[note: for anyone reading this via facebook, scroll to the bottom and click “view original post” in order to see all images and video. Or don’t. But this’ll be confusing as all hell]
So maybe you’ve heard about the woman who decided to bash open a display case at the Loveland Museum & Gallery in order to destroy a piece of art.
Here, if you’re interested, is the original piece. The very last panel is the one that’s got people all pissy:
Some people are pissed off because it shows Jesus getting a blowie, sort of.
The artist claims, however, that this is not the case and that the figure is not actually Jesus, but a visual representation of a corrupted religious icon. A mixed message, to be sure, because the face looks a hell of a lot like Jesus. But on the other hand, I don’t remember Jesus having a rack that nice.
Let’s explore the people who really hate this thing, starting with the protesters.
They really bring out their A-game, huh? Nothing makes me want to hear someone out more than an angry old woman in bizarre futuristic sunglasses holding a protest sign with handles on the sides. Signs are on a stick for a reason, dummy, so people can see what the hell they say.
This poor slob is just one of many. Unfortunately, she probably passed away from the force of the camera’s flash used for this picture. Let’s watch a little video and see some of our other friends in action.
Wow, some really amazing stuff there.
Can someone discuss with these people the irony of protesting outside an art museum using the shittiest signs of all time? Maybe they should consider attending some of the free art classes offered in the community. How are you telling me anything about what is and isn’t art when you’re carrying around a sign that doesn’t explain shit and makes no sense? Maybe you’re offended by the depiction of Jesus doing the blowie, but I’m offended that you just jam his goofy smiling face on top of a piece of cardboard. “This is art?” Is this some kind of test? How is there nobody there policing these signs so that you don’t all look like assholes? Cutting out a picture from a flyer trying to sell you a Jesus commemorative plate and gluing it to the inside of a box from the garage in order to tell people your silly views is not art, asshole.
Speaking of assholes, let’s talk about the drunken astronaut. Where the hell did they dig this guy up? What the hell is wrong with him? And how come he says that the picture is of Jesus giving a blowjob when it’s clearly Jesus RECEIVING a blowjob? Would it make him feel better if he knew that? Maybe he just doesn’t want a gay Jesus, but everyone knows that receiving oral isn’t inherently gay or straight. It’s whatever you want it to be, baby.
The worst part about Drunken Astronaut is that he goes with the classic arguement about kids. Why should kids be exposed to this? What about the children? I think you’re right, you should protect your children from things you don’t want them to see. But what in the fuck are you doing taking children to an art gallery? Are you out of your fucking mind? There’s a reason you see more commercials for Discovery Zone than for the Museum of Modern Art on Nickelodeon. Kids don’t give a fuck. Quit bringing your kids to places where they don’t belong. Your kids don’t belong in art galleries, they don’t belong in bars, and they don’t have any business at protests either. And as an organization that has supported boyfuckers for decades, do you really want to open up a debate about what is good for children? How can you protect and relocate a boyfucker and then tell me about protecting kids? From what? We’re talking about visuals here, so if I had to make a horrible choice between letting a boy be banged by a priest or see a picture of someone that suggests oral sex, that would be a really easy choice. Not a lot of late nights spent debating that one.
How about these jagoffs:
This little bastard couldn’t stop whipping his head around on his neck long enough for his grandma to tell us all about shit she doesn’t even understand. Seriously, you’re so worried about your kid, maybe you should stop him from twisting his own head off in boredom. I tried seven times and this is the least blurry I could get his face. And who are you kidding, holding that kid? If you two are actually still banging, advertising it by carting this child around is far more offensive than anything that could ever hang on a wall. There’s no way that’s your kid, so why are you just dragging children to this shit? Shouldn’t that kid be in school, or maybe on a playground? What parent in their right mind, when asked what their kid did all day, can say, “Oh, he stood out on some fucking sidewalk all day with nothing to do.” That’s insane.
But these are just some of the whackjobs who are really good at telling us how to live our lives yet have nothing more important to do than hang around outside a building and hold signs all day. What does the city council say?
