Just Say No to Skeptic Calendars

Over the past several years, various groups have created calendars featuring nude/semi-nude/fully-clothed skeptics to raise funds for their events or donate to charity. For the most part, it’s all in good fun. The models — I’ve been one myself. Not nude. You’re welcome. — volunteer to do it (and it’s exciting!), the organizations make a little money, the buyers enjoy the calendar. That’s the idea.

You haven’t looked at one of these since 1999.

Rebecca Watson, whose Skepchick/Skepdude calendars were pretty popular a few years back, is now asking secular groups to stop making them. It’s not hypocrisy; she’s just had a change of heart when it comes to what these calendars accomplish.

Her points are completely valid and worth reading in their entirety, but here are the bulletpoints:

  • In an atmosphere where there’s a lot of talk about sexual harassment and making women feel comfortable, pin-up calendars aren’t helping.
  • Having calendars featuring men didn’t “balance out” the ones with women. No one’s ever leveled a complaint at me for posing in one or suggested I have no right to talk about harassment because I was Mr. July, 2009. But people have said that (and more) against the women who have posed in them.
  • Does sending women to skeptic conferences (often the intent of these calendars) really benefit them? Or is it just a fun weekend with no long-term payoff? It’s looking more and more like the latter.
  • Who uses calendars, anyway?
  • Pin-up/nude calendars are just not very novel anymore (if they ever were, that is).

It’s possible to rebut individual points, but the overall idea still stands and I agree with it. The calendars, the way they’ve always been done and despite some of the benefits they bring with them, aren’t working. Not for our community. Not at this time.

None of this is to say the groups who put these calendars together are wrong to do it… but if you’re considering the idea in the future, you might want to think of something else.

(image via Shutterstock)

About Hemant Mehta

Hemant Mehta is the chair of Foundation Beyond Belief and a high school math teacher in the suburbs of Chicago. He began writing the Friendly Atheist blog in 2006. His latest book is called The Young Atheist's Survival Guide.

  • http://www.atheistrev.com/ vjack

    If Watson is saying that her group will no longer make the calendars and explaining why, I’m all for it. That would mean that she’s making an effort to be more consistent, and that’s a good thing. On the other hand, if she’s really asking other groups to stop making calendars, then I’m not so sure about that. It seems like that would be up to them.

    • http://twitter.com/tauriqmoosa Tauriq Moosa

      I think there might be some confusion of the “RIGHT of other groups to make calendars” and Watson’s reasonable arguments for them not to. Just as we have a right to (mostly) say whatever we want, it’s a separate argument for whether we should. 

      Watson is making a good argument for why no secular groups ought to do so. She’s not trying to censor them, but asking them (not) to do so for moral reasons.

    • Gordon Duffy

       Rather like “guys, don’t do that” you can extrapolate an expressed opinion/preference into a command and get outraged that Rebecca is trying to run your life, or you can take it at face value and look to see whether there’s any merit to the opinion.

    • http://www.laughinginpurgatory.com/ Andrew Hall

      I’m looking forward to Richard Carrier’s “I’m an Atheist Jacobin” calendar.

    • Grizzz

      Hey, as far as I’m concerned, the less I have to see Rebecca Watson and her crew of idiots (Adam Lee, PZ and Greta) the better. If they are not going to be on anything that is shown in public all the better.

  • http://anonatheist.wordpress.com/ Mike Hunt

    Am I the only one that thinks everyone is losing their sense of humor?  The human body is beautiful, if you were to throw out all art that features nude or semi-nude figures, it would be a very large swath of our human heritage gone.

    • http://twitter.com/tauriqmoosa Tauriq Moosa

      I’m not sure who is throwing out “all art that features nude or semi-nude figures”? Let’s stick with current goal-post of secular groups making calendars before storming the Louvre, shall we?

    • Parse

      Point: missed.  Congratulations, you think the body is beautiful.  That’s not what Rebecca’s arguing against.  She’s saying that people use her presence 
      (and other women’s, too) in risque calendars as a reason to discount what she says.  That because of that, she asked for all of the sexual harassment that comes her way.  That it reinforces the view that the primary purpose of women being involved in skeptic organizations is eye candy, not because they’ve got something to say.  

      Also, can you explain something to me?  How do you get from a simple request  of “Guys, don’t do that (make risque calendars)” to “Ban all nude/seminude figures in art”?  

      • IndyFitz

        Yeah, I absolutely agree!  Because some women might feel offended by calendars displaying pin-up girls, and because some calendar owners might be offensive enough to post them where they might offend, they’re obviously bad.  Come to think of it, the best solution here is to do what the Muslims do, and just require all women to obscure their faces and bodies so the men won’t be tempted and the women won’t suffer.

        Really, if someone doesn’t want to make calendars, that’s a personal decision.  I disagree that they’re “not working” or that they’re somehow universally a bad thing, but oh well.

        Someone will always be offended by anything.  Like this post, for example.  I’m sure many will be annoyed by the snarky opening paragraph, and some offended by my obvious support of naked of bikin-clad women, but that’s just life.  You can’t please everyone.

        Anyone interested in doing a skeptics’ calendar of nude or semi-nude males and females, get in touch with me.  We’ll do this thing better than every before.  A daily calendar.  With a daily email version, an app, etc.  And we’ll put it in a brown paper wrapper with warnings, and make buyers promise not to display it outside the privacy of their own homes.

        • Grizzz

          Hymen…..I mean I’m in….I am all for partially clad women in brown paper wrapping…..or some variation.

          • IndyFitz

            We could do each picture like in the movie Major League, when every time they won a game they got to peel a piece off the life-size cutout of the woman who owned the team and was a horrible person to them! Each day of the month, you peel off one piece. Maybe that would “work” where apparently all such calendars no longer reportedly do.

        • Parse

          If you want to have a conversation, try actually addressing the points I made, and not the Evil Straw Feminazi you think you’re arguing against in your head.  For example, I asked two questions in my previous comment – perhaps you should try answering them?

          Or, if you want to continue to try to troll, can you at least be funny?  Here’s a hint: comedians punch up, bullies punch down.

    • Grizzz

      Mike…..love the name….”Mike Hunt” – say that REALLY REALLY FAST!

      Well played sir, well played.

  • Moira

    “The calendars, the way they’ve always been done and despite some of the benefits they bring with them, aren’t working.”

    It depends on what you mean by “working”.  I have never been a major user of calendars to begin with, and have less reason now with east access to an online  version.
    But if selling them generates income for a group because they are selling an item that people like and are purchasing as a keep sake, I think her other objections are on a case by case basis.

    Seems like a silly post regardless.
    I know wondering about the issue of calendars was not very high on my radar.

  • sara

    I am sooooo tired of hearing about skeptics/atheists and so-called sexual harassment. It’s turning into a meme

    • Gordon Duffy

      Well maybe if people would stop sexually harassing other people those people could stop complaining about it and then other people could stop complaining about the complaints!

      • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

        Sorry, but I don’t see sexual harassment in the sceptic community. What I do see is a bunch of angry women vilifying men and doing more to separate the community than any of this supposed ‘abuse’ for which there is no proof. I’m fed up of sceptic women painting our entire gender as helpless victims.

