The ''progressive'' and beauty

The reason they hate it is because of the Marxist view on art. Marxism views art as only being relevant in terms of how revolutionary it is compared to its time. The classical western view on art has been entirely different. The classical western view of art is that art should be something long lasting and beautiful. Something which displays the culture of the people that made it. Art in the western sense is the essence of tradition. Western artists have tried as hard as they can to make paintings that won't crack, and statues that won't break. Marxist art is designed to be short lived and anti-tradition. It's designed to be revolutionary to what came before it, and to not hinder the revolutions that take place after it. A woman with her legs spread as period blood drops down onto paper will not last forever. The woman will need to eat, drink, and sleep. And even if she didn't, her period will only last a week. This art fulfills the Marxist view on art, because it is revolutionarily different from art before it, it makes a statement about "equality" (feminism in this case) which fulfills the fundamental Marxist creed, and the art will have to be taken down eventually and can't last forever. This is the absolute height of Marxist expression and art. Marxism, which is opposed to tradition. And nothing is more traditional than a marble statue.

They hate beauty because beauty isn't egalitarian. You could make the argument that beauty in terms of art is subjective, but physical beauty is fairly objective and people know this deep down. I really think this is the brick wall that leftists will never surpass. You can't fool the eyes. "Beauty is in the eye of the beholder" is just signaling.

Also this.

(((Adorno's))) 'Aesthetic Theory'

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aesthetic_Theory

Of course it is. Physial beauty ultimately goes in line with one's use as a mate. For women, it's signs of one's use for incubating and caring for children (hips, bust). For men, it's signs of one's use for dispatching predators and providing resources (height, musculature).

Agreed, but what about facial beauty? I can make the deduction to biology with the hips and bust, but the same can't really be made with facial beauty right?

The ugliness of their art reflects the ugliness of their souls. Beauty to a lefty is like light to a vampire.

A bad tree cannot produce good fruit. And lefties are rotten trees that produce rotten fruits.

Male facial beauty also links to one's use for dispatching predators and providing resources. A study that tallied how reproductively helpful women rated the facial attrativeness of men had the most threatetning men as the most attrative.

I figure Lefties/SJWs/Progressives are averse to working and by default anything else that requires sincere effort. That's why they're fat blobs who pursue desk jobs.

How can you say that when pagan Greek and Roman art and writings set the standard of beauty for ages.

I implore you to read ted kaczynskis writings on the psychology of the left.
He makes mention of this, the left are masochists who hate anything strong and successful.

10. By "feelings of inferiority" we mean not only inferiority feelings in the strictest sense but a whole spectrum of related traits: low self-esteem, feelings of powerlessness, depressive tendencies, defeatism, guilt, self-hatred, etc. We argue that modern leftists tend to have such feelings (possibly more or less repressed) and that these feelings are decisive in determining the direction of modern leftism.

15. Leftists tend to hate anything that has an image of being strong, good and successful. They hate America, they hate Western civilization, they hate white males, they hate rationality. The reasons that leftists give for hating the West, etc. clearly do not correspond with their real motives. They SAY they hate the West because it is warlike, imperialistic, sexist, ethnocentric and so forth, but where these same faults appear in socialist countries or in primitive cultures, the leftist finds excuses for them, or at best he GRUDGINGLY admits that they exist; whereas he ENTHUSIASTICALLY points out (and often greatly exaggerates) these faults where they appear in Western civilization. Thus it is clear that these faults are not the leftist's real motive for hating America and the West. He hates America and the West because they are strong and successful.

16. Words like "self-confidence," "self-reliance," "initiative", "enterprise," "optimism," etc. play little role in the liberal and leftist vocabulary. The leftist is anti-individualistic, pro-collectivist. He wants society to solve everyone's needs for them, take care of them. He is not the sort of person who has an inner sense of confidence in his own ability to solve his own problems and satisfy his own needs. The leftist is antagonistic to the concept of competition because, deep inside, he feels like a loser.

17. Art forms that appeal to modern leftist intellectuals tend to focus on sordidness, defeat and despair, or else they take an orgiastic tone, throwing off rational control as if there were no hope of accomplishing anything through rational calculation and all that was left was to immerse oneself in the sensations of the moment.

20. Notice the masochistic tendency of leftist tactics. Leftists protest by lying down in front of vehicles, they intentionally provoke police or racists to abuse them, etc. These tactics may often be effective, but many leftists use them not as a means to an end but because they PREFER masochistic tactics. Self-hatred is a leftist trait.

