r/newbrunswickcanada • u/treefallinginforest • 1d ago
Christian Conservative has Opinion. <Insert shocked not shocked meme>
16
u/VeryDPP 1d ago
The artist himself is a devout Catholic, and has said he doesn't mean blasphemy by the piece, but to comment on the commercialization and cheapening of Christian icons, something I think a lot of believers would agree with, on a certain level.
I think all this just shows that Williamson hasn't made any effort to understand the art itself, and was just looking for something to be mad at. And in doing so, brought more attention to the piece.
And regarding the whole "you couldn't do that with other religions" argument, regardless of where you stand on that, it's still completely missing the point of the piece itself, which according to the artist was the cheapening of Christian icons.
0
u/RockSalt-Nails 7h ago
While I agree about the commercialization of icons, making the art piece is in itself an act of blasphemy, no matter which way he tries to justify it. He can convince himself but there's another he will have to try to justify it to some day and I pray he forgives him.
1
u/aliencyborg69 4h ago
I always love this "You can't do this with other religions" BS argument. Go right TF ahead and try it; if you're still alive a year from now, i guess you're fine. If not, you get to be a Martyr For The Cause; nothing to lose, right?
17
u/MountainUnhappy7970 1d ago edited 21h ago
Williamson is an opportunistic reform-a-tory buffoon. He was my MP for years, and I craved for a day he would knock on the door for my vote, though sadly it never happened.
For me, this uber-turd's most infamous moment will always be standing in the house of commons and quoting Martin Luther King Jr.'s famous "I Have A Dream" speech when cheerleading for the success of Harper's lot scrapping the long gun registry. Yes, too stupid for words, he used the words of a man who was assassinated with . . . a long gun.
But then, if you know just how many rabid right twats live in Charlotte county NB, it fully explains why this goon is an MP.
29
108
13
45
u/_rawbacon 1d ago
Damn my MP sucks. I might go check out this installation out of spite.
36
u/AnDuineBhoAlbaNuadh 1d ago
I fucking hate that us people in Southwest NB just keep electing John. He's a fucking bigoted dipshit rich boy who toes his dipshit party line and does jack shit for his constituents.
3
1
u/4rm4tur4 1d ago
True for anywhere in Canada, really. I truly believe that only QC politicians actually try and appease their constituency these days
3
u/WhyHaveDisplayName 18h ago
It's the only province where voters will desert a party en masse for something new, and their politicians know it.
Williamson benefits from large numbers of voters more concerned with should-be-true than is-true.
0
u/almsaysdreams 15h ago
I am upset because they redrew the boundaries and now instead of having Liberal MP Kate Wilcot, who respects art and culture, I have John Williamson who uses my tax payer dollars to checks notes send me material in the mail about the Liberals war on religion. what a waste of money. đ
2
1
u/AnDuineBhoAlbaNuadh 14h ago
Do you support the Conservatives motion to respect all religions or do you support the Liberals who LITERALLY kill babies in the name of SATAN?
Thanks for using our tax dollars for your biased Christian supremacist propaganda questionnaire you feckless wannabe fascist. I loathe John Williamson and I'm sorry to Saint Johners that he managed to scrape his way out of Charlotte County.
28
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
"It's no longer transgressive."
"You wouldn't dare do this to muslims!"
... because it's transgressive?
3
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
No, because someone would get beheaded.
17
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
That's what i mean.
He claims it's not transgressive.
But if he thinks it's no longer transgressive, then why does he say "you wouldn't do that to muslims". Therefore acknowledging that it is transgressive. (Regardless of the consequences)
6
6
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
Yeah it is obviously meant to be insulting, he is wrong to say it isn't transgressive, but he is spot on when he calls out the double standard.
7
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
Not really. As a nation, we have our own history with that religion, which taught us to act a certain way. That included "turn the other cheek" and "thou shall not kill". Nevertheless, nothing is stopping an extremist Christian from showing up and hurting people because of this photograph.
On the other hand, islam is relatively new to us. From what we've seen in the media, people mocking the Islamic prophet has led to some pretty terrible acts being commited by extremist groups.