        • http://twitter.com/RantBot5000 RantBot Grikmeer

          So you’re lucky and don’t experience it. This doesn’t mean that it doesn’t happen, just that you’re a lucky one in the right group. 

          • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

             No, it’s not just that I don’t experience it (in the gaming community I do at times, and it’s pathetic) but I don’t agree with their definition of it as abuse or harassment. Like elevatorgate. That was just a normal human interaction, and people who can’t cope with talking to people should lock themselves in their room and stay there.

            • ganner

              The only people who made a big deal out of elevatorgate were the mansplainers. Rebecca made an offhand comment that said “This kind of creeped me out, guys don’t do that” in the middle of a 5 minute video about completely different things. To treat that as the example of what see as sexism and misogyny in atheism is inexcusably misinformed or deliberately deceptive.

            • IndyFitz

              But locking yourself in a room means you can’t whine about everything constantly!  Really, though, stop making sense, Sabrina! :-)

        • Gordon Duffy

           Well good for you, have a cookie. What I see is mind blowing and shocking abuse being hurled at women.

          Please get your eyes tested.

          • http://twitter.com/the_ewan Ewan

            “have a cookie”, “Please get your eyes tested.”

            “in reply to Sabrina Harris” F
            You know, if you’re going to object to abuse being hurled at women, a good first step might be to not hurl abuse at a woman.

            • Gordon Duffy

              I thought I was quite polite.

              • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

                Your definition of polite actually coincides what the rest of courteous society refers to as patronising superiority. And I do not agree with the BS posted by bloggers as being abuse.

                • Gordon Duffy

                   What about the death threats, rape threats, and online bullying? WOuld you call that abuse?

                • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

                  Yes, that’s abuse. And it’s totally disgusting. But I feel a lot of those troll comments (if we’re thinking of the more recent ones posted) came after quite a lot of posts critical about men in the community and privilege. Which doesn’t excuse them, obviously, but I do think the clearly shock-provoking comments were from people frustrated and pissed off at being pigeon-holed and talked down to.

                  I feel that there are some fantastic guys in the community who don’t deserve to be tarred with the same brush as a few assholes, and that we need to work together to combat sexism, not become hysterical and demonise entire sections of our communities.

                • Grizzz

                  You…..ROCK!!!!!

                • https://twitter.com/#!/OffensivAtheist bismarket

                  Somehow Ms Watson just KNOWS those comments all came from Atheists. Along with the fact that they see ALL men as potential rapists, i can’t take them seriously & IMO nor should anyone else.

                • http://twitter.com/TychaBrahe TychaBrahe

                  If you’re talking about Schroedinger’s rapist, you’re totally missing the point.  The point is not that all men are rapists.  The point is that you can’t know.  Rapists don’t wear a club t-shirt.  They look like normal people.  If they looked like scary people, they’d never get close enough to anyone to rape them.

                  Schroedinger’s rapist isn’t about accusing all men of rape. It’s about explaining to nice guys who would never think of raping a woman why a woman alone at night who doesn’t see a way out or someone who would come to her aid if necessary is going to be wary around guys she doesn’t know.

                • https://twitter.com/#!/OffensivAtheist bismarket

                  So “Nice guys” NEED to be told “Don’t Rape”, Can you see a problem there?

                • JRS

                  Sabrina,

                  I am really pleased to see the growing number of women such as yourself who are speaking up in reaction the hysterics that seem way to prevalent on this topic. You and they are a welcome breath of rational fresh air.

                  Thank you for having the courage to speak out.

            • http://twitter.com/FelyxLeiter Felyx Leiter

              Ummm, that wasn’t abusive or sexist.

        • Johnnykaje

          I have never been sexually harassed or assaulted at a convention either*, but I’m not arrogant enough to assume my experience is universal or even normal.

          *well, not enough to note, in any case

          • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

            Neither am I, but we have the internet for people to share their experiences and we can decide whether their concerns are valid or not. And most of the incidents reported I certainly wouldn’t classify as harassment or sexual assault. Elevatorgate was pathetic.

            Not to mention that the feminists having so many public strops then invites actual sexist trolls to have their fun, which they then use as proof the community is OMG SO BAD AND TERRIBLE. No, you’re just easy targets for trolls. And I’m not surprised people turn nasty – the same women would be screaming bloody murder if they were lumped into one group merely on the basis of their gender. Any valid points these female bloggers have made are lost in their blanket condemnation of males in the sceptic community.

            • ganner

              Elevatorgate was pathetic. A girl makes an offhand comment about how something creeped her out and a torrent of misogynist trolls harassed her over it for a year.

              • Grizzz

                the other issue is that when the overeaction occured, Watson took the ball and ran with it and used it to promote herself. This is at the expense of reality and decency. Media whore is a term that comes to mind.

                • http://www.facebook.com/AnonymousBoy Larry Meredith

                  Careful now. You can’t use the word “whore” ever in any situation because that word carries sexist connotations, as it’s been used throughout history to denigrate women. Therefore, anyone who uses that word, no matter what they mean by it, are being sexist.

                • Grizzz

                  :0!!

                • Grizzz

                  Yes, my use of the “w” word was done in such a niggardly fashion that the obvious boobish behavior is sure to create a ruckus in the pussy segment of society. 
                  :)

                • IndyFitz

                  Damn, Grizzz, you crack me up.  I make comments like those, and I get attacked six ways to Sunday.  How the hell do you do it? :-)

                • Grizzz

                  I have cyber-AIDS.No one wantsto respond….bigots.

                  And that is why I am a master baiter…..

                • IndyFitz

                  No, sometimes you can.  Like this: “My first wife was a whore.”  It’s true.  She was.  One could call me sexist or misogynistic, but it’s just the honest truth.  *shrug*  (She was, too.  Absolute slut.  But it’s okay; I’m disease-free, so it’s okay to chat online with me without worrying about catching some horrible computer virus.)

              • DrewHardies

                I was under the impression that Elevator gate blew up primarily over a dispute about the treatment of a student organizer by a conference speaker.

              • https://twitter.com/#!/OffensivAtheist bismarket

                 You’re being disingenuous, it wasn’t just that “Offhand comment” & you know it. A lot of other people know it too. PZ & his little group of gripers have seized an opportunity to make themselves the centre of attention when there are more important things we should be focusing on & some (but thankfully not many) people have fallen for it. I can’t wait for it all to be over & they can go back to patting each other on the back in private & enjoying their all expenses paid trips to speak around the world alongside people who have actually done something positive & NOT divisive. You do know the theists are laughing at us don’t you?

            • Pascale Laviolette

              I don’t perceive any blanket condemnation of males AT ALL!  In fact, many of the vocal proponents of the harrassment policies have been male.

              None of this was ever supposed to be a big deal – it only BECAME one after the onslaught of people telling them to shut up or get off the internet. 

              A harrassment policy at a con is not a big deal.

              Asking men “please don’t do that” in elevators was not a big deal.

              It was the knee-jerk reaction and accusations of hysteria that pointed to a bigger issue, demonstrating that our precious skeptic/atheist community can still fall victim to issues of gender equality.

            • nakedanthropologist

              I disagree – I think the concerns are valid (and we are talking about them on the internet).  Plus, Watson does have a valid point – she’s not commanding anyone to stop doing something (not that she could), she’s pointing out the contradiction between words and actions.  On one hand, we have been made aware that sexual harassment does happen within the skeptic community – but then the same people are making nudie calendars.  If nothing else, her post is leading to more dialogue on the subject, which is helpful.

