Yik Yak icon
Join communities on Yik Yak Download
Time to indiscriminately upset lots of people: some of Christianity's most iconic art was created by men who were most likely queer, namely Michelangelo and Da Vinci
7 upvotes, 17 comments. Yik Yak image post by Anonymous in US Politics. "Time to indiscriminately upset lots of people: some of Christianity's most iconic art was created by men who were most likely queer, namely Michelangelo and Da Vinci"
upvote 7 downvote

default user profile icon
Anonymous 21h

Cock and balls on main is crazy work

upvote 1 downvote
🐘
Anonymous 21h

I don’t think anyone finds this upsetting. I personally believe in separating the art from the artist.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 21h

Okay but also look at the acorns. In Latin the word "glans" (which we use to refer to the tip of the penis) literally means acorn... It could be a unrelated that they look so phallic, but when you look at the historical facts about Michelango, that seems less likely.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #1 21h

Also the cock and balls are literally in the Sistine Chapel…

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 20h

Is being queer bad or something, people really only say this when the artist has done something bad

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 19h

Separating art from artist is nonsense. How an artist sees the world shapes what they make. Picasso reportedly said women were either goddesses or doormats, and you can see it: Dora Maar, his lover, painted again and again as the Weeping Woman, her face fractured and dissolving. And here there's nothing to separate anyway. Being queer isn't a sin to look past. Michelangelo's desire is right there in these nudes, and it's part of why they're masterpieces.

upvote 0 downvote
🐘
Anonymous replying to -> OP 15h

I enjoy art from artists who identify as trans, do drugs, or express leftist opinions. I don’t judge the art based on the person.

upvote 0 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 15h

So you do think that being queer is bad then

upvote 3 downvote
🐘
Anonymous replying to -> #3 14h

Depends.

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 14h

On what?

upvote 3 downvote
🐘
Anonymous replying to -> #3 14h

Queer is an umbrella term. It’s too vague. There are some parts I’m okay with but other parts have gone too far. So it depends on the queer person.

upvote 3 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 14h

Ironic for you to talk about people being vague when I asked you to elaborate and you just continued being vague

upvote 6 downvote
🐘
Anonymous replying to -> #3 14h

Idk what you’re on about. If you want to ask a concrete question go ahead.

upvote 4 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 14h

What I want to know is what part of queerness you think is bad.

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> #3 14h

Also, ideally, why

upvote 5 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 13h

Nobody said anything about judging. That was all you. Judging is different than fully understanding.

upvote 1 downvote
default user profile icon
Anonymous replying to -> last_republican_on_yikyak 13h

“gone too far” is vague. I suspect most of that claim relies on strawmen and media charicatures, rather than actual good faith understanding.

upvote 1 downvote