# What exactly is "homoerotic" about "Passion of the Christ"?
**URL:** https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287
**Category:** Cafe Society
**Created:** [September 11, 2006, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287 "2006-09-11T14:32:18Z")
**Posts on this page:** 20
**Page:** 1
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 2:32pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/1 "2006-09-11T14:32:18Z")
The word seems to pop up here and there in unfavorable reviews. From [Katha Pollitt:](http://www.thenation.com/doc/20040329/pollitt)
> [@](#):
>
> The Bible’s brief mention of Jesus’s flogging–one sentence in three Gospels, nothing in one–becomes a ten-minute homoerotic sadistic extravaganza that no human being could have survived, as if the point of the Passion was to show how tough Christ was.
And [Christopher Hitchens](http://slate.com/id/2146880) has called _The Passion_ a “twistedly homoerotic spank movie.”
Now, when I think of “homoerotic” content I think of, I dunno, two guys kissing or something. What is “homoerotic” about Jesus being flogged with a barbed whip?
---
### Author:  [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 2:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/2 "2006-09-11T14:39:30Z")
Well, it’s a very pretentious, mediocre film that portrays Christ as an existential wimp, the sort of thing an easily impressed college sophomore might think of as deep and profound. Maybe that has something to do with it.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 2:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/3 "2006-09-11T14:49:06Z")
> [@LonesomePolecat](#):
>
> Well, it’s a very pretentious, mediocre film that portrays Christ as an existential wimp, the sort of thing an easily impressed college sophomore might think of as deep and profound. Maybe that has something to do with it.
No, no, you’re thinking of _The Last Temptation of Christ_ or maybe _Jesus Christ Superstar._ Gibson’s Jesus wouldn’t know an existential crisis if you nailed him to one.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 2:53pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/4 "2006-09-11T14:53:30Z")
What’s _not_ homoerotic about a naked guy getting tied up and whipped by dudes dressed like Roman soldiers?
It’s not just the “homo” part that people see, it’s the element of sado-masochism added onto it (and I think the film is more masochistic than sadist. Gibson seems to get off on the idea of characters suffering absurdly unrealistic amounts of brutality and torture.
---
### Author:  [@LonesomePolecat](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/LonesomePolecat)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 2:57pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/5 "2006-09-11T14:57:56Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#):
>
> No, no, you’re thinking of _The Last Temptation of Christ_ or maybe _Jesus Christ Superstar._ Gibson’s Jesus wouldn’t know an existential crisis if you nailed him to one.
You’re right. I withdraw my comment.
---
### Author:  [@Autumn\_Almanac](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Autumn_Almanac)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 3:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/6 "2006-09-11T15:01:41Z")
I think some folks’ logic is:
Mel Gibson =\> religious =\> homophobic =\> repressed homoeroticism.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 3:13pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/7 "2006-09-11T15:13:54Z")
> [@Autumn Almanac](#):
>
> I think some folks’ logic is:
>
> Mel Gibson =\> religious =\> homophobic =\> repressed homoeroticism.
No, it has more to do with the hunky, naked guy being tied up and whipped for like four hours straight. In most Jesus movie, the flagellation is a small part of the story, usually shown as brief and somewhat sanitized… Gibson makes it the centerpiece of his film, cranks it up to ten amd seems to revel in it.
Really, his whole film is ONLY about a guy being tortured and killed. It’s like _Hostel_ with sandals. Gibson shows no interest in any of Jesus’ teachings (which should be the only thing that matters) and focuses obsessively on his death. What is the message in that?
---
### Author:  [@Max\_Torque](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Max_Torque)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 4:38pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/8 "2006-09-11T16:38:00Z")
> [@BrainGlutton](#):
>
> What exactly is “homoerotic” about “Passion of the Christ”?
The buttsex?
---
### Author:  [@ZipperJJ](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ZipperJJ)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 4:39pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/9 "2006-09-11T16:39:10Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> Really, his whole film is ONLY about a guy being tortured and killed. It’s like _Hostel_ with sandals. Gibson shows no interest in any of Jesus’ teachings (which should be the only thing that matters) and focuses obsessively on his death. What is the message in that?
When I saw the movie I got the impression that it wasn’t a movie for non-Christians. It wasn’t for converting anyone. The people who were watching were going to be people who were already familiar with the teachings of Jesus.
I think Gibson was trying to highlight the suffering of Jesus as a way to really drive home the “he DIED for you” part of Christianity. And he didn’t die in a very soothing way, like grandpa passing in his sleep.
That’s what makes the movie powerful - but only to someone who believes Jesus died for them and is familiar with the teachings.
