France's Olympic Trans Last Supper

[LDSGator]

The FB page “Conservative Women Rock” has gotten into some “trouble” for suggesting people boycott the Olympics.

 

I was dead wrong. I thought conservatives would be 100% into boycotting the Olympics, but the admin is getting a ton of flack for her stance.  
 

I’m sorry-once again, I was way off base. 

Edited July 29, 2024 by LDSGator

[NeuroTypical]

My Christianity doesn't really revolve around 500 year old artwork, or what people try to do to it.  Come to think about it, it doesn't revolve around France or the Olympics either. 

I mean, I'm a fan of Christian symbolism and art through the centuries, and The Last Supper is certainly iconic and enshrined in our culture.  But my Christianity doesn't really revolve around my culture either.  Perhaps to the extent that I'm happy to have a ward family anywhere I go on earth, but that's it.

[ZealoulyStriving]

7 minutes ago, NeuroTypical said:

My Christianity doesn't really revolve around 500 year old artwork, or what people try to do to it.  Come to think about it, it doesn't revolve around France or the Olympics either. 

I mean, I'm a fan of Christian symbolism and art through the centuries, and The Last Supper is certainly iconic and enshrined in our culture.  But my Christianity doesn't really revolve around my culture either.  Perhaps to the extent that I'm happy to have a ward family anywhere I go on earth, but that's it.

People aren't upset about the artwork, but the message being sent by utilizing the artwork as a model.

[LDSGator]

I feel really bad for the Christian athletes who worked 90 hours a week for 15 years to get to this point. They’ll be bashed for not dropping out, their Christianity will be called into question, and perhaps most sad-they may not have fans there to support them. If that happens, it’ll be a heartbreakingly sad display by “fans” who leave their fellow Christians behind.  

[Phoenix_person]

There seems to be a lot of confusion over whether the scene was supposed to be depicting the last supper or a feast of Greek gods, the latter of which has also been depicted in artwork over the centuries, including the painting below which shows the sun god Apollo in the place of Jesus, right down to the halo. Best I can tell, the organizers of the show have kept their true intentions close to the chest. My impression of it was that it was meant to portray both "the old gods and the new" simultaneously in a hybrid display that pays homage to the Olympics' Greek roots and the cultures/traditions that were inspired by it (which includes, according to some, Christianity to a certain degree). As someone who doesn't have a dog on this particular fight, I can appreciate the artistic intent (as I perceive it). 

I also wouldn't rule out the possibility that it was a French taunt towards a generally more conservative/pious population of American Christians that hates to see Christian imagery intermingled with other religions, even the Greek gods who inspired the games in the first place. If that's the case, well, mission accomplished I guess.

 

[NeuroTypical]

1 hour ago, Phoenix_person said:

There seems to be a lot of confusion over whether the scene was supposed to be depicting the last supper or a feast of Greek gods, the latter of which has also been depicted in artwork over the centuries, including the painting below which shows the sun god Apollo in the place of Jesus, right down to the halo. 
...
I also wouldn't rule out the possibility that it was a French taunt towards a generally more conservative/pious population of American Christians that hates to see Christian imagery intermingled with other religions, even the Greek gods who inspired the games in the first place. If that's the case, well, mission accomplished I guess.

Yeah, BP's post is basically my take on things.   I'm not upset that the people were either clueless or intentionally insensitive.  I'm more upset that Christianity doesn't have the same hold it had on the global culture in decades past.  Such things wax and wane across decades and centuries.  Christianity survives and thrives, even when it's a mocked minority barely managing to not shrink too much. 

25-ish years ago Mormons were all worried and mad because one of our church leaders had been meeting with the Salt Lake LGB community, and the result was a jointly sponsored bill that both sides were pushing to get passed.   It was rights and protected class legislation, that would ban housing discrimination based on sexual orientation, and also preserve, protect, and expand religious liberty.  Many folks were ticked, but I wondered if it was the church just being prophetic about coming hard times, and laying up stores of goodwill and legal protection against future years of discrimination.  The more I read about how the Catholics survived the dark ages, with their walled monasteries and cloistering and whatnot, the more it makes sense that the church is investing so much in airable farmland and temples across the world.

