He would have known about the Theotokos and a large number of other Saintly women venerated in the Orthodox liturgical calendar, of which there are icons depicting all over Mt. Athos, so while he may have never met another women in the flesh the title is a little misleading
The differences in depictions between male and female Saints in Byzantine iconography are definitely different enough to distinguish. But downplaying the human form is a big part of the point of these icons. “Orthodox icons, unlike Western (Latin/Roman Catholic) pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event.”
So while he may not anatomically “know” what a woman looks like, his understanding of scripture and holy tradition as well as the icons he was able to see would be more than enough to understand Biblical femininity as a Greek Orthodox monk of the Great Schema. He would have considered lacking the knowledge of the female form a blessing, as one less passion to potentially tempt him.
While that line of thinking is foreign to the modern world, we’re talking about Mt. Athos here.
It still looks fake, but the dailymail article is real, and it might actually link back to a real newspaper, but I'm not too sure about it. And even if it is real, the original article is apparently from 1938.
14 Comments
Duke_Nukem_1990@feddit.de · 54 pts · 2y
That robe is fucking awesome tho. Worth it.
ivanafterall@kbin.social · 42 pts · 2y
Is the headline suggesting women do exist outside books? I feel like you guys are burying the lede here.
The_Picard_Maneuver@startrek.website · 13 pts · 2y
Yes, but I think only in movies and TV shows. Right?
theodewere@kbin.social · 1 pts · 2y
Puritanism has been defeated! women are now confined to the theater..
freebread@lemm.ee · 22 pts · 2y
Men will literally avoid seeing women for 82 years instead of going to therapy
XbSuper@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
This comment hits hard.
bakaraka@lemm.ee · 21 pts · 2y
He would have known about the Theotokos and a large number of other Saintly women venerated in the Orthodox liturgical calendar, of which there are icons depicting all over Mt. Athos, so while he may have never met another women in the flesh the title is a little misleading
Nepenthe@kbin.social · 9 pts · 2y
Would depictions have been that great, though? The baggy, flowing robes are a given, so was his idea "like men but with more hair?"
If we're talking the medieval kind of art and before, hoo boy, he does not know what a woman looks like any more than they did
bakaraka@lemm.ee · 12 pts · 2y
The differences in depictions between male and female Saints in Byzantine iconography are definitely different enough to distinguish. But downplaying the human form is a big part of the point of these icons. “Orthodox icons, unlike Western (Latin/Roman Catholic) pictures, change the perspective and form of the image so that it is not naturalistic. This is done so that we can look beyond appearances of the world, and instead look to the spiritual truth of the holy person or event.”
So while he may not anatomically “know” what a woman looks like, his understanding of scripture and holy tradition as well as the icons he was able to see would be more than enough to understand Biblical femininity as a Greek Orthodox monk of the Great Schema. He would have considered lacking the knowledge of the female form a blessing, as one less passion to potentially tempt him. While that line of thinking is foreign to the modern world, we’re talking about Mt. Athos here.
PP_BOY_@lemmy.world · 5 pts · 2y
Reminds me a lot of the *Vivian Girls"*artwork by Henry Darger. Possibly NSFW image
fidodo@lemm.ee · 7 pts · 2y
Ah just as God intended.
coco@lemmy.world · -2 pts · 2y
Trollling. ´ickbait trolong vait
Oh wait ! Nope
Neil@lemmy.ml · -14 pts · 2y
ltxrtquq@lemmy.ml · 5 pts · 2y
It still looks fake, but the dailymail article is real, and it might actually link back to a real newspaper, but I'm not too sure about it. And even if it is real, the original article is apparently from 1938.
Fuckfuckmyfuckingass@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 2y
You sure bud?