Creators of a sexual version of Da Vinci’s The Last Supper come under fire
A gay bar in Italy has caused controversy for its alternative version of Leonardo da Vinci’s Last Supper.
Hosted by LGBTI group DiverCity, Caffe Verdi’s Easter Thursday gay night is held in the Italian city of Salerno.
The poster features a shirtless tattooed Jesus, surrounded by men making out in their underwear. One of Jesus’ devoted disciples is even receiving oral sex under the table, as the guy next to him removes his toga.
The poster predictably caused an uproar in the town, with local media attacking what they claim as ‘bad taste’.
The deputy coordinator of Forza Italia’s Salerno branch immediately called for the event to be cancelled, out of respect for the local Christian community.
‘The organizers are neither blasphemous, nor “alternative” but simply misplaced and disrespectful,’ said Forza Italia’s Fabio Mammone.
Others took to the Facebook page to criticize the actions.
Hermann Ha wrote: ‘Given the reactions of your own customers, you should quit.’
But Caffe Verdi defended the poster in a statement: ‘We cannot remain silent in front of the multiple media attacks and print media also came to our activities in the past few hours.
‘Like any business, we respect secularism and freedom of expression of each and all!
‘Our doors are always open to all, without distinction of race, sex or religion,’ the press release said.
About author
You might also like
Gay porn star arrested for beating up boyfriend because he watched gay porn
A gay adult film star has been arrested by the police for allegedly beating up his boyfriend – who was watching gay porn. Jared Louis Valezquez, better known by his
Manny Pacquiao provokes storm by saying gay people are ‘worse than animals’
Manny Pacquiao has provoked a storm of controversy in his home country after saying people in same-sex relationships “are worse than animals”. The 37-year-old, who is running for a seat
Azealia Banks Slams Kanye West, Says He’s A “Closeted Homosexual”
Kanye West is apparently hiding in the closet, at least that’s what Azealia Banks claims. The ‘212’ female emcee recently slammed the hip-hop superstar over his recent tweets, dropping the
20 Comments
y
April 16, 07:32Rather offensive.
Kenny
April 16, 08:12Why? Because they remade a picture of your precious Jesus?
‘Like any business, we respect secularism and freedom of expression of each and all!
‘Our doors are always open to all, without distinction of race, sex or religion,’
☝️☝️☝️☝️
Enigma
April 16, 13:04@Kenny:Would they have done same for a picture that has to do with Islam? Oh yes,we know what happened the last time such caricature was made.
This is outright offensive.If you do not want to acknowledge the precepts of a particular religion,please,be my guest,but don’t go about bashing the religion in more ways than one.
Pink Panther
April 16, 13:09The question you asked was: “Would they have done same for a picture that has to do with Islam?”
Not: “What would the consequence be if they do same for a picture that has to do with Islam?”
And the answer to your question is yes. Something you already admitted yourself. Irreligious people will do with religious stuff what they will, Islam or Christian, because they do not hold those things as sacred as you do.
Mitch
April 16, 09:41We need to realize that boundaries do exist and understand where to draw the line. This was way over the board
IBK
April 16, 10:13I saw a remake of the last supper involving basketballers. I didn’t feel offended. Then why was my knee-jerk reaction to this offense? ?
On both counts it is offensive I guess.. I guess it’s that little homophobic part of me acting up.
Pink Panther
April 16, 10:31Your knee jerk response was to find this offensive? Lol. I’ll probably be branded a devil for this, but my knee jerk response was amusement, and then intrigue at the lewdness of it. I never once got offended.
ambivalentone
April 16, 13:28mine was 1st terror for their mortal souls, then lewdness. I wanted to see the models used. Then amusement. I was looking for Judas. And then thanksgiving. Muslims’d av blown y’all to bits for even less
Mac nuel
April 16, 10:29Dis is way out of line
Dimkpa
April 16, 17:17Way over board, offensive and out of line seem to be the consensus on this erotic work of art. I do acknowledge the right of everyone to take offense over anything they want, however I just want to remind us all that taking offense is personal and that what one finds offensive is personal and does not apply to all. Furthermore it does not take away the right of anyone to express their thoughts or ideas anyhow they want. Right to take offense should be protected, so likewise the right to cause offense because if we all stopped doing what will cause offense to anyone then nothing in the world will get done. This is what I find annoying with those who bomb others because they are offended. If you don’t like something close your eyes and pass. Homophobes find same sex love and PDAs offensive and some attack LGBT members because of that. Is it justified?
Religion is not sacred and should not be exempt. If the whole world had followed religious beliefs we would still be in the Dark Ages or something like that. In fact because of the hold it has over people’s lives and the incredible claims it makes over the nature of life, existence, history and biology, it should be challenged and expressed in as many ways as possible to hold it accountable.
When it comes to Religion especially Christianity, what I find offensive is the doctrine that I or any other gay man is just to be tolerated in their midst. I find it offensive thay should I desire, I cannot be a priest because of who I am. I find it offensive that I am considered a worse sinner than murderers. I find it offensive when they compare me to paedophiles. I find it offensive when they say I will go to hell because of who I am or for being the way God supposedly made me. I find it offensive when they blame me for the mistale or impotence of their God.
