.
    Accept it! 😛

  • ghostsniper June 20, 2018, 4:25 AM

    John said:
    “Once you know it’s truly fake acting … the magic is gone.”
    =================
    That’s a whole lot of sentence right there.

  • Frank P June 20, 2018, 9:22 AM

    “… fake acting”: tautology.

  • rkat June 21, 2018, 12:55 PM

    This is such a quaint discussion. I play in an orchestra and my current section leader is a female to male transgender. It seems homosexuality is the least of our worries. Plus, I hate to think of all the castrati who performed music at the Vatican over the centuries. Some say that peculiar practice never really ended but just went underground, since it yielded fantastic results for singing, hmmm …

  • Barnhardt June 21, 2018, 1:32 PM

    (Cross-posted at Barnhardt.biz with video citations)

    The first point that needs to be addressed is the notion that almost no art today is produced without the involvement of sodomites or other sex perverts, whether it be in production, set building, backing or orchestral musicians, etc.  My answer goes directly back to my original thesis:  the issue is whether or not the art itself projects an aesthetic of sexual perversion, or points to or is perverse and obscene.  Can I promise you that every contractor or laborer that worked on the building or remodeling of the house I live in was sexually normal and pure?  Of course not.  If the man who installed the bathroom tile were a sex pervert, how could I know that, and even if I somehow did, does that mean I should move out of my house?  Well, not unless he arranged the bathroom tiles in the shape of a phallus.  In exactly the same way, we can’t know who every orchestral musician or set builder was, but what we can know is whether or not the ART ITSELF points to or glorifies sodomy.

    And, as an aside, this is why you get your house blessed by a priest early and often – at least once per year at either Epiphany or Easter.  Not only is the sacramental a conduit of grace, but it also gives one peace of mind.  And, may I just ask, have you ever slept in a hotel?  At this point, every hotel room in the western world is pretty much guaranteed to be a crime scene – because remember, sodomy is a crime.

    This reminds me of the heresy of Donatism, which is a MASSIVE problem in The Church today.  Many very pious people are tempted to believe that the interior state of the soul of the priest determines whether or not the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass is offered.  Hence, many people fall into the heretical trap that all Masses and sacraments performed by sodomite priests (or heterosexual fornicator priests, etc.) are invalid, and that any priest in the state of mortal sin is incapable of confecting the Eucharist.  This is, of course, TOTALLY WRONG.  Considering that it is, by definition, impossible for any of us to know the state of the soul of anyone else, much less a priest, how IN THE WORLD could Jesus Christ hold us responsible for that, and how could Jesus Christ establish His Church and His Sacraments such that they would be not just illicit, but INVALID a non-trivial percentage of the time with it literally impossible for the faithful to know either way?  This argument maps closely to what we are talking about with art.  How could people be held responsible for what Tchaikovsky did, or whatever sodomite Renaissance painter?  Can one determine from the 1812 Overture that Tchaikovsky was a sodomite?  Of course not.  Nor can one determine from da Vinci’s Annunciation what da Vinci’s sins were.

    I’d also like to revisit a point I made not too long ago, namely that up until just a few short decades ago, many people literally did not know about sodomy, homosexuality, transvestitism, pedophilia, bestiality – none of it.  At all.  Lots and lots of people in the Christian world went through life never knowing that there were people who engaged in same-sex sins.  I cited a clip from the 1980s sitcom “The Golden Girls”, in which the promiscuous, Jezebel character Blanche, confuses “Lesbian” for “Lebanese” and has to have it explained to her.  It got a huge laugh not because it was implausible, but because it WAS plausible.  THIS is why the flamboyantly gay pianist Liberace was as popular as he was, and with the demographic that he was popular with – old women.  When Liberace came mincing out out on stage in a pink sequined tuxedo, it literally NEVER OCCURRED to most of the elderly women in the audience that Liberace was a sodomite because a non-trivial percentage of them were totally unaware that sodomy existed on earth – and I’m not exaggerating.  And THIS ties back to the piece I just wrote on how Diabolical Narcissists (when all sex perverts, by definition, are to one degree or another) derive their greatest satisfaction from watching people watch them as they act out.  Liberace got his biggest rush from the fact that a bunch of old women who went to the United Methodist church every Sunday and probably taught Sunday school were his biggest fans, and that he was rubbing his sexual perversion in their faces, and they were too “stupid” and “unsophisticated” to even realize it.  Should they have at least been off-put by Liberace’s aesthetic, especially when he stopped wearing normal black tuxedos in the 1960s and started wearing the ridiculous outfits that he did?  It is hard to say.  Given how jaded and steeped in perversity we all are, it is pretty much impossible to revert back to a mindset innocent of all of the filth we now know.  This is a perfect example of how only Christ can judge the soul of man.