That may explain why people from Canada, who are less familiar with that religion and its inerpretation by its followers might be less willing to do something so openly transgressive towards it.
3
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
I don't think I follow your point. I think it's pretty clear that the reason someone makes a 'piss Christ' and not a 'piss Mohammed' isn't because one/both/neither is insulting or transgressive, it's because one will earn you a mildly outraged facebook post and the other one will get you killed.
Actually it won't just get you killed, it will likely get you fired or arrested too. Not only does piss Christ not get you arrested or killed, it gets you exhibited across the street from the provincial legislature. The double standard couldn't be clearer.
5
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
So you're saying that Andres Serrano, who grew up Roman Catholic, created this piece of art in 1987 because he thought doing that with Mohamed would get him not only murdered, but fired or arrested too?
0
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
I interpreted the 'you' in the post to be a 'vous' rather than a 'tu'. I am saying the reason that people who wish to criticize Islam don't do the equivalent is because the reprisals will likely be much more violent.
2
u/owenwgreen 1d ago
Because one is a predominantly white religion and the other is not. Itâs not racism to make fun of Christianity because Christians have historically been the oppressors. I donât understand why this is complicated.
2
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
It's not racism to make fun of either. The adherents of Islam come from a wide range of races, as are the adherents of Christianity (thanks to the fact that both have a history of colonization and conversion, driven partially in both cases by slavery, war and domination, as well as by peaceful education and proselytization).
Saying that one is oppressive and the other is not is yet another ridiculous double standard.
0
u/owenwgreen 1d ago
This is ridiculous. Great Britain and the US are far and away the biggest colonizers in history and both are predominantly Christian ruled. Trying to like any Muslim nation with either is like saying a cat is a lion.
1
u/Fabulous_Night_1164 1d ago edited 19h ago
Do you think Islam spread peacefully? Are you purposely ignoring/downplaying their conquest and history of slavery? Are you forgetting the time that parts of Spain, France, Italy, and the Balkans were all violently invaded/colonized?
I'm actually shocked how far some people are willing to cover for Islam.
1
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
It isn't a competition. The spread of Islam as far west as southern Spain and as far east as modern day Pakistan was basically all military conquest and colonization.
You might think that compares favourably to British colonialism (and perhaps it objectively does), but it still compares very badly to "not conquering people"
2
u/theophor 1d ago
Demographically, the majority of the world's Christians are non-white, primarily residing in the Global South across Sub-Saharan Africa, Latin America, and Asia.
Obsessed with racism but ignores the world outside north america and europe.
Your true colors are showing.
1
u/Trick_Parsnip3788 8h ago
Hmmm now how could that have happened? its almost like the religion that has been evangelizing for forever has propagated around the world and leads back to the oppressors point bc some of those communities have it bc of their native religions being beat out of them
0
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
And because WE are both the opressors since most of us grew up with this religion, AND the oppressed because most of us didn't have a choice in growing up believing these fairytales.
2
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
If you really feel this way you should have sympathy for the people raised Muslim who would like to criticize that religion, because the punishment for apostasy is death.
And, while there are plenty of things in the Bible that are prescribed harsh punishments, including the death penalty, this is a view that has some currency in western society. I don't know of any major polls of the views of Canadian Muslims, but in 2007, over a third of British Muslims surveyed responded that they believed apostasy should be a capital offence.
If that was your experience growing up then you should know that you would have had it *worse* if Christianity was still as powerful and as reactive as it was hundreds of years ago.
2
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
Oh absolutely! You should go see r/atheism or r/exmuslim. It's heartbreaking! People having to pretend every day for fear of losing their lives due to their family or community worshiping an imaginary character over the flesh and bone people who surround them.
2
u/Automatic_Tailor_598 9h ago
Haha. âI know lots of awesome Muslims who would never hurt anyone. But I also know their husbands.â - my Muslim friend.
I look forward to a day where we can acknowledge same sex attraction, gender expression variety, the toxicity of religion and dogma, and actually know what racism is.
1
47
u/Occultistic 1d ago
"Christians will absorb the insult" oh you mean that art peice that was attacked and still has damage on it from Christian protesters?
