It’s called “Calendargate,” and it’s raising the question of what — and whom — the right-wing war on “wokeness” is really for.

While most people were enjoying the holidays, extremely online conservatives were fighting about a pinup calendar.

Last month, Ultra Right Beer — a company founded as a conservative alternative to allegedly woke Bud Light — released a 2024 calendar titled “Conservative Dad’s Real Women of America 2024 Calendar.” The calendar contains photos of “the most beautiful conservative women in America” in various sexy poses. Some, like anti-trans swimmer Riley Gaines and writer Ashley St. Clair, are wearing revealing outfits; others, like former House candidate Kim Klacik, are fully clothed. No one is naked.

But this mild sexiness was just a bit too much for some prominent social conservatives, who started decrying the calendar in late December as (among other things) “demonic.” The basic complaint is that the calendar is pandering to married men’s sinful lust, debasing conservative women, and making conservatives seem like hypocrites when they complain about leftist immorality.

  • Flying Squid
    link
    fedilink
    4911 months ago

    the calendar is pandering to married men’s sinful lust

    I’ve been looking porn since I was a teenager. Which would be 30 years now. I’ve been married for 23 years. Figure it out, Christians. You don’t have to fuck everything you look at, even if what you’re looking at is naked.

    • @Raziid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      3911 months ago

      Many Christians believe that lust is just as sinful as actually doing the deed. It’s based on one saying of Jesus where he says if you look upon another woman with lust, you have already committed adultery in your heart.

      This interpretation is foundational to a lot of Christian sexual thought and explains why they have failed to have a healthy relationship with sex.

      • Pennomi
        link
        fedilink
        English
        2011 months ago

        I mean, at that rate the only viable solution is to nudify everything to the point it becomes completely desensitized. Then they won’t feel lust every time some girl shows her ankles.

        But game theory isn’t religion’s strong point.

        • @Raziid@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          511 months ago

          I think one of the main issues with the interpretation is the meaning of lust.

          Is it attraction? Is it masturbation with a woman in mind? Is it flirting?

          In the time these things were written, women were widely viewed as property and desire was not a huge part of marriage. Who knows what specific sort of cultural thing he might have been referring to?

          Personally I think lust is the debasement of a person for your own enjoyment. People consensually engaging in sexual exhibition and other feelings of attraction or sexual fantasy are probably not what Jesus had in mind and aren’t really harmful to healthy adults.

          • Kbin_space_program
            link
            fedilink
            5
            edit-2
            11 months ago

            Not widely.

            Ancient Egyptians, who were around when the Bible was written/collected, absolutely had the concept of women being more than objects and while not having equal rights, as I recall they were at least allowed to own things/land and go out on their own.

            Ditto the Gauls and Celts. Hell, one of the reasons for Boudicca’s revolt is the massive loss of rights for women going from Celtic culture/law to Roman culture/law.

      • @danl@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        411 months ago

        This is what I find most hilarious about it. The whole point of that teaching is to remove the lust - if you actually love your wife, you won’t lust after others. But simpletons’ answer is to not look at stuff. It’s bizarre.

        • @Wolf_359@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          211 months ago

          But even that is ridiculous. You can love your wife and find other people highly attractive. You can even fantasize about them. You can even have little crushes.

          We’re human beings and evolution is a powerful thing. Sex is in our DNA - it’s probably the strongest urge we have after our basic survival needs are met.

          The difference is that most healthy adults know that you can be turned on by someone and not take it any further than that. You are free to make your own choices. You and your significant other decide what kind of relationship you want and agree to respect whatever boundaries you do or don’t set.

          I see gorgeous women with great personalities all the time. They’re very attractive but I love my wife so I stay faithful to her. It’s not difficult.

    • @Dagwood222@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      711 months ago

      I like to ask this question. If men’s lust is uncontrollable, why aren’t there more assaults in go-go bars? The answer is always the same; there’s a big bouncer at any club to defend the girls. Controlling lust is easy if you know there will be consequences.

      • Flying Squid
        link
        fedilink
        10
        edit-2
        11 months ago

        I don’t even think a bouncer is necessary for a lot of men. I’m not into strip clubs myself, but if I was, I’d still be able to keep it in my pants because there’s the whole consent thing. I realize a lot of Republicans don’t give a shit about consent, but most of the rest of us do and I’m guessing that the majority of men who visit strip clubs would never think of sexually assaulting a stripper.

        I’m not suggesting they shouldn’t have a bouncer, because there are some men who can’t control themselves, I’m just saying plenty of men are perfectly able to see strippers and not attack them.

        • I realize a lot of Republicans don’t give a shit about consent, but most of the rest of us do

          I’m pretty sure the core goal of right wingers in their respective domains is preventing us from gaining the ability to consent to more stuff - or in their more extreme, for taking away our ability to consent to things - so yeah you’re right about that. Democracy is a system of consent, and our progress towards that was being challenged during the Enlightenment. Today, for example, many right wing economists are against democratically elected managers/bosses, unions, democratic government owned enterprises, government welfare safety nets for the vulnerable, housing cooperatives as a solution to the housing crisis, the list goes on. The pattern being that all of those increase the average person’s ability to consent to more stuff by leveling power asymmetries.

        • @Dagwood222@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          -111 months ago

          “Go into the cage, it’s for your own protection.” Forcing women to dress and act a certain way isn’t about protecting the women, it’s about controlling them. Look at how the Taliban are treating women and young girls. The preachers will swear up and down it’s to protect the women.

    • @Telorand@reddthat.com
      link
      fedilink
      611 months ago

      You don’t have to fuck everything you look at, even if what you’re looking at is naked.

      I mean, they’re a bunch of ascetics, so they’re wound up tighter than shibari ropes.

    • @doingthestuff@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      511 months ago

      “You have heard that it was said, ‘You shall not commit adultery.’ But I tell you that anyone who looks at a woman lustfully has already committed adultery with her in his heart.” - Jesus

      And oh yeah I discovered porn at age 8 or 9. He knows he’s setting an impossible standard which was his point, but the people arguing about a sexy calendar don’t understand.

    • @Iamdanno@lemmynsfw.com
      link
      fedilink
      English
      211 months ago

      Those pictures aren’t even going to move the needle in a world with internet porn on your smartphone.