    The next point is the notion that ONLY sodomites are good at certain types of art.  Again, this is false, and the best example of this is ballet and dance in general.  First, ballet.  It is taken as axiomatic that all male ballet dancers are sodomites just by virtue of the fact that ballet is intrinsically graceful.  But this notion is false – a product of the fact that sodomites infected, were tolerated and then pretty much took over ballet.  But isn’t it interesting that the two best male ballet dancers of the 20th century were totally heterosexual – Mikhail Baryshnikov and Fernando Bujones.  Both were incredibly good dancers, graceful yet powerful and almost preternaturally athletic, and also compelling in their roles as male leads, interacting romantically with the ballerina, as almost every ballet entails.  Isn’t is telling that in a field as saturated with sodomites as the ranks of male ballet dancers is, that it was the heterosexuals that were head and shoulders above the rest.

    Two other great male dancers of the 20th century also bear mentioning: Fred Astaire and Gene Kelley – both straight.  Astaire projected masculine elegance, and was at his best serving as a mobile stage decoration for Ginger Rogers, while Kelley was the all-American athlete-dancer.  Donald O’Connor gets an honorable mention here, too.

    In my next entry on this topic, I will specifically deal with Michelangelo, who seems to always be cited in conversations about this subject.

  • Ed Wallis June 22, 2018, 12:56 AM

    rkat,
    layering modern-day homosexual degeneracy over centuries-old musical castrati to say “no big deal” = unclear on the concept, but an excellent example of degenerate moral relativism

  • Ed Wallis June 22, 2018, 4:16 AM

    “Consuming art created by sodomites is permissible so long as the art in question does not have a “sodomite aesthetic”, and does not point to nor glorify sexual perversion.”

    The weakness therein lies with the gaystapo mob (redundancy intentional) promoting in our otherwise healthier culture one artist over another expressly *because* a particular artist was a fellow deviant…I see it as a “baiting/grooming” technique that needs to be crushed.

  • Dr. Jay June 22, 2018, 5:27 AM

    As Michelangelo said to Lorenzo il Magnifico, “Braccae illae virides cum subucula rosea et tunica Caledonia-quam elenganter concinnatur!”

    [Trans:”Those green pants go so well with that pink shirt and the plaid jacket!”]

  • Fred June 22, 2018, 6:55 AM

    “Consuming art created by sodomites is permissible so long as the art in question does not have a “sodomite aesthetic”, and does not point to nor glorify sexual perversion.”

    I disagree. This statement sets up a legalistic tightrope that does not exist in the Holy Scriptures. Some of these things He hates. One should not support in any manner that which our LORD calls reprobate and abomination nor should we support the people by knowingly paying for their services. What they do is unnatural and many very likely have demons in them. Our only responsibility is tell them the Gospel of Christ Jesus that they might be converted and saved. Which leaves us with the Tile Layer who’s proclivities we know not. Same thing, tell him the Gospel, period. As an aside; why hire a Tile Layer who you don’t know? This is folly anyway.

  • Frogdaddy June 22, 2018, 7:49 AM

    And how shall we view Michelangelo’s David? Isn’t it phallic? Is it open to subjective observation/interpretation (eye of the beholder)? Is it covert “fagism” on display? Would I shield my kids eyes upon first glance or would I say it’s just an expression of the beauty of the human body as is a female hourglass figure? Do we ask the artist they’re interpretation and would we even get a straight answer? Was it designed to pollute the mind or does it have a different meaning? I can’t tell anymore. Certainly not today, it’s all being destroyed by cultural Marxists. What was once seen as good I should now be suspect of some hidden agenda or meaning designed to win me over to “fagism” or acceptance of a new norm. Sigh. Some days I should pray for a meteor.