            • JamesEmery

              Awww, yeah, show us that “blanket condemnation” you speak of.  Srsly.

              Also, why do you, or the rest of the internet, get a say in whether someone’s concerns (experiences with harassment/assault/rape/whatever) are valid?  

          • Grizzz

            Maybe you haven’t been harassed because you are ugly?

            Just a thought. I mean, there could literally be thousands of reasons why you haven’t been harassed, so don’t despair.

        • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

          All the people around here who deny sexual harassment always want proof, but they deny the proof when it’s put right in front of them. I’ve seen people given multiple, clear examples of sexual harassment on the internet and they’ll ignore it. They’ll say they meant a different kind of harassment or that all those examples are just trolls or that the woman just needs to grow thicker skin. My personal favorite was when someone denied that calling Greta Christina a “feminazi slut” was evidence of the shit women go through on the internet because Greta Christina *is* a feminazi slut.
          If you want examples of internet harassment, I’m sure we could pull up thousands. I just don’t think you would listen.

          As for real life harassment, how easy do you think it is to get proof? Should women have to wear hidden cameras? Do you think it is common for men to harass women when there are lots of other people around? And when harassment does occur and you report someone, do you think they’ll just say “Yup, you caught me. I was harassing her!” ??? That doesn’t fucking happen. Just like rape, men rarely harass women in front of people or admit to it afterwords. And of course, there wouldn’t really be much physical evidence after someone says something threatening or touches you inappropriately. 

          You know what harassers do say after they’ve been accused of harassment? “It was only a joke!” “I was just flirting.” “I was just trying to be nice.” And then people with no experience being harassed choose to believe this guy over the girl and spread it around that women are just completely insane and overreact to jokes and harmless flirting just because “there is no proof that she was actually harassed!”
          You are doing your gender a huge disservice. You would rather believe that a large amount of women make up sexual harassment than believe that a small amount of men sexually harass women.

          • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

            I’ve been sexually harassed. Where I feel comfortable to confront the guy and tell him his behaviour’s unacceptable and he has no right to touch me, I do so. When I don’t, I try and find the nearest form of safety, whether that’s an escape route, another person or whatever.

            Do you know what I don’t do?

            Go and bitch about how this certain population of people in a certain community are the ones at fault and it’s them specifically that are the problem.

            Sexual harassment IS a serious problem but it is not unique to a certain community. It’s in our entire society. I feel these women make it difficult for genuine cases to be heard because they’re too busy mouth-foaming over largely trivial bullshit and applying labels to the men in x community.

            So save your vitriol for someone who doesn’t give a damn about women.

            • Grizzz

              Sabrina, I think I love you. You are the lone voice of reason in a community that calls themselves “skeptics”. Yet, julie up there is screaming that “All the people around here who deny sexual harassment always want proof”….does she not see her idiocy Skepticism is FOUNDED ON GETTING PROOF OF ANYTHING THAT IS BEING POSITED!!!

              Anyway, Sabrina, you rock and you have stated the bare knuckle, bare bones crux of the issue and I thank you.

              And PS – You are HOT! (and that was not harassment nor sexual abuse. If that is your picture in the avatar, the combination of your wit, your beauty and your position makes you a HOTTIE!)

              • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                Yes, I get that our movement is founded on the idea that we need proof. But it’s also pretty stupid to disbelieve everything someone says because they can’t prove it. In many cases, sexual harassment would be *impossible* to prove. That doesn’t mean it doesn’t happen. If you’re alone with someone and they make a threatening statement to you, there is no way in the world you can every prove that to someone else. That doesn’t mean it wasn’t real.
                The only proof is the large amount of women who say that they have been harassed.

                • Grizzz

                  What a lovely tautology. A dangerous one too. So, all it takes is an accusation and that becomes proof. 

                  Why is it true? Because she said it’s true.

                  FAIL.

                • JamesEmery

                  Sounds like the same shit that happens whenever a woman gets raped.  Before the “I’m so sorry!”s or the “Let me help!”s, there come the “Pics or it didn’t happen” people.  Skepticism applies in some cases.  In others, it’s fairly useless.  What Grizzz just pointed out is that, if ze said that ze had a cheeseburger for lunch, we should pile onto hir with shouts of “Where’s the proof????”.  Idiotic asshole.

                • IndyFitz

                  It’s not that black and white.  My ex-wife accused me of beating her up and had me arrested.  I didn’t beat her up.  I never laid a hand on her.  She was just an incredibly vindictive lying bitch who did and said whatever she could to control people.  So, do we all now assume I’m lying and assume she was telling the truth?  Or do we assume the other way around?  Or do we require proof one way or the other?  Besides, claiming someone was raped or beaten is a FAR MORE SERIOUS matter than claiming one ate a cheeseburger.  Nobody’s life, future, etc. is on the line whether or not a burger was eaten, but rape and abuse can change a lot of lives.

                • JamesEmery

                  Indy,  I’m sorry you went through that.  It’s pretty awful.  By your own logic, though, you could be falsely accusing your ex just to ruin her rep.  It happens, just like false rape claims happen.  I’m taking you at your word, however, because I know those awful things happen, and neither your claim (or your ex’s claim, for that matter) are farfetched.  Unfortunately, men in your situation often suffer from those accusations, and that’s partly because of patriarchy.  The kicker is this:  When a woman reports a rape, she usually faces an immediate backlash for having BEEN RAPED (assaulted, harassed, whatever).  Getting rid of institutional patriarchy will help the falsely accused be cleared without further suffering.  Not immediately blasting rape victims helps make the path clear to more victims stepping forward, and less rape.

                  I appreciate your polite and well-thought-out reply.

                • Grizzz

                  No dinglenuts, if I said I had a cheeseburger for lunch, no one is getting damaged by that statement, unless I don’t pay for it.

                  When someone accuses someone else of a felony, they had damn well better present some fucking evidence.

                  Habeas Corpus is not just there when convenient.

                • JamesEmery

                  So?  You didn’t specify whether someone was being damaged- all you had to say was that we shouldn’t take women at their word, because skepticism.  I don’t think you actually know how skepticism works.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  I never said that all it should take is an accusation to have someone kicked out of a conference or arrested for assault. All I’m saying is that a large amount of women are saying that sexual harassment is a problem, and that itself should be proof enough that there should be a harassment policy. 
                  And no, I also don’t think that it this policy means that men should get in trouble just because someone makes an accusation. More likely, when someone makes an accusation, there will be people who can talk to this person and make sure it wasn’t just a misunderstanding and keep an eye out just to make sure he isn’t acting inappropriately. Accusations would also be taken more seriously if there were complaints from multiple people or witnesses. Personally, I think that’s better than the “pics or it didn’t happen” system.

              • IndyFitz

                YOU, sir, are a MASTER at baiting people in here!  I dare say you are a master baiter!

              • RebeccaSparks

                It seems to me that julie is not so upset about proof is that no amount of proof seems sufficient.  Skeptism is not just being skeptical, or else all those new earth creationists who are skeptical of evolution would qualify.  Skeptism as a reasoning style has more to do with critical thinking, and that includes when to accept reasonable evidence.

