Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. Only the apps you allow.

Meet the Other Phone.
Only the apps you allow.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

See all MNHQ comments on this thread

Original poster

to think that this 'transsexual' Jesus play should not get public funding?

508 replies

whatwilltheythinkofnext · 12/11/2015 16:07

I would say 'no words' but how about "disgusting, insulting, disrespectful, immoral..." need I go on? How does this awful thing get 'public funding' - I'd be demanding a refund of my council tax. Enough already!

OP posts:
celtictoast · 13/11/2015 22:03

Faberge if the author has accepted Christ as her saviour then yes she is a Christian. Not the sort you or other right-wing fundamentalists would like her to be, but as you rightly point out, Jesus did say "do not judge, or you will be judged".

The Bible being "quite clear" is always what fundamentalists say because they take the Bible literally. I take issue with your claim that only your view of the Bible is the right one.

I also think you're wrong to criticise feminism as Jesus himself treated women with equal respect, and there are female images of God in the Bible such as the hen gathering her chicks under her wings.

As for the "texts alluding to those who would claim to know Christ but to whom Jesus will say on the day of atonement, 'Be gone from me, I never knew you.'" how do you know that doesn't apply to fundamentalists who follow certain Biblical passages to the letter but do not show love to their fellow humans?

celtictoast · 13/11/2015 22:13

The arts are about imagination, not reality. Everyone knows this show is something a playwright has made up and no-one is claiming it to be real. No-one is going to watch the play and think they're watching a documentary!

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:18

I would suggest that if the author of this play was a Christian he would not seek to use Jesus for the espousal of his own Left-wing sexual politics.

You use the term 'fundamental' as if it were an insult. What makes you think my post is intended to criticise feminism? Where do I not show love to my fellow human beings? How is my directing you to passages of the bible something to 'take issue' over? Which passage do you find oblique? Which passage is open to interpretation with regards how we must show love for Christ?

Do feminists who deny a transwoman's experience of being a woman necessarily hate that person? Does my suggestion that someone is not a Christian mean I cannot or do not love them?

BrendaFlange · 13/11/2015 22:20

Welcome out of your lurkdom, Faberge.

I don't engage with the trans Threads, so forgive me for not engaging with any of that - excpt to say that of course many people on the Tran threads are NOLT the same people as on this thread, so can't necessarily be held to account for hypocrisy because threads there do not align logically with this thread (in your view). MN does not have a UniMind. Not even the lefty etc people on MN.

I think it reasonable for you as a Christian not to want to have anything to do with a play that you feel does not fit comfortably with your faith. It's up to you. But this thread is about 'offence' and that 'offence' should be the most important thing. I haven't seen the play, and neither have you. It could be that it explores some really interesting questions. The church has recently been thinking about not always referring to god as 'he' (I heard a programme on R4 about it). Non Christians in this county have the very fabric of our lives shaped by Christianity. The tussle over marriage and its definition, the limiting of marriage to 'one man and one woman'. Why can't whole groups of people marry and form a family for the purpose of bringing up children? 2 gay men and two lesbian women, for example, as 4parents to shared children?

Maybe this play asks some 'what ifs'. Maybe this play asks whether gender and sex is actually even important or relevant to the character of Christ. What is WRONG with that, that the OP and other posters feel it should be not allowed?

It is relevant that none of us have seen it because it might well be a valuable exploration and debate. It might not be a wild mockery. (though even if it was I wouldn't support censorship). But just calling for it to be banned because it is deemed 'offensive' is not good enough.

Shallishanti · 13/11/2015 22:20

hmm
a quick look at the people complaining about this play shows they are in favour of beating children so any teeny tiny chance there might have been of me wasting time trying to see the world through their eyes has just evaoporated

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:22

what is left wing about being a transsexual?

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:24

What an absurd notion: that anything at all could and should be depicted in a play because 'it's only art'; that nothing borne of an author's imagination can possibly be dangerous/blasphemous/offensive.

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:29

Maybe this play asks whether gender and sex is actually even important or relevant to the character of Christ. What is WRONG with that...

Well, that would be pertinent if the bible said anything at all about the sexuality of Christ. It doesn't. And that's because His life and death on the cross were not for the purposes of providing fodder for politicos and ideologues.

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:30

I don't know whether the play is dangerous (suspect it isn't as it has been performed for a number of years with apparently no casualties) but it is allowed to cause offence and we no longer have blasphemy laws in the UK.

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:31

And that's because His life and death on the cross were not for the purposes of providing fodder for politicos and ideologues.

Well 2000 years later Jesus must be bitterly disappointed with how that worked out!

BrendaFlange · 13/11/2015 22:32

Well people are now dying and in terror for their lives on the streets of Paris.

Insistence on respect, intolerance, 'offence' and a lack of common understanding about free speech and living alongside others and use debate and discussion instead of bans and gags will doubtless be found to be at the root of it.