“If you go to a XXX-rated movie, at least they have the decency to put a sign out of the theater, letting you know this is what you will see. I’d like to see something like that, a warning, placed at the museum in this case. But so far, that has not happened.”
Okay, that would probably solve everything. Let’s just put a sign everywhere someone might be offended. That seems like a worthwhile cause. What is it with people and signs? It’s like signs are law, and if there’s no sign we’re living in Thunderdome. Although I think even Thunderdome had a sign that said, “Please refrain from murdering the handicapped.”
Also, how many XXX movies is this dude seeing, and in a theater? Buddy, I daresay you are more out of touch with porn than you are art.
Then we get to the real action: a crazy woman who attacks the art case with a crowbar and tears up the print.
Nice. Fucking. Shirt. And jeans.
Well, I would first like to nominate this person as Helpfulsnowman.com’s Worst Person of the Week. She is being charged with a felony which carries a fine of up to $2,000, and 3-6 years jail time. That fine is kind of bullshit when one considers that the piece was priced at $3,400. Also, she pled not guilty, which is annoying on a level I can’t even describe. How do you plead not guilty to something that a number of people saw you doing and that you seem proud of? And then you say not guilty? How is that not guilty?
Also, I would like to note that this supposed lover of Jesus, Jesus being the man famous for endlessly turning the other cheek, decided to physically destroy an object, whether you consider it art or not. Meanwhile, the artist has offered to create a portrait of Jesus for a local church as a concilitory gesture.
Let’s take a quiz. Which of the following people is most reverant in his following of the teachings of Jesus Christ:
A: Woman who drives from Montana, destorys a piece of art, and then does her best to weasel out of the charges.
B: Man who puts his art into the world, watches as others physically destroy it, and then offers to create another piece for the very organization that destroyed the first, apparently apologizing for having his art destroyed.
Let’s wrap things up.
Does Loveland protect your religious rights? Yes. You are demonstrating that right now as you sit outside with your dumb fucking sign. Your religious right is the right to express yourself. You have the right to worship as you please. Beyond that, I don’t think a city has the responsibility to take your delicate religious sensibilities into account. How many times do we have to go over this arguement about the separation of church and state?
The part you Jesus freaks never seem to comprehend is that, though you have a right to religious freedom, so does everyone else. So if that means I’m an atheist and I express myself artistically, that is my right. If you wanted to respond to that artistically, that would also be 100% acceptable. What is not acceptable is to take a crowbar and destroy an object.
The worst part about all this is that if you do a quick search you’ll find a lot of support for this woman. Lots of talk of “red-blooded Americans” and how wrong it is for “Art fags” to tell us what is and isn’t art. But let’s remember something. These people who are so interested in supporting the rights of Americans are only interested in supporting the rights of those Americans who have the same beliefs they do. That’s not me, and it’s probably not you. They are defending a criminal. I don’t really care what the reason is, smashing a display case in a gallery and destroying a piece is a crime. Do I think this woman should do the maximum of 6 years? Not necessarily. But I do think she should do time. What she did was wrong, and she deserves to be punished. Much like her, I do not follow the teachings of Jesus, and I don’t believe in turning the other cheek. So I hope she reaps what she sews, because she sewed herself a real shitty jail cell and a toilet to make pruno in and flush a couple years of her life down.
The big question, the point people keep debating: “Is it art?” Some are saying it’s pornography. Personally, if I don’t see any genitals, humping motions, or feel a tingle downstairs, it’s probably not porn. And, if it’s clearly not intended to arouse you in that way, it’s pretty much impossible for it to be pron. To be honest, I don’t think a lot of people were looking at it and thinking, This art is getting me so hard right now.
Was it art? That is not a question that can be answered. Everyone has a different opinion, which is why art museums have lots of different shit on the walls. There is going to be stuff you like and stuff you don’t. There are people who claim their four year-olds could paint that, and people for whom that is irrevelant because the four year-old didn’t paint it, a grown man did. Art is subjective on a level that is nearly impossible to describe.
What I can tell you is that an attempt to create art generally results in art of one kind or another, while an attempt to destroy it physically, though having an effect of its own, is most certainly not art.