Is Death Grips Post modern? seriously I love that shit

...

It's to promote dysgenics. Fat people have unhealthy babies, and no one wants to breed with a bitch with half her head shaved who hates men.

You're kidding right? Look at the thousands of years of Christian art outside of Europe and tell me again that Christianity begat the western ideal instead of just adopting it from Greece and Rome.

en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Why_Beauty_Matters

You should watch this documentary if you're interested in the takeover of our collective aesthetic by degenerate jewish intentionally ugly "art".

Kaczynski's manifesto should be one of mandatory Holla Forums primers anyway. You may disagree with his conclusion, or his vague egalitarianism, but his points on technology, the "power process" and leftist psychology are spot on and are laid out clearly and coherently.

cyber.eserver.org/unabom.txt

Marxism isn't the enemy.

Postmodernism is.
youtube.com/watch?v=YfRgvfruhPo

That's an excellent point.

I read his work some time ago.

we have on released soviet records that communist agents were attempting to destroy all meaning in art.

Postmodernism was made by Marxist Communists.

Beauty, like Truth and Morality, are all derived from God. The leftists, modernists, gommies, etc all seek to distance themselves further and further from God, which means distancing themselves from things which are facets of him. This is why they call ugliness beautiful. This is why they call lies truth. This is why they call wrong right.

...

no, it's just that standards of beauwty have modernized to be less problematic, you shitlord

Store up those heavenly gains, brah.

thats because mate selection is the final destination of the privilege ideology, thats part of what is at the core of their problems with others and themselves

that faggot louis ck said it, nobody fucks ugly, uglier than they are anyway, thats a personal freedom that people lihterrrarrlly use to discriminate against others with

these pathetic useless jealous privilege obsessed types wont be happy until every aspect of other peoples lives are controlled and subsequently ruined like their lives are

i mean this idealogical war, its basic, its distributer vs creator

instead of those that create wealth being able to to enjoy their own fruits of labor and time gains, all that value has gone on to supporting more distributers, more shell companies, more paper shufflers people that dont actually make anything or actually contribute in any tangible way.

what we really should be doing is abandoning incorporation, going back to sole trading and choosing to do business with other sole traders, cutting all the blood suckers out of the loop in the process

its easy for a primary producer to produce gains. you just go down the gym or the dojo and smash some out, hell primary producers are half already fit anyway from working all the time and having real actual interests.

you cant however socialize someone else gym gains and if these fucks buy liposurgery and stomach staples their skin will be fucked anyway

you cant buy someones looks either, instead of accepting the hand life has dealt them like everyone has to, all they can do is try to fuck with peoples concept of beauty and its application

this movement stems from inadequacy and the inability of people to improve themselves because all they have ever known is taking value from others and have no practical ability to create anything of value for themselves

all they can do is cover it all up, cover up their lack of self confidence, cover up their faces and hair in paint, cover it all up and shout at any and everyone with a natural smile and a nature figure.

So much Male Power Fantasies…

(r) selected vs. (k) selection

...

We should start a petition to chisel David's penis into a vagina for trans-acceptance.

That's even easier.
What do you want to see next to you when you roll over in the morning?

Probably.

Would I have been gassed?

Perhaps many leftists feel threatened by actual beauty as a result of their own poor self-image, which could be why some of them sympathize with the left to begin with.
The most likely explanation, though, is the inherent rebelliousness associated with attacking the ideals of beauty. The long-term goal is an equal world, and you can't have that if the definitions of beauty are traditional and exclusive.

You're definitively right about that.

Postmodernism is built on the deconstructionist theory, in which an Algerian french faggot called Jacques Derrida proselytized that everything is relative, even rationality because the basis of language is social constructed. Reality is a number of social constructs feeding off each other.

Funny enough, this is the true traditional viewpoint. Post-modernism has actually been considered to be fascist or right wing, and it is easy to see why. Modernism is actually pure cancer, so to the extent that Post-modernism opposes modernism, it is actually good.

(((Italian)))

Yes. She's a modernist feminist and will not make it on the day of the rope.

Wrong. Postmodernism is awesome, traditional, and right wing. Postmodernism is the heir to the counter-enlightenment. Holla Forums is postmodern.

FUCK OFF KIKE

...