Another thing, who is to say that picture is out of line. Let us examine the facts, Jesus was a 33 year old man who the Bible says was like us, never married (some say he was married to Mary Magdalene but for arguments sake it is not in the final compilation of the Bible) and surrounded himself with twelve groupies… sorry disciples. He spent time alone wi7th only them a lot and there were even tussles amongst them on who he loved best. Who is to say this scenario never happened. Did they not have sexual urges? What did they do to relieve such urges in the absence of women? Abi their body be firewood?
Is the offensive nature because the men are naked and having fun? Is it an abomination or is it something that we have never done? When we find this offensive, it will be good for us to ask ourselves why. IBK admitted he didn’t find a similar picture with basketballers offensive but because it is naked sexy men, it suddenly becomes offensive. Is it the same way that Republicans find any suggestion of a black Jesus offensive?
As for me I find it a good piece of art which is rather appealing and I will cut, paste and file it for when the need will arise.
Happy Easter all! He has arosen, abi na arose or rised or raised or arisen or reason… whichever you choose, do have a good day.
Pink Panther
April 16, 17:22???????????
The bit about what the disciples did to relieve themselves of konji though… ?????
Kenny
April 16, 19:25Thank you Dimkpa. ? ? ?
Pankar
April 20, 15:53Its no news that there are celibates
Icarus
April 16, 18:03I’ll call a spade a spade here. This is borderline offensive and that’s the truth. They won’t try this with Islam or Hinduism and we all know it and even if they will, it still doesn’t make it any less oftensive. I’ll rather not have one of the greatest moments of Christianity sexualized.
“Like any business, we respect secularism and freedom of expression of each and all!
Our doors are always open to all, without distinction of race, sex or religion”
Freedom of Expression is well and good but like that the deputy head of the branch said… ‘It’s just disrespectful and misplaced’ I’m guessing they weren’t trying to blasphemous in any way.
Dimkpa
April 16, 18:44I find it worrying that we keep using this idea that they won’t try it with Islam as some sort of standard to uphold. We all know the reason is become some extremists will incite violence and killing of innocent people. I still remember killings in Northern Nigeria because of the Danish cartoons that I’m sure none of them ever saw. Is that what we should aim for? A situation where people live in fear of expressing themselves, the policing of people’s thoughts and action so that soon everyone becomes a non thinking zombie.
Blasphemy has also been brought up in this case. It is a charge brought against people for speaking what they think and it is punished in some countries by death, imprisonment or lashes. Is that the kind of society we want?
When we bandy these ideas about, what worries me is what should then follow? What should happen to people that “blaspheme”. If someone were to find the artist behind this and kill him is it then justified? In Pakistan a lot of bloggers have been murdered for their views, is this right.
The whole question bouls down to what kind of society we want to live in. Is it one where people are free to speak their mind or one where there are laws for crimes of thought and expression? Fortunately these two kinds of societies exist in the world and it is a no brainer which are more progressive and advanced.
When we talk about offense and disrespect and misplaced this and that, there is the assumption that religion takes precedence over everything else. Have we also considered it is disrespectful and offensive to the person who is stopped from expressing himself as he sees fit. Is it not disrespectful to suggest that his ideas are not worth being aired?
Icarus
April 17, 09:55I get the angle you’re coming from. I really do but despite the fact that freedom of expression should be the order of the day we should be careful not to step on someone else’s rights or in this case ‘beliefs’. I also agree that Islam shouldn’t be the standard but however it also shoudnt be ignored.
“When we talk about offense and disrespect and misplaced this and that, there is the assumption that religion takes precedence over everything else. Have we also considered it is disrespectful and offensive to the person who is stopped from expressing himself as he sees fit. Is it not disrespectful to suggest that his ideas are not worth being aired?”
No one here is talking about supremacy of religion and infringement right but imagine Christians made art that insulted LGBT? Or let me come down. Imagine an artist, that depicted the Alaafin of Oyo in that manner? Are you telling me the Yorubas shouldn’t feel offended just because of the ‘artistic freedom’ of the artist? The truth remains that freedom of expression is very relative as opposed to something like ‘right to dignity of person’ which is quite absolute and to ignore that reality would not be fair to ourselves.
Omiete
April 16, 23:11This is borderline offensive not just because it’s about my Lord and Saviour Jesus. A similar reaction was reached in the Pepsi advert. I know Christians bash us all the time and we are trying to do same but if we want to see change offensive things like this won’t make them accept us at all. Call me hopeless but I believe the church would change their stance with time. Things like clapping in church, covering of hair, women being allowed to be ordained were all things that weren’t allowed before.
Pink Panther
April 16, 23:50Lol. And pigs will fly. ?
Uziel
April 17, 06:46This is quite offensive. Imagine that Christians made art and trivialised the LGBTi community?
bain
April 17, 08:41It doesn’t bother you that all the other non-sexualized, depiction of the last supper are made by numerous artist,who have their ideas and takes on what they think it was?…
well this is one of them,if you don’t like it, close your eyes.