We’ve been talking about this for quite some time over here. You know, how Katy Perry, for someone who walks around with her tatas hanging out singing about losing your virginity to your high school sweetheart in skin tight jeans, is still WAY into God. It’s not that we have a problem with religious types (to each their own, ya know?), but we are a little freaked out by how polarizing her message can be. After all, she is married to a trashmouth former sex addict and BFF with one of the most sinister characters in Hollywood, all while having the name of Jesus tattooed on her wrist.
Well, it looks like Katy’s God fearing ways have rubbed off on her husband, who reportedly has toned down his comedy act in an attempt to appease his wife. From The Telegraph:
Katy Perry has succeeded where the BBC failed. The pop singer has managed to persuade her husband, the comedian Russell Brand, to tone down his act.
“Russell has made very blasphemous jokes in the past, but he’s making fewer all the time because he knows that I am very sensitive about this subject,” says Perry, whose parents were pastors.
“You can be frivolous and fun without needing to get involved in that. And I don’t know why that only happens to the Christian religion. I don’t see people simulating sex with statues of Buddha, for example.”
This type of humorless Christianity is so backwoods and ridiculous to me. Most of the hardcore Christians I know at least have enough of a sense of humor to understand that just because something pokes at Jesus or Christian traditions doesn’t mean that the person making the joke is unholy or disrespectful. And then there’s the fact that Katy went ahead and married someone who makes jokes that offend her about the religion she grew up practicing. Doesn’t that seem like a wrinkle they should have ironed out before saying “I do”?
Neither of these people are my cup of tea, so whatever hit Russell’s act is taking to keep his wife happy isn’t really the source of my concern. I’m more worried about the fact that Katy speaks about this topic like she’s from the 1600s and genuinely believes in what she’s saying. As a gay advocate and woman who makes a great deal of her money off of her sexual freedom, I would think she’d have figured out by now that the Church probably isn’t a fan of her regardless of whether or not her man uses the Lord’s name in vain.