            • http://gloomcookie613.tumblr.com GloomCookie613

              Oh good! Finally another woman like myself. I hope you stick around. I like the cut of your jib. :)

            • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

              “this certain population of people in a certain community are the ones at fault and it’s them specifically that are the problem.”
              There is a certain population of people in this community who are the problem. People who harass other people! I’m not for one second implying that it is men in general who are the problem.

              Yes, sexual harassment is an issue in our whole society…So why are you denying that it’s an issue here too? And as atheists and skeptics, aren’t we supposed to break out of harmful social norms?
              Stealing is also an unfortunate part of society, but I’m sure they have rules against that too at conferences. 

            • Guest

              I’m sorry, but this is the most hypocritical bullshittery I have ever heard.

              How many times a week do the people here talk about how believers should stop getting butt-hurt over the fact fanatics make them look bad and instead use their voices to distance themselves from the crazies? “If you don’t want to look like a bigot, do something about it”, and so on?

              Yet the skeptic community is then going to freak the fuck out when someone calls them to live by the same rule?

              • IndyFitz

                EXCELLENT post.

                And I love the term “hypocritical bullshittery.”  Mind if I use that?

            • JamesEmery

              Sabrina, would you like the harassment to stop, or are you cool with the status quo?  That’s what it sounds like you’re saying, here, when you attack the people trying to DO something about it.

            • IndyFitz

              Sabrina — excellent commentary all over this discussion. Taking that position on this forum generally means asking for trouble — particularly if you’re male; they flock in like wolves after weak prey because they think you’re a misogynist!  But even for women it’s dangerous, so excellent posts.

              I assume all the usual folks will not congratulate me for not commenting first on whether Sabrina is attractive, and compliment me for letting her know how intelligent her arguments are, whether you agree with them or not.  Right?

              • Grizzz

                Niiiiccccceeeeee!!!!!!

                And in response to your wife’s false accusation; it is a growing problem, and yes, women have learned how to play the system. In fact, a friend of mine who is a woman and a divorce attorney informs me that something along the lines of 70-percent of “good” divorce attorneys tell the female clients (wives) that in the initial stages of a divorce to file restraining orders or claim some sort of abuse, whether it is true or not, because they then get the upper hand in negotiations and bargaining. And for proof of the abuse for the restraining order? Just a few crocodile tears and a made up story. No proof not facts no investigation, just an accusation and then BAM the man’s reputation is ruined.

                And that is a HORRIFYING thing and problem.

                Now, watch, there is going to be an IMMEDIATE call for the proof of the above facts (the 70-percent, the restraining order criteria etc) where they do not call for any proof when a Miss Watson gets a twitterpated because someone dared hit if her royal highness…..double standard much?

                Yes. Yes it is.

                • IndyFitz

                  The worst part about fake claims of abuse is that it cheapens the topic. It’s like the boy who cried wolf but on a cultural scale: The more many women cry wolf, the less the ones who aren’t making it up are believed. Besides, it’s shitty for anyone to lie like that about anyone.
                  My wife regretted it right after she did it, but it was like moving mountains to undo it. Naturally, the state assumed she was an abused woman who was succumbing to my wooing her to try to undo it. And all that because she was having a tantrum and wanted to show me just who was in charge.

                  I married a much better woman the second time around. She hasn’t had me arrested under false pretenses once!

        • Patterrssonn

          Well if you don’t see it then it mustn’t be happening. Now if only we can get you to not see global warming and cancer they won’t exist either.

      • IndyFitz

        And I’m soooo tired of hearing the complaints about people complaining about people complaining about sexual harassment.

        This could go on forever, but the comments get narrower on this page until you just can’t read them.

        • Grizzz

          You know what? I am getting tired of hearing you complain about the people complaining about the people who complain about the people that complain about the sexual harassment that may or may not have happened…..

          • IndyFitz

            You know what?

            10 PRINT “I’m tired of “;
            20 FOR X=1 TO 4E4
            30 PRINT “hearing people complain about “;
            40 NEXT X
            50 PRINT “… whatever we were talking about in the first place.”

            • Grizzz

              My cat’s breath smells like cat food.

    • http://twitter.com/tauriqmoosa Tauriq Moosa

      Absolutely agree. But how does that relate here? 

      • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

         I’m guessing it’d be this line here that made sara comment:

        “In an atmosphere where there’s a lot of talk about sexual harassment and
        making women feel comfortable, pin-up calendars aren’t helping.”

        That’s kind of ridiculous when there’s no widespread sexual harassment.

        • Gordon Duffy

           “when there’s no widespread sexual harassment”

          I’ll happily concede/hope that the harrassers are a minority, but pretending they do not exist at all is dishonest. They exist and are very vocal.

          • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

            I said it wasn’t widespread, not that it doesn’t exist. Irony strikes again, looks like you’re the one who needs an eye test!

            There is a massive difference between the existence of the reality the mouth-frothing feminists claim is real and the reality that there are sexist assholes everywhere in all communities.

            • Gordon Duffy

               Ok, then I think we are talking across each other about something we both see.

            • Grizzz

              You need to stay around here Sabrina! You are simply SPOT ON.

              • Patterrssonn

                You too Griz, any guy who thinks its heroic to refer to women as “pussy” is A-OK in my books.

              • Grizzz

                You know what I have discovered? That little “-” sign to the right of the banter boxes. I now know how to just ignore idiots like Patterssonn. I press the little button and *BAM* they go away! Niccccceeee……..

    • 1000 Needles

      “so-called”?

      I’m sooooo tired of so-called skeptics denying that a sexual harassment problem exists in the skeptics/atheists community, despite the accounts and reports of many women.

      Every population in geek culture, from sci-fi to programmers to gamers, is dealing with this right now. Why should the skeptics and atheists populations be special?

      • http://twitter.com/SabrinaLianne Sabrina Harris

        Not everyone agrees that being propositioned by a man for coffee in an elevator is abuse or sexual harassment.

        • Gordon Duffy

          oooh clever retort. However the response to a simple request not to be propositoned in an elevator was unambiguously sexual harrassment.

          • TristanLawksley

             Flag on the play…

            Gordon, you’re right. Women have the right to not be propositioned in an elevator. They have the right to not feel vulnerable in any given situation. They have the right to not feel like their pieces of meat. They also have the right to not be flirted with if they don’t like it. “No” is always implied, and a “Yes” is always required from a woman before you approach her especially if it’s in a dark alley.

            Sabrina is also right. Men have the right to not be labelled as misogynistic for approaching a woman and asking said woman if she’d like to have a cup of coffee. Yeah, I know… it was “COFFEE” which was actually “SEX”… *wink wink*. I believe that was the unsubstantiated claim made at the time.

            Regardless, there’s plenty of back and forth points to be made on the subject and they’re all as pointless today as they were when the blogosphere went batshit insane over it the first time. Let’s not rehash it and give it any more attention than it deserves… which is the same amount of attention, in my opinion, that it deserved the first time.

            • http://twitter.com/the_ewan Ewan

              ‘a “Yes” is always required from a woman before you approach her’

              So what – you just ask the question from a distance with a loud-hailer?

              • TristanLawksley

                 It would appear that in our secular community, yes, that would probably be a good idea.