I'm just posting some art here from throughout the ages from cultures all over the world.

The standard of female beauty is pretty universal throughout all times and cultures.

Progressives are at war with women. They are at war with femininity. They are at war with the entire world

...

...

...

...

...

...

Damn, those bitches in the first statue are fine.

So as we can see there is an objective standard of beauty. Leftists are constantly at war with it

Because Progressivism is just Communism re-branded.

Then you do actually know why: they wish to ensure that no one can live beyond the plague pit that they inhabit, because such people bring to light just how awful they are.
It's a similar trait evident in jewry: the desire to render the west, which allows their very existence, a slum, over which they are the lords. This is a jealous reaction to the aforementioned fact: that they are reliant upon the west, which is (or was) a virile civilization that's existence is predicated on a higher level of morality and awareness than the jew is capable of. Naturally, they will react against this, even though doing so will clearly lead to their own downfall.
The heart of leftism is the heart of Judaism: envy - plain and simple.

It's also so for males.

Here's a source:

femininebeauty.info/medieval-body-size-preferences

I have seen this statue.

In person.

Art is a redpill.

This town has no or negligible amounts of jews.

Now if we could just get rid of those fucking masons.

Savage!

She's not Jewish, fuck off shill.

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

...

It more or less just comes down to tearing down people who have the things that they don't have. They want to tear down the rich because they are poor. They want to tear down the beautiful because they are ugly. They want to tear down the intelligent because they are stupid. They want to tear down the thin because they are fat. It's rooted in insecurity. They hate who they are, but instead of working to improve the things they can, and accept the things they can't, they want to bring everyone else down to their level. These kind of people are the most miserable sacks of shit to be around.

Those doubles require explanation. I see post-modernism as pure evil and cancer allowing for leftism and SJWism to run rampant and destroy the traditional patriarchal western structure. How the hell can it be right-wing or fascistic at all?

Judaism is (and always been) THE enemy. Never underestimate their destructiveness. NEVER.

i'm a shy, bokworm girl (well, trap, but close enough) but i'd like to start doing degenerate stuff like burlesque dancing.

No, as a matter of fact, it isn't.

nice bait.
and btw i have the innate spiritual qualities of women, not men.

Christ, Holla Forums really is being flooded by cuckchan if freaks like this are showing up.

Also filtered, get triggered and stay salty lgbtewifhodlvhlkd filth.

Well yeah, except for the fact that you utterly and completely don't, my pseudo-otherkin friend. Your soul linked with precisely the correct spirit into the correct body, you're just doing an astronomically bad job at living your nature and instead pine for another in a socially disastrous bid to salvage the trainwreck that is this incarnation of yourself.

but i'm better at being a girl than cis girls are, so it balances out.

Art should never remain stagnant, it should always be evolving and developing new a e s t e t i c styles.

I mean I love classical art as much as the next guy, but you can't stay there forever.

Being submissive, demure and domestic… far from being qualities that show that you are actually a woman are underpinning flaws that show why you are failing at being a man. That you are a man and nothing else is a demonstrably provable fact as indicated by your Y chromosome. You are as you inherently are, belief and wish are irrelevant.

I'm well aware you're low effort b8ing with single-sentence replies but that's no reason to not sharpen my traditionalist argumentation against the delusion fucks who actually believe this stuff

Leftists hate everything good in the world.

i am a traditionalist. i hate submissive beta men like i would be if i was a man.

you yourself posted the difference between men and women: men determine and cause motion and development, women receive what is external and adapt to it. men are self-created, women reflect men's creation. men are virile, women fix themselves to the virile.

you were quite right there, and about how harmful it is for women to try to be men. that's why i know i've got the spiritual qualities of a woman, as you described, and why it's pointless trying to be a man.

(checked)
But you don't, as I pointed out. You're wearing a theoretical skin of womanhood that much like this modern world is entirely material and superficial. As I just stated those are not qualities that somehow prove your womanhood, they prove you've degenerated from the masculinity that is absolutely, inescapably, intrinsically your being. No amount of sophistry or skirts will change these very concrete and unmovable facts.

You're not spiritually a woman, you're a man who has been spiritually feminised. A fact far more shameful than any of the physical feminising you have undertaken. You are the submissive beta male, you're just trying to wrap it in another genders standard…. To take what makes you flawed by male standard but would make you virtuous were you female (but you're not).