Sad
outofpaper · 13/11/2015 22:33

Sorry if I am being niaive but how are you being insulted exactly? I think you are being insulting tbh.

BrendaFlange · 13/11/2015 22:35

"What an absurd notion: that anything at all could and should be depicted in a play because 'it's only art'; that nothing borne of an author's imagination can possibly be dangerous/blasphemous/offensive."

It's a CRUCIAL notion.

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:37

I don't engage with the trans Threads, so forgive me for not engaging with any of that - excpt to say that of course many people on the Tran threads are NOLT the same people as on this thread, so can't necessarily be held to account for hypocrisy because threads there do not align logically with this thread (in your view). MN does not have a UniMind. Not even the lefty etc people on MN

Hmm..disingenuous, that. I'm not making reference to the Jenner thread for the fun of it, or trying even to extrapolate what folk have said over there in order to conflate my 'argument'; my point is that respect is given to posters all over Mumsnet who do not recognise the 'female experiences' of transwomen and refuse to accept someone can change their biological sex, yet here the OP is denigrated and badgered into admitting she has 'issues with transsexuals'. Because she is a Christian.

BrendaFlange · 13/11/2015 22:39

"Well, that would be pertinent if the bible said anything at all about the sexuality of Christ. It doesn't" Well, it does actually, in the form of M Magdelene, but I am being less literal. Can any play which references Christianity only be of the purpose to debate things actually written in the Bible? That would be a bit dull. And better placed in a text or reference book. Why can't ideas about Christianity be debated in the public forum that is theatre, and through the fictional medium of drama?

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:39

Well 2000 years later Jesus must be bitterly disappointed with how that worked out!

Not at all. He is God, you see, and as such He knew before the beginning of time how all this would pan out in 2015 Smile

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:40

Because she is a Christian.

No, because he/she hasn't made a convincing argument.

BrendaFlange · 13/11/2015 22:42

Not disingenuous at all - the OP, or Rose, actually, was being challenged because she couldn't actually say why it was offensive to write a fictional play about any connection between Christ and gender.

I am off to watch the news.

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:42

Not at all. He is God, you see, and as such He knew before the beginning of time how all this would pan out in 2015

Well then He has no problem with this play.

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:42

Brenda, please cite the passage in the bible that alludes to Christ having sexual feelings for Mary Magdalene (bearing in mind he frequently told his male brethren that he 'loved' them).

Of course Christianity can be referenced in plays, who said it mustn't?

GruntledOne · 13/11/2015 22:44

I wish someone could explain why the mere fact of showing Jesus as a transsexual must mean that author of the play is mocking Christianity. Surely that can only be the case if you think transsexuals are people who can and should be mocked, which this author plainly doesn't.

It does amuse me when rabid Christians equate anyone whose views they dislike with dreadful Lefties. If Christ existed and came back today, he would inevitably be pilloried as a dreadful Lefty. All that dreadful business of loving your neighbour, loving the poor, helping those outcast by society, forgiving sins - he would be totally monstered by the right wing press.

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:47

No, because he/she hasn't made a convincing argument.

Just because you weren't convinced doesn't mean the OP wasn't convincing in her passionate defence of Christ and Christianity. The OP doesn't have to win an argument or even think in a manner that is critical as approved by Mumsnet academics. It's a discussion forum, not Question Time.

Well then He has no problem with this play.

God 'has a problem' with all kinds of behaviour and thought and deed, but because He gave us free will He will forever weep at man's sin.

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:48

Of course Christianity can be referenced in plays, who said it mustn't?

You - unless it matches your idea of Christianity - which is a bit of a problem given that there are many Christians who won't agree with your interpretation of Christianity - even the ones who agree with your views on this play.

merrymouse · 13/11/2015 22:48

Just because you weren't convinced doesn't mean the OP wasn't convincing in her passionate defence of Christ and Christianity. The OP doesn't have to win an argument or even think in a manner that is critical as approved by Mumsnet academics. It's a discussion forum, not Question Time.

Sorry - I missed that bit - where?

FabergeEggs · 13/11/2015 22:54

I wish someone could explain why the mere fact of showing Jesus as a transsexual must mean that author of the play is mocking Christianity. Surely that can only be the case if you think transsexuals are people who can and should be mocked, which this author plainly doesn't.

It could be anything, though, couldn't it?: Christ portrayed as a vegan anti-vivisectionist; Christ as a hairdresser called Jesse; Jesus as an AIDS victim. What is the purpose of conflating what we do know about the Saviour to satisfy our need to have a fallible, mortal, sinful mirror of ourselves? It's not that Christ has been ascribed the mental illness of dysmorphia in this play but that He is being used as religious fodder by those who would seek to politicise further their own agenda.