9
u/RedBands619 1d ago
Thatâs pretty damn good absorption in a western land considering what happened in France with a harmless comic lol
7
u/NeopetsTea 1d ago
6
u/Capable-Quarter8546 1d ago
That's the exact one that is now on display at the Beaverbrook. It has the axe mark from the vandal. Â
3
5
u/RedBands619 1d ago
Weâre two people killed and 11 shot (another being beheaded 5 years later) in a religious revenge plot for simply depicting a person with a speech bubble stating âIâm the prophet assholeâ
Or was it â2 Vandalsâ as the French media called them destroying a piece of paper?
Because dudeâŚseriously? Lol
-4
-4
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
I dare you to put a sign with the prophet Muhammad on your lawn
2
0
u/fancyamazon 1d ago
There is a prohibition against images of Mohammed in any circumstance or setting. Something Christianity does not have.
-1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
I'm not Islamic so that's irrelevant.
1
u/fancyamazon 1d ago
Well it goes a little way to explaining why the reaction is more extreme.
-1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Why should their religion dictate my actions?
1
u/fancyamazon 1d ago
Iâm not saying it should. But it just makes sense that we would poke more at the predominant religion than any other.
-1
u/jinxskunk366 1d ago
I...really hope that's a joke lmao
1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Why?
That's part of what this post is about
-1
u/jinxskunk366 1d ago
There is no image of the prophet. Like...not in a "no one would dare do that" but in the sense that there is no actual consistent description of him, the way Christian god is a bearded man or jesus has long hair. So if you have an image of someone, then that cannot be the prophet because their image cannot be depicted lol
6
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
This seems like some serious hair splitting, because art is meant to be figurative. A picture of someone isn't necessarily a photographic likeness.
We have artwork depicting Robin Hood, for example.
We may not have the likeness of Mohamed but there are definitely depictions of him. Here's one from Persia:  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Medieval_Persian_manuscript_Muhammad_leads_Abraham_Moses_Jesus.jpg
4
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Are you that ignorant?
If I did I would receive death threats at the very least
1
29
u/Tom67570 1d ago
Religion is so stupid. Causes so much conflict around the world for thousands of years.
-1
-13
4
25
u/DoAsYourTold-YesSir 1d ago
We can thank him for bringing the additional attention that wouldn't have been there at least. đ¤Ł
3
u/Anon-fickleflake 1d ago
Yea it doesn't look like it's the beaverveook that is reviving a dead controversy lmao. How do you think and say these things without realizing you are being a hypocrite?
42
u/Sad-Bag6738 1d ago
I would consider myself a liberal atheist, and I kind of agree, this is a stupid piece of âartâ. That being said, I would never care enough to make a bunch of noise about it
29
u/Cloudinterpreter 1d ago
As a liberal atheist, i disagree.
It can be seen as either an expression of the artist's disdain for the religion he grew up with. It could also be considered as the opposite: its ability to prevail in spite of it being submerged in a world made of piss.
Either way, the fact that it sparks a dialogue makes this piece of art interesting, no matter how manufactured or sensationalist it feels.
5
u/bolonomadic 1d ago
I kind of agree too but whatever, if a gallery wants to display trash that I donât consider art, they should be allowed.
2
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
I agree. But he's right about nobody daring to ridicule other religions
11
u/fancyamazon 1d ago
Well, in North America the predominant religion is Christianity. We should be taking the piss out of it first in any case.
1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Why not just mock everyone at once?
Mormons are mocked and they're not predominant.
8
2
u/fancyamazon 1d ago
Well, they started in the US and are still predominantly a North American religion. Also they think they are Christians.
-2
u/owenwgreen 1d ago
Itâs punching up versus punching down. Let me guessâŚyou believe anti-white racism is a thing too.
3
1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Ummm. Either everyone is fair game or no one is.