None of us got to choose what we were, but it confer duties and obligations all the same. Fix it. There are plenty of quiet and studious true-men, even if you are a bookworm.

...

you post evola but then ignore everything he said because "muh y chromosome"

no more shameful than being a cis girl.

what's wrong with that?

...

Go look at a urinal. Modern art is garbage.

You act like you've ever read evola, then claim that "muh y chromosome" is an actual argument in stark contrast the massive naturalistic philosophy of the man.

That you aren't a woman. You. Are. Not. No amount of fancy, sophistry, wishing, material imitation will make you so. Are are not a woman. You are a man. This is a concrete and demonstrable fact. That we are even arguing this shows how fundamentally sick this age is, and how much of its baggage you yourself have internalised.

In fact, your very opening post belies the very first step of your fetishisation of feminity (pic related). You are wearing the skin of the girl you couldn't get. You are lava arguing it is water because it can be poured. You initiated the action to shape your own self into something new that it isn't… a profoundly masculine act, the very definition ofalchemical fire. Women are alchemical water, they have no form, they don't do anything on their own unless acted upon. You initiated this transition profoundly illustrating on every level you are a perverse man, and not a woman.

Adopting Greek and Roman ideals is a feat by itself. You should've realised this the first time you saw modern art portrayed by our cultural leaders as things wordy of museum stands.

When a culture has good taste, it's because the culture is healthy, this healthyness wasn't thanks to the greeks or romans, but thanks to the rigurous christian values.

I am not a christian, just so you know this is not biased.

That's a complete non sequitur to the point you were trying to make. There is no logical congruity from "good taste" to "the culture is healthy". Degenerate islamic culture valued greece and rome as well. The likes of Al-Khindi, "the first arab philosopher", are basically just a ripping of greco-romanism because the inferior arabs realised they had a really bad framework. One could just as easily say the same of christians and their realisation that desert-people scribbling on catacomb walls was vastly inferior to what it was competing against and so appropriation was in order.

Who said it wasn't garbage? I think it's garbage too, but art has to go in some direction. Our ancestors were pioneers of impressionism, deco, surrealism, etc.,

All of those, and more are wonderful and unique. But came and passed. Just like classical. We have to create a new movement that returns to appealing aesthetics, but innovates.

And yet Christian Europe improved upon that Greco-Roman legacy, while the Islamic world only took the legacy of the old world and gradually degraded it into nothing.

White people with better technology took the work of white people and bettered it. No real shock. All the church did was make sure they painted a lot of saints and miracles. You cannot possibly argue that western art is christian or owes a n y t h i n g to the church. If it wouldn't have been tithe money buying images of saints, it would have been as it had been for millennia and been nobles requesting various decoration for their villas and public works. If anything the church limited the range of what was painted to be more parochial.

If you want to talk the transition from rome to roman church and what culturally that meant I can assure you that you will come out of it with an argumentatively bloodied nose.

i just quoted directly from your screencap about him, retard.

no, i'm male. but i have a woman's spiritual qualities. that's what really counts, unless i'm talking to a doctor.

pic has nothing to do with my post. and it's wrong too, i don't have a desire to self-mutilate, just to look feminine and pretty. i don't destroy social relationships and or give up careers. i don't pretend only feelings count or use "i can say x because i'm y" fallacies.

no, i'm giving a girl to the man i'm not.

no, my bf takes the initiative for me. because he's a man and i'm not.

i'm not fighting against nature. you want me to, by telling me i should act like a man when my nature is to be a woman.

Ironically, trannies form *themselves* into another mold. So they keep being male/virile.

Never thought about that in this way.

She is 100% certainly a Jew. A lot of Italians are Jews and don't even know it because of crypto-Jew bloodlines. Same with Spanish people. That is one reason why Italians and Spanish are so degenerate.

That is not possible. There is no spiritually female but bodily male and there cannot be.

I read his manifesto three times. That's the beginning of my red pill journey.

Sorry but all high art is mostly owed to the italian city-states who actually had an interest in it. No-one else in Europe, christian or otherwise gave a shit.

Why Beauty Matters by Roger Scruton.

This documentary changed my life. I suddenly realized how ugly everything was, including my home and myself. Since then I've put effort into surrounding myself with beauty. My home is full of beautiful furniture and art, and I dress myself in beautiful clothes and I work out and eat better. I've also put effort into consuming more "beautiful" media. I don't own anything ugly any more. It has cure my depression, just to name one thing. This is not the same as being a vain consumerist. You don't need 5 gold watches, you just need one aesthetically pleasing watch. You shouldn't clutter your home with decorations, you should carefully pick out a few beautiful decorations and throw out all ugly decorations that you don't care about. Quality over quantity.

That was magnificent. Thanks for sharing that.

This documentary is so important. And it's a lot easier to swallow as a "first red pill" than political stuff.

You're missing my point. Where's all the high art coming out of white muslims or white pagans? Christianity allowed and encouraged art. Persians are white, but they had no Renaissance. And yes the Renaissance started in Italy, but it then spread to the rest of the white Christian world. The point is, both whiteness and Christianity are important factors, and when they're combined you get the best results.

Where's the great art from christian nignogs or the original sand-christians? trick question, it's all terrible

I would arguing being a european is the entire factor and that christianity has zip-all to do with it. Pagan europeans make great art, christian europeans make great art, islamic europeans would make great art. The religion barely matters besides paganism which edges out since paganism is basically "religious whiteness" (the period of highest public art exhibition was indeed pre-christian rome where even mundane public objects were engraved or somehow "artified", not even christian rome matched it so it makes an excellent control for this though-experiment: all other things equal besides religion).

What are the other reasons on average?

this

I chuckled.
Stay classy /fit/.

In order to make the world equal, you need to destroy distinctions. Standards are a way of distinguishing good from bad, hence they have to be destroyed.

This has probably been said on some way already, but progressives are narcissistic, consider themselves undervalued, and associate negative traits with themselves.

The landwhale knows she's a fatass, but she wants to be valued more in society so she wants others to address her as though being a fatass is beautiful.

You also see this with those that like Marxism. In a capitalist society, you are paid what others deem worth paying you. The Marxists despise this because they understand that they have nothing to sell to anyone in terms of their services, they are not valued and they do not want to work towards attaining a higher status so that they'd be deserving of higher pay when they could simply clamor for others to adjust their standards to view the pathetic as highly valuable.

So you have progressives that understand no one likes them and/or values them, and decide this is the fault of others and not indicative of a flaw within themselves. If they recognize that are others are better then it would destroy their ability to view themselves as worthwhile, so they'll constantly complain of how awful anyone unlike themselves are. Which is part of why it's so obvious how deranged they are since you'll find they'll frequently talk about how everyone deserves to be accepted yet it's only who they feel should be accepted.

that's not how it works you living garbage.
if you have a dick you're a man, there's no way around it faggot.

there is no such thing as gender.
there is no such thing as sexuality.
there is only bird and pussy.
bird enters pussy, everything else is just a fetish.

(check)

Preach it, brother.

So where's the problem?

if cultural marxism is the rejection of biology as a basis of human behaviour, i'd argue anti-beauty is in actuality anti-health.

i don't see things in terms of beauty and ugly anymore, it's either healthy or diseased.

beauty in art seems like an expression of eugenics to me.

Daily reminder that pagan Rome ruled the world and Christian Rome lost it's ass to barbarians and mudshits

Did you mean 'jewish'?

You didn't answer my questions, you just went on a pointless rant re-asserting your claim, and then some nonsense about "engravings" somehow comparing to Renaissance art. Yawn.

Though I'm Christian, this is pushing it. A whole bunch of other Christians wanted to destroy Art like sandniggers do.

As I said, the common thread is Italians (part Greek) who have always had a special hard-on for aesthetics.

Not sure why you're just repeating yourself now, forcing me to repeat myself that the Renaissance spread beyond Italy to all of Europe… Also, back then the appreciation of beauty was closely intertwined with spirituality and a desire to connect with the divine (aka God/Christ), so it's quite laughable to imply it had nothing to do with Christianity.

After I learned what this literal subhuman wished upon my countrymen…

It's called weakness. You're simply a very weak male, and therefore submissive, which you justify with all that pseudo-deep bullshit you're spouting.

You sound like you don't know shit about history. The reason there are a lot of Christian themed masterpieces from those times is because the Catholic Church was the richest and most powerful organization in Europe, so if you were a top artists, chances are you were employed by the Church.

I'd wager good money that if Da Vinci and Michelangelo could paint whatever they wanted, most of it would be naked dudes and horses with big dongs

The problem is that Jews are naturally subhuman degenerates. This is determined by genetics. A Jew will act like a Jew even without knowing he is a Jew.