                And remember people… “No means no” no longer applies. It’s “Yes means yes” or you back away slowly and go about your business.

              • Conspirator

                Well what you have to do to ask a woman out at a skeptic/atheist event is hire a lawyer and ask that lawyer to write a letter of interest to be sent via registered mail to the party you are interested in or their designated representative.  If that person accepts your offer of interest than a meeting will be arranged through the lawyers at an appropriate time and venue with the lawyers and an impartial observer there to govern the meeting.  That way everything will be on the up and up.  

                • Patterrssonn

                  What a bunch of whiners men are, it’s getting more and more embarrassing to be one.

                • Grizzz

                  Do you EVER have anything of value to add or are you just in permanent mensies? You are the poster child for PMS.

                • Guest

                   I…think the comment implied he’s male..?

                • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

                  And the award for most misogynist comment of the thread goes to…

                • Patterrssonn

                  Poor old Griz, this is starting to get embarrassing. I tell you what I’ll throw you a bone. Your sad little grab bag of misogynist slurs won’t work with me. If you want to hit a nerve, like obviously I did, you’re going to have to try a lot harder.

            • Gordon Duffy

               Wow, when you strip all the details that made it creepy and inappropriate from the anecdote it sounds less creepy and inappropriate.

              But not much help since my starting point was that the initial situation was not the abusive part, it was the kneejerk vitriolic response to mentioning it that was abusive.

              • TristanLawksley

                 The problem initially was that there were a lot of statements made that lacked any compelling facts. I stripped the “creepy and inappropriate” elements because those ” creepy and inappropriate” elements were based on assumptions and opinions. We still, as far as I’m aware, do not have any more information regarding the entire spectacle today then we did when it happened. A man approached a lone woman in an elevator and asked her if he could return to her room for coffee… I understand that the woman might have felt uncomfortable, unsafe, and offended… I understand that the guy might have been hitting her up for sex. I also understand that none of us were there and we can’t translate “coffee” into “sex” without facts to support it. I’m assuming there hasn’t been a confession yet?

                The fallout was men choosing sides, accusations being flung, and everyone involved looking like a bunch of jackasses. The kneejerk, abusive, vitriolic response that you mentioned? Some of it was a direct result of men everywhere being called out as ignorant, privileged, unsympathetic  women-haters because they didn’t pick the right side in a debate that lacked facts – something we Atheists pride ourselves for.

                Now, that’s not to say that there weren’t ignorant, privileged, unsympathetic  women-hating jackasses making a problem spectacularly worse. There was. A lot of them. Unfortunately, anyone who didn’t agree with Rebecca and her assumptions got thrown in front of the firing squad with them. They still do… so yeah, there was a bit of hurt feelings on both sides I think.

            • https://twitter.com/#!/OffensivAtheist bismarket

               As far as i’m aware the claim is STILL just that “Unsubstantiated”.

              • Grizzz

                It is amazing how in a community of self-described “skeptics” there has been NO evidence presented for review to prove this “harassment” has actually taken place. Instead, in this “skeptic” community, heresay and conjecture becomes the modern witch hunt and perfectly acceptable as “proof”.

                Shame on them!

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  And for the millionth time, no one said it was harassment. It was just a suggestion to guys that it’s not a good idea to show interest in a girl when you’re alone in a confined space late at night.

                  There is a gray scale of behaviors that are acceptable and unacceptable. Asking someone out is totally okay, as long as you’re willing to back off if they say no. Asking someone out in a confined space late at night is less acceptable (but still not harassment) because if you decide not to accept her “no,” she is very vulnerable. That doesn’t mean it’s automatically harassment because there’s a good chance it never occurred to this guy that she might be uncomfortable. That’s why she suggested guys don’t do that, so that they understand it’s not an especially nice way to approach a girl. She said it made her uncomfortable, not that she was being sexually harassed. 
                  As a skeptic, I would think you would look at what was actually said in the original incident and avoid straw man arguments in the future, especially when they have already been explained.

                • Grizzz

                  The MILLIONTH time? Really?

                  After a perfunctory read through here I count seven, maybe eight times you have tried this defense. Now, to be fair, I have a hard time counting accurately past five without removing a mitten, so my numbers may be a little askew.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  Wow. So I shoot down your argument and all you have to retort with is that it wasn’t actually a million? lol

                  The millionth time was just referring to how every time this is ever brought up, people insist she was calling it sexual harassment when she never was. But hey, don’t let the facts get in your way!

                • Grizzz

                  Oh Julie, dear sweet Julie….you give yourself far too much credit. You did not shoot down my argument, you ignored it and decided to gripe about a non sequitor….butI understand, it is so hard being a woman today, so hard in fact that reason and logic get suspended in a flood of estrogen. I understand.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  You said she claimed it was harassment. She never did and I explained that to you. Argument shot down.

        • Pascale Laviolette

          Nor did Rebecca say it was – OHHHH my god why is this discussion still happening?!

          • TristanLawksley

             Because it’s relevant. What Rebecca saw/heard/felt in that position was hers to own – none of us have the right to define it for her… but what she said afterwards? We can define that, and I choose to define it as a skeptic who had a momentary lapse – drawing conclusions that lacked any actual evidence and trying to use that said experience to prop up her argument.

            How is it relevant to her latest post? Did you catch all the assumptions she made about the calender? Did your eyes gloss over the part where she decided to post this:

            “and this ongoing “Girls of Geek”
            calendar that, when preordered, comes with a “Geeks <3 Boobies”
            bracelet, so you can tell everyone you meet what a giant shithead you
            are without saying a single word."

            I don't know about anyone else, but I'm offended that loving breasts and wearing a bracelet stating such would make me a giant shithead because some idiot on the Internet decided to draw a biased conclusion based on something as silly as that bracelet.

            Rebecca Watson, in my opinion, seems to enjoy exaggerating in order to keep herself relevant all the while hurling insults and playing the victim. But what do I know, I'm just a privileged, white male who's never been accosted or sexually harassed in my life (Completely untrue.).

        • Patterrssonn

          I didn’t realize you were there at the time, it wasn’t mentioned in any of the discussions before.

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

            Well how could she have been there? The whole incident obviously never happened because Watson never took pictures!
            As skeptics, believing a story like that without video proof and a signed statement by elevator guy saying that this actually happened is just as ridiculous as believing in an omnipotent, omnipresent, omniscient deity. The two are totally comparable!

    • Mike Laing

       Well, if somebody doesn’t bring attention to it, how is it supposed to change? I would think it thinking about harassment only makes people uncomfortable when it forces us to confront our own values.
      I agree, though, that there has to be a balance somewhere along the line.

    • Winchester

      Posing nude for money is a form of prostitution.

      And, frankly, some of the Skeptic Women were overweight and not that attractive.  Amanda Brown didn’t help with that pose.

  • http://www.theaunicornist.com Mike D

    If she’s going to stop posing, and/or encourage others to do the same because of the vitriolic comments of some, then the trolls have won.

    • http://twitter.com/tauriqmoosa Tauriq Moosa

      Her points don’t seem catered to trolls but inferred using reasonable argument. Having recognised that being an atheist is not an automatic indicator of being decent or moral or not a misogynist, I recognise her justification for overturning this assumption. She’s taken on new evidence and is making a better/different argument. That’s good scientific-thinking.