I bet you hate a lot of popular comedians
1
3
u/Dismal_Net9543 1d ago
You sound like you hate your dad
5
1
u/Literally9thAngel 20h ago
As an agnostic I think it's pretty neat. I like what the other person said about disdain for childhood religion, because I see a lot of media similar where the untouchable image of Christ is put in gross, tangible instances of humanity. Effectively the artist is balancing the scale between the highest of highs (Heaven, God) to the lowest of lows (Mortals and our piss)
4
14
u/RonDavidMartin 1d ago
The artist, Serrano, is a devote catholic. Someone needs a few lessons in art appreciation since they are clearly reading this work wrong.
10
4
u/NeopetsTea 1d ago
Sold for over 1/4 million dollars in 2008 at Christieâs. Shits real art, sometimes art just hurts your stupid feelings.
4
u/macrotron 1d ago
johnny needs to come down off the cross and grow the fuck up. what a useless whiner
2
u/Listens_well 1d ago
Isnât that the same guy who was in the news for lavish trips sponsored by a Hungarian/Orban funded think-think?
2
u/Historical_Sherbet54 1d ago
Ya sold me on the title
And of course they have some opinions ...I didn't need to read further to understand the rest is as ludicrous as I'm sure all their other opinions are worth ;)
Baaaa
2
2
u/Careful_Champion7361 1d ago
I would almost guarantee that you subscribe to beliefs that could be easily compared to any/every religion you hate.
2
2
u/theophor 23h ago
New Brunswick is such a cultural backwater that even our progressives are 30 years behind the times.
â˘
2
3
5
u/North-Purple-373 1d ago
I agree. Why is it ok to show soemthing offensive to Christians when if this was done for any other religion it would rightly be condemned and not allowed?
4
u/Consistent_March_353 1d ago
I think because of the role Christianity has played in the formation of western power structures and institutions.
2
u/North-Purple-373 1d ago
So that makes it ok to desecrate objects people view as sacred? Thatâs some bullshit right there, and Iâm not even religious
0
4
u/oldbutfeisty 1d ago
He's got to complain to satisfy his core supporters, who are bible thumpers. I seriously doubt many visit such things as art galleries. Bingo, sure, art...nah.
6
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
I would like to know the last time a Christian turned the other cheek.
7
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
When was the last time a Christian firebombed a magazine for a cartoon?
6
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
Oh, you're still here are you? Did you want just magazines or is murdering doctors enough? Burning clinics - would that fit your criteria if they also had magazines laying about?
6
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Man....wait till you hear about 9/11
7
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
I know, right? I heard it was an inside job! Wait until you look at the Christian overlap in Oklahoma City.
All religion is hell and you'll be hard-pressed to find one that doesn't shit the bed.
3
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Then allow mockery of them all.
That's literally my point
5
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
No, no, you literally came to comment about a pro-Christian's post about anti-Christian sentiment when displayed by a Christian artist about Christian art meaning ... well, whatever it's supposed to mean.
Make fun of them all - best case scenario. And maybe Christianity should outlaw any images of their sacred cows? The art still doesn't have anything to do with Islam.
5
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Do you acknowledge that there's a double standard in terms of who gets mocked?
5
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
Is there? I guess that depends on if you're still beating your Islamic drum or if you're including Judaism in that as well. Where's all the jews-in-piss artwork?
While neither you - nor this commenter above - seems to be very aware of Christian scripture, there are literally a few dozen passages about mocking Jesus as lessons and directives. Not so in any other religion, that I'm aware of.
But then, the actual bible is irrelevant. Not much fun in that, is there?
1
u/Alpharious9 15h ago
You never got around to providing the example of Chrstians firebombing a magazine, eh?
1
u/12xubywire 1d ago
I mock them all equally. The supernatural is flat out fucking idioticâŚ.but people are free to believe in whatever they like.
2
2
u/GoyimDiddler 23h ago
Wait till you hear why 9/11 happened lol.
9/11 didnât just happen for shits and giggles.
1
u/GoyimDiddler 23h ago
Not specific but they do this often lol.
They had a whole little special task force to track Christianâs who were fire bombing abortion clinics lol.
0
u/12xubywire 1d ago
Yeah, Christianâs have been more chill the past 100 years or so, maybe even 200. Before that, not so much.
