Some “conservative” guys at a company riffing off a progressive fumble saw fit to publish a calendar with a bunch of “conservative” women posing seductively for profit. If you criticize it, people will chide you for being too straight-laced or a religious zealot. Yes, really.

We all remember when self-described transgender influencer Dylan Mulvaney posed in a social media promotion for Bud Light. Over the past several months some “conservative” entrepreneurs have been selling “Ultra Right Beer” in a clever spoof on the outrage generated by the Mulvaney incident. But their latest marketing promotion was a calendar with “conservative” commentators like Riley Gaines, Dana Loesch, and Sara Gonzales posing in outfits ranging from a t-shirt and jeans to red, white, and blue bikinis.

I’m not straight-laced or a religious zealot, but I’m rolling my eyes and genuinely irritated by this because it is wholly inconsistent with conservative ideology and Christian values, which many conservative thought leaders in the movement and on social media constantly claim they adhere to and promote. Yet I see absolutely no influencers, podcasters, or leaders speaking up.

There are three reasons this could be the case. Maybe people are completely desensitized by our degenerate culture to think it’s totally fine for a woman to pose in a bikini so other dudes can stare at her breasts and lust after them. Maybe they don’t want to be disregarded by their enlightened, scholarly, relevant friends as a prude. Maybe they are appreciative of what someone like Riley Gaines has done for the conservative movement and women’s rights, so they don’t want to say a word and be squarely put on the wrong side of progress, as well as the big conservative personalities that support her.

I have to say, that’s the beautiful part of being a relatively small name who people won’t recognize. I can say the quiet part out loud and not fear the ramifications. I’m not going to lose my job or networking opportunities. I don’t care if you think I’m only saying these things because I’m jealous that I wasn't voted to be included in the calendar, which seems to be the common retort to anyone raising their eyebrow at this stunt as an anti-conservative project.

I’m just an average conservative, homeschooling, Christian mother who is sitting at home utterly confused by how ardently Republicans are trying to cosplay as progressives and the lengths to which they will go to defend their actions. Even a progressive will look at these images and be confused because traditionally this wasn’t what our side of the aisle stood for, and it wasn’t what either side of the aisle stood for until the 1960s and 1970s. Seriously, why are we rushing to defend the sale of a calendar that markets women to married or unmarried men?

In what other circumstances are we okay with this? A woman goes out with her husband and he stares too long at a scantily clad waitress. The wife is ticked. Why? Because inherently we know this is wrong. Why is that? Because the great majority of people who adhere to classical conservatism and Christianity know that lusting after someone who isn’t their spouse is backwards. It’s inherent inside of us, and God created us to know this is wrong.

Yet we will turn off that sane part of ourselves to nod at the creation of a calendar where you can gift the man in your life photos of Riley Gaines in a bikini. “Don’t worry sweetie, she is speaking against trans men in sports! Go ahead and stare at her.”

If you reject the Christian doctrine that lusting after someone who isn’t your spouse is wrong, you are free to do that, but I would ask you to use logical consistency and follow that mindset to its full conclusion. It makes you a slave to an ideology no different than our conservative friends who succumb to every whim and pleasurable passion that comes their way.

I’m sure I will get plenty of people asking me why there is such outrage over something so benign. Why not just be content with not buying the calendar? To that I’ll ask you where along the way you were brainwashed to think it’s perfectly appropriate, under the banner of “conservatism,” to sell sexualized images of women for profit and then question people who think that might be the exact opposite of what actual conservatives are standing for.