    • 1000 Needles

      Are you really saying that she needs to continue to do the very activities that other atheists and skeptics (read: not just trolls) are using to discredit her?

      Nobody is entitled to Rebecca Watson’s photos or her time. She’s certainly done more than her share of the work for the skeptic and atheist communities. Perhaps if more of the non-sexist members of our community were vocal in our support of women then pinup calendars wouldn’t even be an issue.

  • TristanLawksley

    Rebecca makes many valid points. I’m feeling randy so I’ll take a stab at it.

    1. pin-up calendars added to an existing environment in which women were seen first as sexual objects

    There’s nothing inherently wrong with being nude and the objectification of a body, male or female – nude or clothed, is going to happen regardless of whether or not these calendars are made. There might be a few ignorant people out there that point to these calenders as justification, but that’s not a good enough reason to stop supporting the calenders or using them to spread a message. More importantly, to simply stop making them because someone, somewhere will view it and then convince themselves that it’s perfectly reasonable to objectify someone’s nude form is reaffirming that nudity is something to objectify is justified. It’s on the same level, as far as I’m concerned, as hiding the nude form because it’s something shameful, instead of something to be celebrated. Women will continue to be objectified regardless of whether or not this calender is created but a by-product of the calender is the aid, even minimal, it lends in de-stigmatizing nudity and chip away at the religiously conservative who hold the United States of America in a morality choke-hold. I know, that’s reaching. I can live with that.

    2. Adding a calendar of men did not balance out the calendar of women.

     Right… a man who beds 100 women isn’t a slut… Yes he is, and probably pridefully so. It’s an age old argument that probably isn’t going to change in any of our lifetimes. I really have to say, “So what?” here… Anyone want to take a vote on whether or not this calender is going to conquer the slut shaming issue? I certainly don’t expect it to do so – my expectations are found in the previous paragraph. She makes some interesting statements about how others perceive the models, and what others will or won’t do but let’s face it – covering up our bodies isn’t going to change how people choose to react to our genders and our bodies. The only thing we can do is, once again, work to de-stigmatize nudity and educating people regarding objectification and slut-shaming. Neither of those goals are accomplished by hiding our “naughty bits”. Maybe I’m hyper-focusing too much on that, but that’s my take.

    3. Sending women to large conferences isn’t that great of a cause.She makes a very valid point…
    4. No one uses calenders any more… Really? I do. My wife does… many people do. It appears that a lot of shoppers at Wal-Mart, Office Depot, and Best Buy do because they’re still selling them. I know… correlation doesn’t imply causation. Unless you’re raking in the dough from calender sales. Now, if we’re talking no one using nude calenders any more… Wait. No… it’s pretty much the same thing.5. calendars, and particularly nude calendars, are in no way edgy, interesting, or clever. To whom? While it might appear to be a bit hypocritical using nudity to garner attention and spread a message while at the same time wanting to use it to put an end to bullying, slut-shaming, and de-stigmatizing nudity, I can live with it. People don’t generally see nudity on a daily basis and putting it in a place where they literally look at it every day seems like a good idea. Is it edgy? Depends. Perhaps we should add some BDSM gear and capitalize on the 50 Shades phenomenon and promote consensual lifestyle choices while we’re at it? Wait, BDSM objectifies women too, doesn’t it? So do high heels. Interesting? I suppose if you don’t find beauty in the human form to be interesting then no, it probably isn’t. Clever? It’s a nude calender… Animal calenders haven’t been clever for a long time but the WWF uses them to help promote their cause. They even include neat little facts about each animal on the page. Maybe we should dispel some Atheism myths on each page? That’s clever, somewhat interesting, and if you put it right up against the top of the picture… it’s… well… yeah. You know what’s not edgy, interesting, or clever? Exaggeration. I know… I’m going to get bent for that one.

    • IndyFitz

       Tristan — excellent response.  When the hordes of posters accusing you of being a misogynist come complaining, know that I’m in your corner.

      In agreement with your points, I’ll add to them.

      1. Objectification is part of how our brains are wired.  And nobody makes anyone strip for a camera.  If they’re not being forced to, there’s nothing wrong with it.

      2. How people perceive the calendars — they’re individual perceptions, and there’s no point trying to please everyone.  And just because someone is offended by them doesn’t make such calendars inherently bad.  It’s disingenuous to pretend that they’re all evil just because some people think so. (Are we becoming as silly as religious people with all these moral proclamations we’re all supposed to follow?)

      3. Agreed.

      4. Excellent point.  Calendars are still big business, with tie-ins to get you emailed calendars, apps on your phone, etc.  I guess the younger set thinks paper calendars are SO 1990s, and why would anyone want them?

      5. Yeah, blanket statement, and one that reeks of intellectual superiority.  NO ONE would do this, NOBODY agrees with that, NO ONE thinks such and such, NOBODY would ever, etc.  How much holier than thou are we going to get before we just open up a church and dictate a rigid set of morals that atheists are supposed to live by?  Sheesh.

      • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

        Hmm…that’s funny….it’s been fourteen hours and no one has called him a misogynist.
        I agreed with some of his points and disagreed with others. Mostly, I was just glad to see it was on topic and engaging with the actual argument at hand.

        I know, it’s crazy. We don’t actually call people misogynists over nothing. We have reasons. Just because you don’t understand those reasons doesn’t mean those reasons don’t exist. 

        • IndyFitz

          That sounds good when you type it, but it doesn’t really work in practice. For reasons I won’t get into here, because I’d be typing for 20 minutes, I can assure you I’m not a misogynist, yet whenever someone is annoyed with anything I post that has anything at all to do with the topic, no matter how fringe, that person, when he or she has no intelligent comments to offer, that person resorts to proclaiming me a woman hater. It doesn’t matter how I argue that point. When those folks have made up their minds, it’s “We don’t like what he said, so let’s keep calling him a misogynist!”

          So when you saw “WE don’t actually call people misogynists over nothing,” well, if you’re insisting on bundling all of “YOU” together, then I will reply as you prefer: Yes, YOU do call people misogynists over nothing, at least at times. I have no doubt I have been called such for no even remotely intelligent reason on many occasion, and every one of YOU seems clearly the better experts over who I am and what happens in my head than I am.

          If YOU believe that all of YOU are perfect and inerrant, and your perceptions MUST be 100 percent correct, and that I am a woman hater because you disagree with me, then I guess it’s pointless for me to argue. I’m pleased that YOU all decide when someone is a misogynist, and far be it for me to possibly argue with YOU, because I certainly don’t know if I respect women or not. Is there a toll-free helpline to call to find my inner woman hater? Based on what YOU all say, it must be there, because YOU have all angrily shoved that down my throat enough.
          People can have opinions contrary to YOUR group opinions without hating women, you know.

          By the way, my comment to Tristan was intended as sarcasm. I just don’t feel the need to add smileys to every comment just in case someone who doesn’t like my comments might be confused. Also, it may have been 14 hours, but if you think the attack squads aren’t capable of swooping in hours or even days after a post, you might be surprised. :-)

          Smiley there for ya, just in case. :-)

          • TristanLawksley

             Damn it… now I don’t know whether you’re in my corner or not.. Thanks a lot!

          • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

            I’m not saying that no woman has ever used that word when it shouldn’t be used. I’m saying that women in general don’t yell that for no reason.
            Similarly, sometimes minorities throw out the word racist for no reason. That doesn’t mean the majority of them do that.
            If you get called sexist/racist/homophobic once or twice and you don’t feel it was deserved, then move on. If you get consistently called sexist/racist/homophobic, there is probably a reason even if you don’t see it. 

            • Grizzz

              So, for example, if I was to call you an “ignorant broad” that would be horrible? If I were to say that “you gals don’t raise the volume for no reason, but that reason may be you gals are hysterical and overly emotional critters that try to use this condition when it is convenient” that would be alright? Or would that be wrong? I am confused as to how I am supposed to behave according to you, so could you help clarify for me?

        • TristanLawksley

           And when and if they do I’ll ignore them. I’m not a misogynist. I don’t hate women. I don’t intentionally make women feel inferior. That doesn’t mean that I’m fully educated about all of the things that women face, or that I won’t say something incredibly stupid from time to time that appears to be misogyny… and when I do I’ll own it, rethink it, and then correct it if I see that I was wrong. That’s the best I can do…

          In the Elevatorgate mess, yeah… you could call me a misogynist because I saw absolutely nothing wrong with a man approaching a woman in an elevator and asking her to his/her room for coffee and discussion (I think that was what was claimed at the time… I should really get off my ass and go re-educate myself on that.). I thought, and I still think, that Rebecca Watson over-exaggerated the situation and used it as an opportunity to bulk up her talking points on sexism in the community. What I didn’t understand then that I do understand now is that it doesn’t matter whether or not she did that – what matters is whether or not a person will be offended, feel threatened, or engage in fight or flight in that situation and what responsibility others have in not putting a person in that situation in the first place.

          I still don’t have an appropriate answer to that question, but what I do know is that not all people in that situation are offened/threatened, and that some people – male or female, are not and we have no way of really knowing so its best to err on the side of caution. Message received. That said, a button would make things a lot simpler.

  • http://twitter.com/nicoleintrovert Nicole Introvert

    I am a member of Secular Woman and I’m not on board with the idea of this calendar.  One thing that I haven’t brought up that I was thinking about just last night, is that I feel this is more “preaching to the choir.”   Where can you hang a risque calendar where it would be appropriate to start a dialogue with someone who might ask, “What is Secular Woman?”  I certainly can’t hang it at work.  I’d be reluctant to hang it at home when I frequently have my nieces over.  (And no, I don’t think there is any reason to hide plain old nudity from kids, but I don’t know if any of the photos could be somewhat suggestive.)

    I’d rather see more pictures of atheists as every day people.   That could start a better dialogue with believers if they see the photos.   “Oh that is Nicole, with her dog.  She’s an atheist and loves animals!”   Believers already have the mindset that we are a bunch of hedonistic trollops having orgies and animal sacrifices.   I’d like to start showing them they are wrong.

    • DAVID E

      Happy fulfilled atheists on a calendar to fight the bitter atheist meme.  I like it.

    • http://www.youtube.com/user/GodVlogger?feature=mhee GodVlogger (on YouTube)

      I *love* the idea of showing atheists just ‘living life’, e.g. laughing while pushing their kids on the swings,  looking sweet while giving a bouquet of flowers to grandma in the nursing home,  smiling while helping the homeless, helping kids with their homework, coaching their kids baseball team, serving as a doctor/nurse to an ill patient, etc., maybe with some meme slogan “How atheists spend their days….” and each one shows something that is clearly positive. 
      Now *that* would be  a calendar that LOTS more folks could actually put up at work, thus prompting conversation and breaking down stereotypes. 

      • http://twitter.com/nicoleintrovert Nicole Introvert

        I think that this is where Chris Johnson is going with his project: 
        http://www.theatheistbook.com/ which I think is great.   I think this is a better idea worth emulating than something which is not appropriate for multiple environments. 

        I’d also like to add that I have no problem if folks are hedonistic trollops having orgies (I draw the line at animal sacrifice).  I think some of the backlash I’ve felt is that people assume because I don’t like a nude calendar I am not sex-positive and not in line with 3rd wave feminism.  That is not true.   I just don’t think that a nude calendar is the best thing for us in this current environment.  

        • http://whatpalebluedot.blogspot.com/ WhatPaleBlueDot

          I agree completely with you.  I don’t think saying “you know, putting more nudie pics of ladies out there isn’t really winning” is upholding the patriarchy or anything like that.  Nude calendars are a gimmick.  They don’t say “I’m participating in sexual transgression!”  They say “I know if I put tits in it, people will buy it.”  

          • IndyFitz

            Sorry, I read that last line and snarfed my Pepsi!

            I wonder if that would work for American cars — put tits in it, and people buy it.  You know, maybe one for the horn — you squeeze it to beep.  But once in a while, when you least expect it — you get squirted in the face when you do.  It could reduce the number of angry drivers laying on the horn just to be jerks.  You could be on to something here!

        • IndyFitz

          “What’s best for us” sounds like “This is what the majority has decided is the best for us, and if you’re not with us, you’re against us.”  It just sounds elitist.  Anytime someone makes comments about “what’s best for us,” it sounds like church in here.  Nobody MAKES people pose for such calendars or MAKES others buy them, or MAKES people hang them in inappropriate places.  And nobody MAKES them sell the calendars in the first place.  With all those things nobody is being forced to do, I’m not sure why such a calendar is not “best for us.”  And what, exactly, do you meanm by “in this current environment”?

          But I totally agree on drawing the line at animal sacrifice!  But the hedonistic trollops having orgies sounds amusing.  It could make a great topic for a calendar!

          • http://twitter.com/nicoleintrovert Nicole Introvert

            To quote Hemant’s bullet point up in the OP, “In an atmosphere where there’s a lot of talk about sexual harassment and
            making women feel comfortable, pin-up calendars aren’t helping.”

            • Grizzz

              I think the crux of that statement is “where there’s a lot of talk” – that there is talk taking place is again NOT PROOF of this horrible scourge of harassment that is being claimed. It is talk – not proof.

              I could use that same statement to read:

              “In an atmosphere where there is a lot of talk about male bashing and harassment, these conversations re not helping”. It means nothing other than there is a talk taking place, not that there is male bashing or harassment. The same holds true for the other side.

      • http://twitter.com/ylaenna M. Elaine
    • IndyFitz

      Agreed, but because you can’t imagine how you could hang such a calendar doesn’t mean there aren’t plenty of people who couldn’t.  I’d hang it in my home office, where no kids go.  A digital version could be on the privacy of one’s phone or email.  Hey, around here the firemen/firewomen bare some every two years, and people buy them and proudly hang them.  Kids will see firepeople in fire gear, maybe without shirts or tank tops.  Nothing scandalous there.  I’d hope someone hanging nudes would be sensible about it, but if someone isn’t and hangs it at work, it doesn’t make the calendar or the idea bad.  It just means someone has poor judgment.  All that being said, if she doesn’t want to do a calendar, she doesn’t have to, and nobody has to buy one if she does.

      • http://twitter.com/nicoleintrovert Nicole Introvert

         This doesn’t solve the problem we have with continuously “preaching to the choir.”  I’d just like to see more things that can be shared more publicly and start a dialogue.