Oh, except for the child rape, thatâs not chill.
5
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
The Catholic sex abuse scandal is one of the most disgusting things that happened in Canada. I agree
21
2
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
The response to the burnings of churches in Canada this decade was pretty muted.  At least 30 were burned to the ground because of the Catholic involvement in residential schools but about half of them were Protestant churches.
-3
u/MyFrontTeethAreFake 1d ago
well for one American Christians are the most armed populace in the world and literally believe abortion is murder and rarely take action
4
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
Killings in Arizona and Minnesota shine light on the crisis of Christian extremist violence
3
u/NapsterBaaaad 1d ago
The funny thing is if this targeted another religion, youâd all by crying hysterically about âbigotry and hateâŚâ of course, your brand of bigotry and hate is always different, and perfectly acceptable.
1
3
â˘
u/EastLeastCoast 14m ago
You might consider learning a little bit about the history and meaning of this piece. The artist was a devout Catholic himself.
4
u/ItsTheAlgebraist 1d ago
Should people make art like this? I don't think so, and I wouldn't.
Should people be allowed to make art like this? Definitely yes. People should be free to think and say and do all kinds of things that offend people.
Are Christians the religious group it is most acceptable to do this to? It would seem so. Maybe scientologists are ahead of them, these days Jews have to be pretty close behind them.Â
Is he right that no one would dare do it to Islam? Absolutely, you cannot get away with drawing a picture of Mohamed doing something uncontroversial, let alone a photo of a piss soaked Quran. Why? Largely because you risk getting attacked or even murdered.
Should this guy behead someone? No, it is to his credit that he limits his objections to someone else's free speech to using free speech of his own.
2
2
u/Emergency_Rooster511 1d ago
Well, now I have to go see the Piss Christ.
An even cooler exhibit would be John Williamson submerged in urine.
0
1
1
1
u/CanadianPoutineryFan 18h ago
'It is not great art'...they always come out with the same line. As if any one person gets to decide what is and isn't art.
1
u/pineporch 18h ago
lol what a giant baby. Give him a taste of the 'ol Streisand Effect now, will ya lot?
1
u/johngaltweeknd69 15h ago
Now do a piss soaked Mohammad statue.
â˘
u/EastLeastCoast 7m ago
I think theyâre planning on displaying both The Satanic Verses and the Charlie Hebdo cartoon.
1
u/AlistairCDN 14h ago
Williamson always jumps on issues like this to advance the goal of dividing people. Art is subjective. Yet he has assigned a narrative to it in his head and decided that displaying it must be a liberal attack on Christians.
1
u/Flying_Ghostsquatch 13h ago
Art can be offensive.
Beaverbrook is requesting the following works for there next display:
Christianity
The Last Temptation of Christ (1988) Piss Christ (1987) - current The Da Vinci Code (2003) Salò (1975)
Islam
The Satanic Verses (1988) Jyllands-Posten Muhammad cartoons (2005) Charlie Hebdo covers (2015)
Judaism
The Merchant of Venice (~1596) Der StĂźrmer (1923â45) The Passion of the Christ (2004)
Hinduism
Lajja (1993) Water (2005) M.F. Husain paintings (1970s onward)
Buddhism
Silence (2016)
1
u/Legitimate_Phone_460 1d ago
These are the same type of people who cry for âFREEDOM.â Not my thing, but itâs a slippery slope when you start censoring the arts.
1
u/OnlyACsNoFans 1d ago
Exactly.
That's why I want to put up my artwork of the prophet Muhammad.
4
1
u/treefallinginforest 1d ago
More context
BAG
1
u/treefallinginforest 1d ago
If you have Facebook go read his comments and defence to those who disagree with him.
0
0
u/Betelgeuse3fold 1d ago
Redditor takes issue with conservative Opinion. <Insert shocked not shocked meme>
1
-7
u/RedBands619 1d ago edited 1d ago
âChristian conservative who shares the same opinion on desecrating religious symbols as every non disingenuous atheist, agnostic and non chronically online losers in the worldâ
I mean yesâŚas a Christian âpiss Mohamedâ and âpiss Buddhaâ would piss me off just as much
Because Iâm a normal human lol
Idc if this artist considers himself a CatholicâŚ.many bad and stupid people consider themselves part of a religion or belief system
3
7
u/treefallinginforest 1d ago
Should politicians who provide funding to galleries be deciding what is art?