Many years ago, I was at the Colorado State Fair hanging out with all the rugged rural wrinkly tanned working people.  Evening social hour had started, and some folks were getting a little liquored up.  I love people watching, and was sitting off in a corner with my diet coke.  Some of the conversations were getting a little political and loud and opinionated.  A gust of wind blew some old cowboy's hat off.  Apparently, the people he was talking/arguing with didn't respect the blowing hat enough for his tastes.  Someone stopped the hat from blowing away with his foot, and this guy saw it as intentionally stomping - an act of overt disrespect.   He got louder and bigger and started offering to whoop people.  He kept shouting "THAT'S MUH HAT!"   I mean, he was in the company of people who thought he was a drunken idiot, you could see it in their eyes.  But holy crap was dude angry.  His hat was a part of his character, a symbol of his manhood, and it had been disrespected.

Same sort of vibes happening with some of the Christian conservative responses to the "trans last supper".    I'm a lot of things, but I'm not especially interested in being that guy.  So yeah, I'll take Bird Person's take on things. 

Edited July 29, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Suzie]

On 7/29/2024 at 8:47 AM, Phoenix_person said:

There seems to be a lot of confusion over whether the scene was supposed to be depicting the last supper or a feast of Greek gods, the latter of which has also been depicted in artwork over the centuries, including the painting below which shows the sun god Apollo in the place of Jesus, right down to the halo. Best I can tell, the organizers of the show have kept their true intentions close to the chest. My impression of it was that it was meant to portray both "the old gods and the new" simultaneously in a hybrid display that pays homage to the Olympics' Greek roots and the cultures/traditions that were inspired by it (which includes, according to some, Christianity to a certain degree). As someone who doesn't have a dog on this particular fight, I can appreciate the artistic intent (as I perceive it). 

I also wouldn't rule out the possibility that it was a French taunt towards a generally more conservative/pious population of American Christians that hates to see Christian imagery intermingled with other religions, even the Greek gods who inspired the games in the first place. If that's the case, well, mission accomplished I guess.

 

 

So wait... some Christians are offended for what they thought was a mockery of the Last Supper but they have no problem defending a convicted felon who bragged about grabbing a woman's private parts??  

[LDSGator]

@Suzie-
 

I’ve also said this before, but it needs to be said again. 

TH is filled with wonderful people of all political stripes, and I’m sure that most of the conservatives here disagree strongly with Trumps personal life. LDS have this thing called “morality” that Trump lacks. 
 

Sadly, I DO see some Trumpers that simply don’t care about his sexual assaults, his bullying, and his disgusting personal conduct-but they aren’t here. 

[NeuroTypical]

2nd reminder I've had to give:

People, be civil.  When you are posting politics, pretend you are speaking face to face with the temple worker assisting you through the veil.   

Again: 

Quote

3. Personal attacks, name calling, flaming, and judgments against other members will not be tolerated.

4. No bickering and nit-picking toward others. Realize that sometimes it is very difficult to be able to express how one feels through written words. Please be courteous and ask for a further explanation, rather then trying to attack and find holes in someone else's post.

 

Edited July 30, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[NeuroTypical]

If you want to strike righteous and civil blows against the folks happy about the trans last supper, you can point some things out.  This is verbal jiu jitsu - using their own language to dump them on their heads: 

They're all in favor of DEI.  Olympics spokesperson Anne Descamps is on record:  “Clearly there was never an intention to show disrespect to any religious group. On the contrary, I think (with) Thomas Jolly, we really did try to celebrate community tolerance,”  Jolly is the ceremony's artistic director, he's also on record: "“We wanted to talk about diversity. Diversity means being together. We wanted to include everyone, as simple as that.”

Ok, so trans inclusion is all about diversity and inclusion.  They're all about love.  Ok, fair enough.  You can point out that they're not being very accepting of diversity or inclusion, if they're intentionally targeting a group of people for ridicule and mockery.  They're all about people being able to be who they are without fear of scorn.  Ask them if they are free to be people of faith and spirituality.  If they say no, religion shouldn't be part of DEI, you can point out that they're in a shrinking minority of DEI folks who think so.  Example: We all know how woke and DEI-friendly corporate America has gone.  Folks are surprised to learn that almost 90% of Fortune 500 companies mention or illustrate religion as part of their broader commitment to diversity.  (Up from 40% in 2022.)  Perhaps it's time for the Olympics to learn a little from global companies that are actually remembering that the i stands for inclusion.

If they claim it was an innocent mistake, you can let them know that even unintentional microaggressions are still microaggressions.  You can talk about the history of "we didn't mean any harm" as justification for all sorts of historical abominations and tragedies.  You can ask them flat out, if they honestly believe that targeting and offending a group without meaning to, is ok.  Ask them the question.  When they give the honest reply of no, you can ask them what they should actually do, instead of that weak crappy apology.  How many of us have had sensitivity training?  Maybe the DEI-adherents who put on the show should have some.  There seems to be good effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Muslims.  How about an effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Christians?

And for pete's sake, do all that with love.  2nd great commandment, yeah.  Can you pull it off?  A conversation like that isn't the best time to prove that you're not a very good Christian.  Following the 2nd great commandment will set you apart from the "that's muh hat" guy.

[Carborendum]

15 hours ago, Suzie said:

...defending a convicted felon

That was a biased trial based on nothing but a judge's instructions to convict him of violating laws that don't exist, and denying exculpatory testimony from the defense.

15 hours ago, Suzie said:

who bragged about...

The Clinton trial ended the "sex scandal" in modern politics forever.  That was not how we wanted it to end.  But it did -- by liberal hands.

Why would we huff and puff over it when the issue has been killed by Democrats?

Edited July 30, 2024 by Carborendum

[Traveler]

I have posted before that I spent some time in the military attached to a military intelligence company that specialized in integrating and brain washing POW’s.  Joseph Goebbels is considered the expert of this dark art.  He suggested that the best method of mass brainwashing was through the use of entertainment – especially humor.   He claimed (and I think he was correct) that anything you could get people to laugh at, eventually they would embrace and think that they have always believed so. 

I have since believed that what a person finds entertaining and amusing (both in what they engage in and how they respond to and use what they learn) is the best indication of their character and the context of their intent.

 

 

The Traveler

[mirkwood]

 

[Ironhold]

The current official mantra is that the event was supposed to be a reference to Bacchus, that it was meant to celebrate diversity, that they never "meant" to mock Christianity, and that even if it was offensive Christians should just get over it. 

This is what I keep seeing on social media and in the news, with some of the involved parties now asking for police investigation of the online backlash. 

In other words folks, this one's going to Streisand Effect itself into what might be a defining moment because the would-be defenders can't admit that the whole thing was in poor taste. 

[Traveler]

21 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

The current official mantra is that the event was supposed to be a reference to Bacchus, that it was meant to celebrate diversity, that they never "meant" to mock Christianity, and that even if it was offensive Christians should just get over it. 

This is what I keep seeing on social media and in the news, with some of the involved parties now asking for police investigation of the online backlash. 

In other words folks, this one's going to Streisand Effect itself into what might be a defining moment because the would-be defenders can't admit that the whole thing was in poor taste. 

I wonder if the French think that this expresses the best of their culture to which the world ought to be aware?  If the French are okay with it, then those that are responsible gave an honest insight to their culture.  There are things the French are indeed famous for.

 

The Traveler

[NeuroTypical]

59 minutes ago, Ironhold said:

The current official mantra is that the event was supposed to be a reference to Bacchus, that it was meant to celebrate diversity, that they never "meant" to mock Christianity, and that even if it was offensive Christians should just get over it. 

Ok, so it was an innocent mistake.  Again, my DEI sensitivity training tells me that unintentional microaggressions are still microaggressions.  I'm taught "We didn't mean any harm" has been used as justification for all sorts of horrible racist and sexist policies.   Honest question to any of these people: Do you believe that targeting and offending a group without meaning to, is ok? 

I wonder if the DEI-adherents who put on the show should have some more training on how to not offend groups of people.  There seems to be plenty good effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Muslims.  How about an effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Christians?

"I know, let's celebrate diversity and trans acceptance in the opening ceremonies!  We can put on a feast of Bacchus type of deal!"

"That's a great idea!  Let's have our cultural sensitivity people look into it.  Make sure they look deeply into history, culture, and practice of our historically marginalized peoples.  We don't want to accidentally offend black people or women or NAAPI people or Muslims by putting on something insensitive to whatever they do.  Do they have feasts or celebrations or anything like that?  Make sure whatever we come up with doesn't accidentally cross any lines."

"What about Christians?"

"Pfft.  Let 'em go cry to their magic sky daddy about it."

 

Edited July 31, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Phoenix_person]

1 hour ago, NeuroTypical said:

Ok, so it was an innocent mistake.  Again, my DEI sensitivity training tells me that unintentional microaggressions are still microaggressions.  I'm taught "We didn't mean any harm" has been used as justification for all sorts of horrible racist and sexist policies.   Honest question to any of these people: Do you believe that targeting and offending a group without meaning to, is ok? 

I wonder if the DEI-adherents who put on the show should have some more training on how to not offend groups of people.  There seems to be plenty good effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Muslims.  How about an effort to not offend the world's 2 billion Christians?

"I know, let's celebrate diversity and trans acceptance in the opening ceremonies!  We can put on a feast of Bacchus type of deal!"

"That's a great idea!  Let's have our cultural sensitivity people look into it.  Make sure they look deeply into history, culture, and practice of our historically marginalized peoples.  We don't want to accidentally offend black people or women or NAAPI people or Muslims by putting on something insensitive to whatever they do.  Do they have feasts or celebrations or anything like that?  Make sure whatever we come up with doesn't accidentally cross any lines."

"What about Christians?"

"Pfft.  Let 'em go cry to their magic sky daddy about it."

 

DEI is intended to protect marginalized people. You'll have a very hard time convincing me that Christians are marginalized in Eurocentric societies. Christian supremacy has reigned in North America and Europe for hundreds of years. It's only started to truly crack within our lifetimes, and it seems a lot of Christians are intent on misrepresenting a reduction of reverence for the dominant religion in our society as open oppresssion of it.

[NeuroTypical]

49 minutes ago, Phoenix_person said:

DEI is intended to protect marginalized people.

Correct.  Protect, boost, make safe, level playing fields, give access to the same things the dominant peoples have.  I get it.

The D is diversity.  The claim is 'we're all better when every voice counts'.  The principles are love, understanding, learning about each other, and mutual respect.  We're taught to search ourselves deeply for unconscious biases, and reflect on how they affect your behavior, and how your behavior impacts others.   Yeah, the focus is on how 'the many' have been impacting 'the marginalized', but the principles are taught as universal.

The I is inclusion.  Make sure there's a seat at the table for everybody.  Pay attention to the people who haven't historically been given a seat, or even an invite to the meeting or dinner.   Just like the D, it's all about self-examination to understand problems those in power might have when it comes to inviting or including those out of power.  And again, while the focus is on helping the marginalized people, the principles are taught as universal.   Be mindful about giving offense.  Understand that even if there's no intent to harm, your actions might indeed bring unintentional harm, and that's not ok.  Think before you do something, on the impact it might have on others.  There's no "yeah, those in power don't matter" happening with the D or the I.

