His Divine Shaft

Even though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I fear no evil, for You are with me; Your rod and Your staff, they comfort me.

Psalm 23:4

Whyever could so many home ohs be drawn to Legacy Christianity? No man could possibly be attracted erotically to hard, straight tube-like things. Right?

Worship

The association of Legacy Christianity with goodness is so strong that many Europeoids can't puzzle out why anyone could think it bad. Jesusianism successfully associated itself with nice things like "being with loved ones during a happy time" (the replacement of holidays), "being physically intimate with a partner" (weddings), having kids (christening), and so forth. What Jesusians are not able to see is that those things were there before. Like a cancer-patient being able to eat, tumors are not how you make good food, but Jesusians have been in that way fooled. When someone says, "You say there's an invisible man in the sky!" they react as though someone is arguing that being safe and warm around your family on some special occasion is a bad thing.

Participation

Legacy Christianity being gay is not a joke. There are and were some very good people who did very good things believing they were committed to S.R. and would never think of touching (or even wanting to touch) men that way, let alone boys. However, there are and were some very good people where a friend of a friend told them to go to some place, they showed up, someone said hold this, oh, she's over there, and at the end of the night it turns out there's a newspaper article of someone holding a sign in a pride parade, participating in a candlelight vigil of gaydom, etc. Or the guy just heard, from a teacher at the school that Mom chose, that those poor gay men had been violently mistreated by bigoted straight people.

Point is, someone can be a good person with good thoughts who nonetheless participates in a bad thing. That is what Jesusianism is. Like the way that it benefits from being associated with holidays, family, etc., the associations it has built with good people can make it seem like a Europeoid who doesn't like the idea of Europeoids having a Middle Eastern man as the lord of Europe is a bad person, even though, with immense irony, Jesusian Christians are far more likely than Bangist Christians to disapprove of Middle Eastern men swarming European lands.

Serious

The homoerotic signals of Jesusian Christian are not trivial things. The common reaction to pointing them out is, by Jesusians, done in a matter that often recalls pop takes on numerology, i.e. "Oh there's a pattern if you look really hard but it doesn't mean anything." True for one reference, true for two, maybe even six. But Jesusian Christianity has more. At some point, it stops being possible for it to be a coincidence and it starts meaning something.

France. 1100AD. A little boy has <redacted> by an evil priest. The boy knows that if he tells his mom or his dad, he'll be accused of being in league with Satan for telling foul lies about one of God's messengers. He knows if he tells his friends, they'll think a mix of that or that he's telling really sick fantasies from his dream. He knows - etc. For his whole life, he keeps it quiet, but he always has this feeling that home ohs are bad and should stay away from kids.

Multiply the above by a thousand, ten thousand, or whatever. In the 21st century there's a lawsuit against the Church that a few dozen boys got <redacted> by priests, and there are many people having academic careers about this irrational cultural idea that home ohs should not be alone with children.

This is a serious issue, involving utterly disgusting things--a violation of a person's desires about that person's defecatory orifice, and that person's genitals.  When the Bible talks about how men should resist the sin of treating men like women, and of a Divine Shaft, it means something horrible.  Changing the punishment for pedophilia from at least ostracism or capital in full-on situations, combined with what priests did to little boys for over a thousand years, casts the disparagement of goddesses in a very sick light.  

What Jesusianism did to the images of women and families, replacing them by ones of a Divine Man, is similar to how "gay" men dominated lesbian pride movements, and how trains no eye ideology became mostly--not all; there're always a few tokens--mostly about prancing men acting effeminate in attempts to replace women with male imitations.  The just as good, same thing, etc. trains no eye nonsense, and the disassociation of buggery combined with the prominentizing of acting fun-loving and girlie, is not a new thing; it is what home ohs have always done.  The change in genetics that causes a male human to desire male physicality often manifests alongside this type of behavior.  In the same way that certain types of material structures operate so as to make healthy boys prefer playing with plastic trucks rather than pretending to nurture baby dolls, the shift that causes home ohs to connect "desire to orgasm" not to "attractive female" but to "where a boy goes poop" conjoins with manifestations of "me being the girl."  The conjunction of that type of behavior and the many centuries of Legacy Christian "sexual abuse" of male children is disgustingly profound.  Like the way that border disavowal (immivasion) is not a joke as it involves men getting inside societies and raping the women there, Legacy Christianity was serious.  Over a millennia of trapped, abused little boys is what you are betraying when you close your eyes and think-text to S.R.  

Origins of Trains No Eye

Now there's a popular ideology that can seem to have come out of nowhere that men become women through behavior, and that the dozens of trillions of cells with either XX or XY don't matter.

From where does this originate? Can you think of any big philosophies that have dominated Western ideological tradition for a long time about matter being less important than believing in things without evidence (faith)?