  • JiminAlaska June 22, 2018, 8:56 AM

    Way back in the fifties I came across a phrase that’s resonated in my head ever since; Poets and outlaws delimit the world in which we all live.

    Doesn’t matter if they’re straight or queer, they fascinate, threaten the status quo, uplift, support, destroy….

    and occasionally expand our world, push back the marches, with a Da Da Da Dummm, a David or A Rough Beast Slouching.

    Friend, foe, fag or freak, they delimit our world and, to a certain extent, define all the rest of us.

  • John Hinds June 22, 2018, 12:58 PM

    Art asks a question of the Real, but doesn’t know it. Religion asks a question of the Real and places the answer beyond reach. Science, likewise, posits its grand unifying theory of reality on a vanishing horizon. Historical understanding suffers the same fate as science. These modes of being in the world are foundational to one another. Each grows out of the previous in tandem with the emergence of consciousness. Each enriches our lives and, more importantly, each adds to the glory of the creation. That makes us co-creators of the Universe with the “I Am” who sent all. We have the profound responsibility to shun evil wherever it manifests. For a healthy person it is obvious that sexual deviance is the manifestation of the daemonic in nature, evil incarnate.

  • Old Fert June 22, 2018, 3:19 PM

    If we can hate the sin but love the sinner, I think we are also free to love (or reject) the sinner’s art.

  • Laurel Yanny in the blue/brown dress June 22, 2018, 3:44 PM

    This must explain what happened to all the other human species through millennia. If only sodomites create art, here would be the Cro-Magnon swan song:

    http://www.bradshawfoundation.com/lascaux/

  • Howard Nelson June 22, 2018, 8:41 PM

    What I’ve learned of value so far:
    1. Noel Coward was a patriot.
    2. Noel Coward was not a coward; a logical impossibility, but he pulled it off with a stiff upper lip.
    3. His plays are admired. His detractors remain mired in the muck their minds admire.
    4. Humans may be described along mulltivariable spectra of many characteristics.
    5. I believe that more than one person’s life was saved due to a blood donation from a homosexual man or woman. Where is the monument of gratitude? Some prefer to pile on fearful of the phallus fallacy of an honoring pylon.
    6. Pornography is dismissed as boorish, banal, and corruptive while religious symbols are drowned in urine and displayed as art. This, #7 —
    7. De gustibus non est disputandum, because we’re all different and similar in many ways, but
    naturam expellas furca tamen usque recurret.
    8. I never said I was the brightest bulb among the onions.

    Us

  • pbird June 23, 2018, 5:49 AM

    If your conscience condemns you for purchasing or viewing art done by sexual sinners then you had best not. If you realize that it has no power in itself and is just stuff and it does not cause you to sin, perhaps it is neutral. OTOH, we can learn from sinners, no?

  • Ed Wallis June 24, 2018, 1:04 AM

    If your conscience condemns you for purchasing or viewing art done by SATAN then you had best not. If you IMAGINE that SATAN has no power in itself and is just stuff and it does not cause you to sin, perhaps it is neutral. OTOH, we can learn from SATAN, no?

    Fixed it for you, pbird. You’re welcome!

  • Ed Wallis June 24, 2018, 2:00 AM

    The “apologists” here are SO DISHONEST (it would be naive to claim they’re just ‘senile with poor memories’)!

    It’s as if we hadn’t already reached to point of:

    BAKE THE F’ING CAKE, BIATCH!
    ‘TEACH’/ INDOCTRINATE ANAL SEX TO ELEMENTARY SCHOOL CHILDREN
    and so on and so forth.

    But/t…we’re just talking about “art”…my (normal/heterosexual) posterior!

  • Casey Klahn June 24, 2018, 3:24 AM

    Art is gay now?

    Shit.

    Pretty soon, World War Two will be gay, too.

    Hears a knock on the door…

Next post:

Previous post: