The Immense Gay

Halo Art

In case you haven't seen them, there are a lot.  Here are a few.  

Botticelli's "The Man of Sorrows" depicts S.R. with a halo of angels.  

Here's an angel:

...and Dolci, another S.R.: 

...Western art is replete with, thoroughly inundated by, pictures of holy people, most often men of course, that category dominated by Jesus also of course, being shown as enshrined by halos.  Why?  

Co-opting Femininity

Much of Legacy Christianity (traditional, Jesus-based Christianity; Jesusianism) was concerned with disgustingly homoerotic things.  Like men effing trains no eye women today and insisting they're straight because that other home oh wears feminine clothes, people--often good people--have been tricked into Jesusianism, like unto how otherwise-good college students can get tricked into socialism.  

The destruction/insults leveled at previous community centers, statues, etc. as being "pagan" things, heretical and devoted to the wrong invisible sky person (heehee, people drill for oil now, you can circumnavigate on some airplanes and as they say it ain't no thang, and "underneath the surface" is as mystical and unknown as "above the clouds"--not really impressive decades after people've figured out spaceships) are duplicated in the halo.  

While it is comparatively easy to see why a cabal of men who demand exclusively male company and revere the idea of a divine man might be doing something "gay" by insisting that a bunch of developing young men focus on a (naked was old) barely clad man instead of women, the halo is often not seen that way.  It's easy to miss why.  So, why did the halo become important?  

Replacing Women

Think of the many ways that Christianity said life was about one man rather than a couple or a woman.  

1) Creative burst: meiotic human life begins almost always with a frictive burst from part of a male human being inside a female human's body.  Christianity made this the action of a solo man.  

True thing: couple.  Man cums in woman, sometimes baby.  Christian replacement: Genesis/Big Bang.  

2) Milk.  Think of the name of this galaxy.  There is a human understanding of how utterly, completely essential the female is to life.  A couple guys, a hundred guys, whatever, can have all the orgasms they want by doing each other, but no babies.  Ever.  Combine the egg with the spermatozoa--female with male--you can have a baby.  Prior to the development of formula--for at least a few million years--humans and their predecessors needed the milk for the baby, because babies couldn't chew, thus they died without women.  Now we can avoid that instant fate, and the sadder long-term consequences of development without that pairing are speculation verboten and now officially diagnostically unknown.  

From where does that milk come?  The woman's body makes it with calories.  Without getting them, there's no milk.  Baby dies; maybe the woman dies, too.  Thus before there are societies where there are derogatory terms for men who don't care for a woman with whom he has mated thus produced a child or children: cad, rake, etc.  

True thing: female and male benefiting from couple.  Man gives woman, thus baby, food.  The partnership of the species is well expressed here, because without the baby, both go extinct, and only the woman can produce milk.  The attack on the life-creating and -nurturing partnership of feminism, where the female complement to the partnership for which she exclusively is biologically built is devalued makes sense for an attack.  

Christian replacement: manna.  

It is really, rilly, reeeeeeally gross when Christianity claimed male substitutes for female-ness.  If you think a man can lie with a man like a man can lie with a woman, ew, personal business, keep it out of sight.  

From Whence, Halo?

When the human is born, it can't talk.  It can't eat.  How does it get what it needs to live?  By being drawn toward indicia of the female nipple.  That nipple is surrounded by a rounded thing that works like a magnet on the baby's brain, telling it, basically, "Calories are here.  Come here or die."  This has worked for quite a few years.  If you have ever seen a person around, you have seen proof of that having worked.  

What is it that tells the baby, without words, in a way that has worked for however many thousands of years, where to get the calories?  On what is based the halo in the philosophy of replacing female things with male things?  The areola.  The halo is the ripoff of the areola!  

In the same way that manna is a ripoff of milk and cosmigasm is a gross allusion to the life-integral male orgasm within the couple, the areola (Christified to the aureola) is yet another part of the life process claimed by the narrative of universalism.  

Gay Replacement

The Jesus stories aren't just a dirty co-option of European culture/history by Middle Eastern culture/history.  Aphrodite et al. being very appropriate for a developing male to look at v. Jesus not is a part of it, and the associated gayness of that whole process is there, but even when it comes to hopefully non-sexual-totally parts of the lifemaking process--babies getting enough calories--the replacement's full foulness can be seen.  

Decay is nasty.  Nasty.  It rips things off--holidays; body parts--because it does not offer anything new or good.  Like the way that Christian culture borrowed various aspects of other religions and European culture to get started (Hades, Hel; Zoroastrianism; Yuletide; Ostara, just some) it can appear to be many things which are your origins, but in fact if it is a foul approximation of those things, not those things themselves.