>>40735746this is christcuckery nonsense
notice how every argument boils down to some generic
>he's evil>he's demonic>he looks like a drug addict>he's projecting its all surface level subjective feelings nothing to do with facts
monotheists are butthurt that all of their "spiritual practices" were ripped straight from pagan drug traditions that were owned by women
the funniest part about all of this is that if you look closely ammon isnt even the first person to notice this shit
literally look at wikipedia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/John_the_Apostle#In_art
>In Medieval and through to Renaissance works of painting, sculpture and literature, Saint John is often presented in an androgynous or feminized manner.[129] Historians have related such portrayals to the circumstances of the believers for whom they were intended.[130] For instance, John's feminine features are argued to have helped to make him more relatable to women.[131] Likewise, Sarah McNamer argues that because of his status as an androgynous saint, John could function as an "image of a third or mixed gender"[132] and "a crucial figure with whom to identify"[133] for male believers who sought to cultivate an attitude of affective piety, a highly emotional style of devotion that, in late-medieval culture, was thought to be poorly compatible with masculinity.[134] After the Middle Ages, feminizing portrayals of Saint John continued to be made; a case in point is an etching by Jacques Bellange, shown to the right, described by art critic Richard Dorment as depicting "a softly androgynous creature with a corona of frizzy hair, small breasts like a teenage girl, and the round belly of a mature woman."[135]hmm wonder where all these artists got the idea to make john a femboy...