The E is where you get class warfare and 'screw the rich' and 'take the power away' and such things.  E means different things to different people.  Some Equity fans figure existing power structures must be torn down, so screw the Christians, and it's our duty to give intentional offense.  There are also plenty of fans of Equity who don't believe you need to tear down existing institutions and power structures.  Just be nice to everyone and focus on those who have less, and the reasons why, and what you can do with your privilege.

Quote

it seems a lot of Christians are intent on misrepresenting a reduction of reverence for the dominant religion in our society as open oppresssion of it.

Nobody is claiming oppression.  We're claiming whether the offense was intentional or unintentional, it was still offensive.  We're demanding to know if followers of DEI give a crap about giving offense, or not.   It helps us figure out where you are on the E scale, and whether you're an intentional threat to our institutions and power structures, or just someone happy to see marginalized folks having equal access to those institutions and power structures. 

 

Don't mean to put you on the spot @Phoenix_person.  I'm not demanding some sort of oath to defend the constitution or whatever.   But yeah, we get to be offended, without claiming that we're being oppressed.  And we get to call DEI adherents to task for their response. And point out any hypocrisy when the love and respect and inclusivity becomes hate and disrespect and excluding groups of people from the table of love.

Edited July 31, 2024 by NeuroTypical

[Phoenix_person]

On 7/31/2024 at 12:39 PM, NeuroTypical said:

Don't mean to put you on the spot @Phoenix_person.  I'm not demanding some sort of oath to defend the constitution or whatever.   But yeah, we get to be offended, without claiming that we're being oppressed.  And we get to call DEI adherents to task for their response.

Before we go too much further down the rabbit hole of what DEI does and does not protect, let's be clear that DEI principles are largely irrelevant here. We're talking about performance art, not a workplace or institution of higher learning. Art has acted for centuries as the most powerful form of expression, and it has often been used to challenge conventional ideas and spark difficult conversations. Yes, art can frequently be offensive. Oftentimes, intentionally so. My issue with this Greek Drag Last Supper controversy isn't that Christians are offended by it, but that a lot of Christians (not you, specifically) are taking it as a sign of persecution/oppression against Christians. Persecution/oppression implies use of force. Taking offense at a TV program is a choice. I don't mean that as an insult or to belittle the offense. People on the left choose to be offended by various microaggressions all the time. We sometimes forget that the 1st Amendment protects those microaggressions. That doesn't mean we can't call them out, 1A certainly protects that as well, but it's important not to confuse offense for oppression.

On 7/31/2024 at 12:39 PM, NeuroTypical said:

It helps us figure out where you are on the E scale, and whether you're an intentional threat to our institutions and power structures, or just someone happy to see marginalized folks having equal access to those institutions and power structures. 

A better question to ask is which of our institutions and power structures are a threat to an equitable society. If there are things that marginalized people are struggling to gain access to, we should be asking if it's something that can be reformed or if it's exclusive by design. If an institution is inequitable by design, then why are we protecting it? While I don't agree with some of the more radical ideas that were spawned by the civil rights movement, I can certainly understand why some black communities of the time were inclined to arm themselves and embrace communist ideas. 

On 7/31/2024 at 12:39 PM, NeuroTypical said:

And point out any hypocrisy when the love and respect and inclusivity becomes hate and disrespect and excluding groups of people from the table of love.

A spot at the "table of love" has to be earned by privileged classes, and Christians are 100% a privileged class in Western society. In many parts of the world, Christianity is synonymous with imperial colonialism. To a lot of marginalized people, Western Christianity is an oppressive institution, and oppressors don't get invited to the table. That doesn't mean that there's no room at all for Christians. But it's important for Christians to recognize their place on the international stage, especially in an event that features dozens of countries whose histories include stories of white Christians taking resources with one hand and handing out Bibles with the other.

Edited August 2, 2024 by Phoenix_person