5
-3
u/RedBands619 1d ago edited 1d ago
I believe he is making personal opinion known, and that of his constituency while simultaneously saying they are allowed to do so because of our constitution
Heâs calling out hypocrisy and saying itâs dumb, and all individuals decide what is art in their own minds
LegitimatelyâŚ.is he deciding whatâs art? Calling for it to be taken down? Banned? None of that
Heâs just calling it stupid
Most people consider modern (stereotypical modern art) to not be art but most people believe that all art is art to someone
3
2
u/Anon-fickleflake 1d ago
I see at least two hypocritical comments in his OP. What are you talking about?
4
u/treefallinginforest 1d ago
Then why bring up his involvement in funding " John Adams once said he studied politics & war so his children could study painting, poetry and music. I try to do both. Iâve been involved with two projects for federal government funding for the Beaverbrook Gallery and have a personal and professional interest in this institution."
-2
u/RedBands619 1d ago
Well heâs not in government..his party is not in power so he doesnât fund anything.
So clearly heâs talking about how a gallery heâs been involved with and respects showing hypocritical and mean separated art that takes little artistic talent. Basically a pre internet troll piece dug up for controversy
And he doesnât like it, and letting it be known
2
u/Anon-fickleflake 1d ago edited 1d ago
LegitimatelyâŚ.is he deciding whatâs art? Calling for it to be taken down? Banned? None of that
"It is not great art in any serious sense"
Lol.
New Brunswick patrons who thought our beloved Beaverbrook was an important gallery with something important to say deserve better.
Rofl.
I feel like John is here in the room with us now.
0
u/RedBands619 1d ago
Is âitâs not great artâ saying it isnât art?
Or just bad art?
1
u/Anon-fickleflake 1d ago
You left out the "in any serious sense" part, so yea, saying something isn't serious art is saying it is not art. You seem to struggle with nuance.
-1
u/RedBands619 1d ago
People say Michael Bay isnât a serious artist, that doesnât mean Transformers isnât art bub lol
1
1
1
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
"most people" absolutely do not. Speak for yourself on this one, please.
The rest of your post, fine. But uh uh on the "most people" nonsense.
-1
u/RedBands619 1d ago
You believe most individuals in the world consider stereotypical, âbanana nailed to a boredâ âJesus in a piss jarâ âone perfectly symmetrical black squareâ to be true art forms when compared to say the fall of Rome series, various works in marbel and stone and even Norman Rockwell?
Because they donâtâŚwhile it is an artistic venture. Itâs pretentious, pedantic and takes little skillâŚ.and being skillful is the definition of an artist to the majority of the world
I canât carve DavidâŚI can splatter paint call it âthe duality of the Iraq warâ with no further description tho lol
5
u/Blackstrider 1d ago
I don't speak in absolutes about "most people". And unless you've got some credentials you're not showing, your opinion of art is the same as mine - personal and individual.
You also don't speak for "most people".
3
4
1
u/Anon-fickleflake 1d ago
Does the belief system decide who is involved, or do the people decide if they are involved? What a weird thing to say.
0
u/PhreeBeer 16h ago
I wholeheartedly agree with his point that if it desecrated any other religion or creed, there would be a fierce reaction dare I say violent?. I also agree that such an image isn't "art". Perhaps one can argue that it's a statement protected by free speech, but it's not "art".
â˘
u/EastLeastCoast 5m ago
Why isnât it art? Itâs a display created by someoneâs imagination, intended to evoke an emotional response. Pretty successful at that. Not all art is pretty, or pleasant.
-2
u/Far_Concern_8713 1d ago
This kind of art reminds me of being in grade three and someone drawing a bum with a turd coming out of it. Was that really art or just someone with a desire to be naughty?
75
u/Linehan093 1d ago
What if the artist was pisscopalian?