Castrato is just Italian for castrated or neutered, even used with animals albeit mostly used referring to males. Sometimes it’s even used figuratively. It would still work perfectly with your example, I think

The base is not bread. Even your definition doesn’t call it bread. It’s pizza. And a random American dictionary is hardly a source.

Also, pizza is older than tomato in Europe…

Here’s an Italian dictionary, if talking with an Italian wasn’t enough

https://www.treccani.it/vocabolario/pizza/

What defines something as pizza is the base, not the toppings. Of course there are some common and more classic toppings, but those include also no cheese pizzas

Pizza and bread have different preparations, cooking, and sometimes they are even made with different ingredients. Certainly you wouldn’t say pasta is bread too only because it’s made with flour and water, for example

I explained more in detail in another comment here, but to be short I can list some like pizza farcita, focaccia, marinara etc

In Italy cheese is absolutely not required, even if Margherita is the most common base so most pizzas have cheese. Even so, there are many types of pizza with no cheese, and many others with no tomato.

It’s also very common to see pizza farcita, which you can imagine as a pizza sandwich. For example a very common one is “pizza e mortazza” in Rome, which is a pure puzza with no topping but filled with mortadella (a type of ham). But various kinds of fillings are possible

Another example would be focaccia, most of them don’t have any cheese at all.

There is even sweet pizza with no cheese, for example pizza with Nutella

If your pizza is same as bread then you’re eating terrible pizza, I’m sorry

Plenty of them are, but of course depends on taste. One of the most common and classic pizza is without cheese (marinara). So plenty of people like it

I’m still waiting the rest of the world to find out that there are so many types of pizza with no cheese

Stated as a fact with no emotion or judgment related to it. So that excludes mourning for it, which was the point I was making in my reply which was more than clear enough.

And I’m sorry, but I find it incredibly ironic how you’re the one saying reading comprehension isn’t that hard after failing to understand both Nietzsche and my comment.

You suggested them to read Nietzsche and from it you got he mourns the decline of religion through all of his works? Maybe you should also get a re-read.

The decline of religion is stated as a fact, killed by men’s rationality and evolution. As any evolution it has opportunities and risks, in this case the bigger risk is the loss of morality.

But the only thing he clearly advocates for is overcoming religion and God because they are not needed anymore. The new Man should make its own meaning and rules.

It’s the whole concept of the übermensch which is the single central point of his all system.

The quote is not supposed to be his opinion (not directly at least), it’s a character in a story.

It’s like taking the stance of Cephalus in the Plato’s Republic and say it’s Plato’s opinion, while it’s clearly just a tool to let Socrates speak.