An example being Camille Paglia, degenerate feminist Jew, despite being raise as a goy.

Hold up. Camille Paglia is a jew? I've read most of Sexual Personae and it argues heavily in favor of a patriarch-oriented society in that men are the movers and shakers and women are the feckless nurturers.

She even says at every cultural decline there is an influx of transgenderism. The only jewishness I can see is that she believes in the 'sacred and the profane', but that seems a lot like the Jungian shadow concept to me.

She's a feminist, a liberal, and a Jew. That is all you need to know.

Her book is known to trigger the fuck out of feminists, saying they're anti-nature.

Proof she is a jew?

Feminists are always triggered by other feminists when they don't agree on everything.

Her face, her geographical origin, her personality, her subversive writing, her "ideas," etc.

She denies rape culture, denies the anti-porn feminists, rejects Rousseau outright, reaffirms the glory of patriarchy, masculinity, and Western civilization, etc.

I thought it was a fair analysis. She relies a bit too much on Freud at some points, but that's all I can force into a 'jewy' ideology.

That's most likely because you are too far gone in feminism yourself to even recognize it when you see it. You swim in it all your life, so you don't even know what a real patriarchy is.

Paglia is the most subversive type of feminist because she flies under the radar like that. One feminist of her type causes more damage than hundreds of tumblr-tier blue hairs.

And she does not reaffirm those things. She affirms liberalism, pseudo-masculinity, and modern civilization. Very different. This shifting of meaning is a very subtle and effective form of subversion.

You're really giving me nothing to rebut other than that I should take your word for it, but because I don't think either of us want to argue about this, what is a 'real patriarchy'? Is it ancient Greece? Islam?

Real patriarchy is early Rome, middle ages, early Greece. And Islam too, obviously. Real patriarchy is not simply liberalism that de facto ends up with men running everything. It must explicitly exclude females and hold an essentialist differentiation between male and female and their corresponding roles.

Interesting that you cite the early phases of cultures, it sorta fits into her point on transgenderism being the late phase/decline of culture. I appreciate the insight, user.

The Blue Madonna

You yourself don't answer anything, simply using a sohpstic argumentative ploy of saying it is we who didn't answer you despite making points ourselves, you then proceeded strut around with a US-high-school-level (so like, 3/10) awareness of history that backs up your already arrived-at notion and are rejecting all outside information whilst demanding all others account for the high crime of disagreeing with ebca96 on high. You're either a natural-talent intuitive sophist or one of the few things you've ever read was their works.

In either case I thought people generally came to places like this to get AWAY from the "normie"crowd who always has strong and emotional opinions born of roughly 20 minutes of un(der)informed pondering of any given matter. Yawn indeed.

The appreciation of beauty as a platonic form is present in virtually every human culture. The striving for perfection (or overdosing on beauty) is a Greco-Roman ideal that carried into Christianity… and in fact caused great friction with the iconoclastic tendencies found in it.

At best (and probably more importantly), Christianity acts as framework/guide with which to pursue beauty but attributing anything more is problematic…. as many 'christians' have been taliban-like in destroying.burning/vandalizing great works of art.

So all artists were really atheists when literally everybody else was Christian? That's quite the outrageous claim.

Wow what a surprise, when I call you out on what you're doing, you do it even more. Hundreds of words and many cringey ad hominems and much Freud-tier psychoanalysis later, still no rebutals. I'll take that as a concession that you've lost. GG.

That's true, just as Greco-Roman philosophy and culture passed on into Christianity, but the reason they could pass on is because they were compatible with Christianity. It was the priests, patriarchs, and monks of the church themsleves that saw the connection between those old ideas and the ideas put forth in the Bible, and merged them precisely because they fit together, while doing away with old ideas that were degenerate and anti-Christian, like human sacrifice or orgy parties.

Sorry but SJWs ruined that word, you can't use it anymore.

That's true, but it's not the fault of Christianity that not everybody understands Christianity. When retarded puritans read the commandment against worshipping idols and graven images, and then ignore the part where God instructed his followers to build statues of angels etc., and ignore the basic logical difference between art/symbolism vs. objects of worship, one can hardly claim that it's Christianity's fault. Those same people, if they had encountered Mein Kampf instead of the Bible, would run around killing all non-Germans or some other ridiculous misinterpretation.

vimeo.com/55784152