My point, by the way, is not that the sexuality of Jesus or his mother is important. It isn't. What made it important was that it was used in service of a stoic/platonic sexual ethic that had nothing to do with the teachings of Christ or Jewish tradition and everything to do with the elite sexuality of Rome at the time. That sexuality excluded women from importance unless linked to men. The word is misogyny. Christianity was never meant to be misogynistic. From Sacred Continence to Humanae Vitae, the ultimate goal was the glorification of asexuality and the suppression of women in the clergy. As the first is revealed and the second is rejected for what it is, the myths will adapt again.