Why There's Conservative Drama Over #Calendargate
/If I told you there was a calendar compiled by “Conservative Dad” that features conservative women, would you expect to find a woman stripped down to her underwear in a bubble bath, with her thighs up, and beer cans propped up behind her? Probably not. But what if I told you she was mocking a video of trans activist Dylan Mulvaney, who did a goofy dance in a bubble bath for a Bud Light ad? Does that make it better? “Strip to your underwear to own the libs.”
Is the root of conservatism reactionary politics? This isn’t a Babylon Bee skit. Ashley St. Clair isn’t a flat-chested boy playing dress up in a tub. The contrast to Mulvaney is that, unlike him, these are real sensual women selling their images for men to ogle them.
Not all of the photos are revealing. Dana Loesch, a passionate defender of the Second Amendment, is clothed in pants and a T-shirt, holding two very large guns. If you added an inspirational quote, that’s essentially what I’d expect in a calendar featuring conservative women.
Some of the images are being debated. Controversial Christian rapper Bryson Gray called Josie, the Redheaded Libertarian’s photo, “demonic” because the women were selling lust while containing Christian imagery. Josie emulated a “trad wife,” wearing an apron and posing with a baked pie, but she was also wearing a short dress, lifting one of her legs, and standing in front of a crucifix. Many thought her photo was tasteful. Josie suggested there was no problem with her pose; people simply perceived there was because she had the body of Marylin Monroe.
One of the biggest scandals of “Calendargate” that has caused it to persist for days is the criticism and shock at social conservatives for speaking out against it. I’ve seen several comments on how they’d prefer women in burkas and accusations of wanting to institute something like Sharia Law. Using the privileges of the First Amendment to express moral criticism isn’t the same as a legal demand, and it’s silly to conflate the two just because you feel judged. Christian conservatives aren’t against sex, and they aren’t against celebrating beauty and feminity. But if the goal is to objectify women and make a buck off of it, that doesn’t come off as particularly “conservative.”
Peyton Drew, one of the models, has responded to the controversy by posting far more provocative photos. “Conservative Dad” Seth Weathers said if women would stop “b*tching” and become motivated to work on their bodies like the women in the calendar, their spouses would find them more “sexually appealing.” He’s also retweeted commentary suggesting the controversy is rooted in envy, which many other users have also suggested.
It's reminiscent of how trans activists behave when they’re called out by women. Kelly Cadigan has told trans critics they’re “just mad” because trans people were “prettier.” Dylan Mulvaney simps will say the same. Some trans activists even brag about their custom faux-vaginas and claim them to be superior. Their view of womanhood correlates to their perception of sexual value. “Of course, these women are gorgeous,” said Blaze commentator Allie Beth Stuckey about the calendar, “and of course, I’m all for celebrating true femininity in an age that can’t define ‘woman.’ In my view, this doesn’t accomplish that at all.” As Jack Posobiec, Senior Editor of Human Events pointed out, these influencers built their platform based on their ideology, and reducing them down to their bodies is “reductive.”
Why is it so hard to believe conservatives genuinely take issue with the calendar itself? I’ve seen many users on X (formerly Twitter) insist the calendar isn’t immodest at all and it’s so far removed from the Playboy magazines they’ve owned, the porn they’ve watched, or the pinup calendars their dad used to own. There are even accusations that men are gay if they don’t want to look at sexy ladies. Someone accused Bryson of wanting women to dress like the 50s because he was attracted to his grandmother, and someone else asked me if I wanted to jerk off after seeing the calendar (who turned out to be an OnlyFans model promoting her calendar). This doesn’t sound like the fruits of a conservative worldview. It reminds me more of Alfred Kinsey, who had a dream to stamp out traditional morality.
Chad Prather pointed to former President Donald Trump’s past, gracing the cover of Playboy, and scolded his voters for their “superior sense of morality.” But supporting Trump in 2016 and 2020 was about what voters could get out of him to advance their agenda. He was never a moral leader for the conservative cause, nor is he particularly ideological. And supporting Trump was also a heavy anchor for conservatives, who were often condemned as hypocrites for standing by such a colorful character with a checkered past. The blot on his character was an electoral obstacle to overcome; it’s not something conservatives should flock to reproduce. Republicans used to be the party of “family values,” and now, it seems as though that phrase is only brought up mockingly, we struggle in the suburbs, and Christians are openly attacked for voicing their views from their own side.
Social conservatives are mocked for having “purity tests” by people who think you qualify as a RINO if you don’t support Trump and believe the 2020 election was stolen. Well, events and personalities don’t determine your party affiliation; policy prescriptions and ideologies do. Today, social conservatives are being told outrage over a calendar is why we lose, which is strange because we’ve been told for months that not abandoning the fight to stop the murder of pre-born babies is why we lose. I suppose calendars are far less serious than M&Ms, debating the skin color of Disney characters, and The Barbie Movie.
Being a conservative isn’t about “owning the libs.” It’s more than reacting to an enemy, and it’s more than being against something. And we have to be more than the party of temporary tax cuts that complains about spending but blows out the budgets anyway. We are supposed to “conserve” something. I’d argue we’re supposed to conserve the Constitution and Judeo-Christian values. That doesn’t mean you have to be a Christian, but you don’t have to be a Christian to appreciate the impact of that moral foundation. You can belong to other political ideologies if you just value liberty and limited government. And voicing how one ought to behave isn’t a call for censorship; it’s an exercise of our First Amendment rights. We can choose to not buy the calendar, but you can also choose to ignore the commentary surrounding it.
Modesty is subjective, and a swimmer wearing a swimsuit isn’t the worst thing in the world. But it’s truly not strange for conservatives to raise their eyebrows and ask who is this for, what’s your creative objective, and why would this appeal to conservatives at all. Inez Stepman said, “When I was a kid, my parents decided which R-rated movies I was allowed to watch based on whether their merit and quality as films made worthwhile whatever violence/sex/drugs were shown and the only comment I’ll make on The Calendar is that it fails that test. The sexuality factor is very tame and low but the quality of the calendar fails to meet even that threshold and so it seems gratuitous.”
We don’t need to break out a magnifying glass and measuring tape to condemn every line of cleavage or the length of every dress a woman wears. Art may, at times, require a bit of skin to flesh out a worthwhile narrative.
The purpose of the calendar is to sell “right-wing” beer, to capitalize off the Bud Light debacle. It’s supposed to be reminiscent of beer ads, so “Conservative Dad” used “the most beautiful conservative women in America” to promote beer, even though not all of the models are conservative. Most of the photos certainly don’t qualify for “soft-core porn,” but there’s nothing particularly “conservative” about it.
The criticism would not have persisted for days if most people were like Riley Gaines, who graced the cover but hasn’t tweeted a peep about it yet. Pretending that these women weren’t used to attract the male gaze to promote beer is why this has become such a large conversation.
10% of the proceeds are going to Riley Gaines’s foundation, but I recommend giving directly to the organization. Fighting for women’s sports is a worthwhile endeavor, and that’s what Gaines is focused on.