I’m a Christian so that’s what I got out of it. If I were a non-Christian I’d be bored and sickened by it. (Actually I was sickened for it, but I have a feeling it meant something different to me than non-Christians)
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 4:54pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/10 "2006-09-11T16:54:50Z")
> [@ZipperJJ](#):
>
> When I saw the movie I got the impression that it wasn’t a movie for non-Christians. It wasn’t for converting anyone. The people who were watching were going to be people who were already familiar with the teachings of Jesus.
>
> I think Gibson was trying to highlight the suffering of Jesus as a way to really drive home the “he DIED for you” part of Christianity. And he didn’t die in a very soothing way, like grandpa passing in his sleep.
I’m quite familiar with the teachings andI think most non-Christians get that Jesus supposedly “died for our sins,” but that belief, in itself, doesn’t make much logical sense (God has to commit suicide to save his own creation from himself?) and Gibson didn’t do anything to make it more comprehensible. He didn’t explain why flaying a man’s skin off his back and nailing him to a stick has anything to do with my “sins.”
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:01pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/11 "2006-09-11T17:01:45Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> I’m quite familiar with the teachings andI think most non-Christians get that Jesus supposedly “died for our sins,” but that belief, in itself, doesn’t make much logical sense (God has to commit suicide to save his own creation from himself?) and Gibson didn’t do anything to make it more comprehensible. He didn’t explain why flaying a man’s skin off his back and nailing him to a stick has anything to do with my “sins.”
Apparently, you are not that familiar with the teachings, or it would already make logical sense to you, and Gibson would not have to make it more comprehensible. You just reinforced **ZipperJJ’s** point, even though I don’t think you meant to.
---
### Author:  [@BrainGlutton](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/BrainGlutton)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:10pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/12 "2006-09-11T17:10:29Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> Really, his whole film is ONLY about a guy being tortured and killed.
OK, but what’s homoerotic about that?
---
### Author:  [@interface2x](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/interface2x)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:11pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/13 "2006-09-11T17:11:08Z")
The thing I never got was why they felt the need to overdo the torture aspect so much. I mean, yeah, I get it, he died for our sins. Isn’t the existing story bad enough as is without cranking the torture up to 10? There were several times I could almost hear Gibson saying “Check THIS out!”
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:18pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/14 "2006-09-11T17:18:48Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#):
>
> Apparently, you are not that familiar with the teachings, or it would already make logical sense to you, and Gibson would not have to make it more comprehensible. You just reinforced **ZipperJJ’s** point, even though I don’t think you meant to.
I’m extremely familiar with the teachings, I assure you. Familiarity does not engender comprehension. It’s a logically incoherent doctrine. The problem is that most Christians have never really examined it very closely.
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/15 "2006-09-11T17:22:11Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> I’m extremely familiar with the teachings, I assure you. Familiarity does not engender comprehension. It’s a logically incoherent doctrine. The problem is that most Christians have never really examined it very closely.
Again, the point was that to be that the movie is for people who DO understand it, not for people who don’t.
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/16 "2006-09-11T17:23:13Z")
Let me try this again. The point was that the movie is for people who DO understand it, not for people who don’t.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/17 "2006-09-11T17:29:39Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#):
>
> Let me try this again. The point was that the movie is for people who DO understand it, not for people who don’t.
You mean it’s for people who believe it without examining it. Gibson did nothing to make that belief seem any more coherent or any less ridiculous to those of us who _do_ understand how logically problematic it is.
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/18 "2006-09-11T17:33:51Z")
> [@Diogenes the Cynic](#):
>
> You mean it’s for people who believe it without examining it. Gibson did nothing to make that belief seem any more coherent or any less ridiculous to those of us who _do_ understand how logically problematic it is.
Let’s just say that if you have gone your whole life without being able to understand the theology, then I wouldn’t expect a movie to be able to explain it to you.
---
### Author:  [@Diogenes\_the\_Cynic](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Diogenes_the_Cynic)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 5:59pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/19 "2006-09-11T17:59:43Z")
> [@Sarahfeena](#):
>
> Let’s just say that if you have gone your whole life without being able to understand the theology, then I wouldn’t expect a movie to be able to explain it to you.
I understand it perfectly. Understanding it doesn’t fix it. The logical problems of Christian soteriology are not resolvable. The logic won’t parse systematically. It can really only be believed if it is _not_ comprehended or critically examined. Understanding it leads to a necessary rejection.
---
### Author:  [@Sarahfeena](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Sarahfeena)
#### Post date: [September 11, 2006, 6:02pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287/20 "2006-09-11T18:02:15Z")
OK, then how in heaven’s name did you expect Gibson’s movie to make it right?
[Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/what-exactly-is-homoerotic-about-passion-of-the-christ/372287.md?page=2)