        • Grizzz

          So go do something. Having calendars does not prevent this from being done. Go do something proactive instead of bitching in a blog.

    • Marella

       I love that idea, pictures of atheists with their pets would sell like hotcakes, even PZ has a cat, squid being difficult to photograph.

  • http://twitter.com/the_ewan Ewan

    This is the logic of the burqa – women get objectified if they expose themselves too much , so they shouldn’t do that.

    It obviously true to say that women tend to get sexually objectified, and certainly more so than men, and that some already misogynistic people respond badly to these calendars. Surely what we need to be aiming for is the ability for people to be able to make these calendars and not get that sort of response. Hiding away and trying not to provoke the misogynists doesn’t actually do anything to help at all.

  • AL

    From the beginning I thought the calendars were at worst hypocritical and at best inconsistent. Never had anything against them, just had issues with her twisting her own message when it was convenient for her. Glad she’s seen the light. 

    • 1000 Needles

      Hypocritical? Twisting her message? Please explain.

      • Johnnykaje

        See, if she consents to a sexy calendar shoot once, that means she consents to all sexual advances from then on and cannot revoke them.

        In other words, the “porn stars/sex workers/girls in short skirts” argument. I have to double check but I don’t think that one’s in Shermer’s Baloney Detection Kit.

  • Mike Laing

    To be honest, I’m glad she’s done this. I know perfectly well the intention behind the calendars, but there is a fine line between objectification and using nudity to sell calendars, and using nudity to show that we are all the same under our clothes.
    Like I’m saying, the intent was good, but the idea of showing people in everyday life is more realistic than nudes, in our culture, anyways.
    Nudity and open relationships (Greta etc) tend to paint skepticism as more of a fringe group, I think.
    I KNOW it’s cultural, and before religion, clothes were just pragmatic, not meant to hide our bodies, and primitive cultures attest to that around the world today, but in the end, it does a disservice to the skeptical/atheist movement. Preaching to the choir, as it were.

  • Arkenaten

    According to author, Terry Pratchett, for  nudity to be considered  artistic and not degrading merely add an urn or two, or cherubs. Cherubs are good, and even the occasional gilt edged hand mirror.

    • A3Kr0n

       Thanks. Now I’ve got this image in my head of a semi nude PZ holding an urn in one hand with a mirror in the other.

  • http://drzach.net Zachary Moore

    Contrary to Rebecca and Hemant’s request, I’ll ask that any organization currently considering a calendar fundraiser continue with their plans, with one caveat: ensure that each photograph represents the free expression of each individual shown, and that the photographs as a whole reflect your organizational values. If you meet those criteria, you should have no shame in creating a calendar fundraiser, and I (and many, many others) will be only too happy to support you by buying one.

    To the arguments above, I’ll say that calendars neither created misogyny within the movement, nor will their moratorium divest the movement of said misogyny. Seeking gender “balance” should not be the goal, it should be seeking to demonstrate free expression of the individual. Even if sending women to conferences is not a worthwhile goal (though I have not seen this demonstrated), there are a myriad other fundraising goals that would be wonderfully served by a calendar project. Calendar practicality seems to be irrelevant, as I (and I suspect many others) have bought calendars to support organizations, not to determine the day (nobody uses postcards either, but I bought the full set of Skepticon IV cards as well). And finally, novelty is a particularly weak argument, particularly for someone who sells clever T-shirts on a website, the novelty of which wore off in 1998.

  • A3Kr0n

    Or I’ll just continue to ignore people that tell me to do this, or not do that. If I wanted to be told what to do I”d go to church.
    I never liked charity calenders BTW.

  • Michael

    Maybe people shouldn’t be the focus of the images. Be a bit more creative.

    • Reginald Selkirk

       How Islamic. Maybe geometric patterns.

      • Grizzz

        How about a big white poster that has nothing on it. People can imagine things onto it, as long as those thoughts are policed by Greta, Rebecca and the Sisters of the Unshorn Apocalypse – you know, can’t have any thoughts that are not approved by the merry band of sexist idiots known as A+.

        • Michael

          I would love to see a calendar of atheists’ gardens. To answer people who say that if you don’t believe in a deity then you don’t appreciate beauty.

          • IndyFitz

            Hey, not a bad idea.  It could be titled “ATHEIST EDEN.” :-)

        • IndyFitz

          STOP IT!  Just STOP IT!  If I keep snarfing my Pepsi I’m going to spray carbonated fizz out my eyeballs!

          It sounds like a Christian poster: blank white, with a caption saying “This is what atheists believe in… NOTHING!”

          But it’s SAFER that way!  We ensure we don’t OFFEND anyone!  Because if ONE PERSON is uncomfy with something we do, it just ain’t right!  So we’d better not EVER do ANYTHING, just in case.  Somebody taking notes?  We need to put that down to add to the growing likelihood of an Atheist Movement One Hundred Forty-Seven Commandments, or whatever the official total is after those who repeatedly talk about what WE should be doing and should not be doing, as if there are atheist deacons deciding what’s best for all of us.

          Seriously, though, a white poster could have use.  If we got a hundred “notable” atheists, et al., to sign it and include a brief but inspiring message, it could be a neat conversation starter.  Put THAT up at work in place of the nude calendar and see how many people it offends… or inspires!

          • Grizzz

            Note taking offends me.

            • IndyFitz

              Yeah, I know, that’s Commandment #76: No taking notes after this project. You have to sacrifice a bit for the cause, Grizzz. Stop being such a rebel and just do whatever the majority tells you to do, because obviously it’s right.

              • Grizzz

                Forgive me Father, for I have sinned….

  • ortcutt

    We should totally sell candy bars door-to-door though.

    • Tainda

      I will wear pigtails if we do

      • IndyFitz

        *snort*  Uh-oh, they’re gonna lambaste you now! :-)

  • Reginald Selkirk

    There’s no pint in buying a calendar that goes past Dec 21, 2012 anyway, since the world is going to end ;>

    • IndyFitz

      AGAIN.

  • souffrantfleur

    Lighten up, Francis.

  • http://twitter.com/debbieflitman Debbie Flitman

    I see no problem with the human body portrayed through an art medium. As long as a the end result is tastefully done. Seeing the naked body artistically depicted in a calendar would certainly illustrate to my children that everyone’s body is beautiful. And that we all come in different shapes, sizes, and colors. If I am correct in my thinking, the calendar(s) described above are not Erotica, but simply a photo-shoot of  some of “us”.

  • DougI

    Simple solution, if you don’t like nude calendars then don’t appear in them and don’t buy them.   I don’t see the point of censorship and demanding everyone succumb to her change of heart just because she doesn’t use calendars herself or because of some other wild generalizations.  People don’t have a use for trading cards either, they collect them because they might have a favorite player and would like them to sign it, like people do with calendars (and yes, Rebecca Watson signed the calendar I have with her in it).  I don’t have it on my wall, it’s a memento (probably the vast reason why people buy calendars with their favorite skeptics in it).

    • ganner

      Who is talking about censorship or demands?

      • TristanLawksley

         Were you paying attention to the part where she stated that she’d like for the production of said calenders to cease? It wasn’t a demand, more than a plea, or maybe it was a “Guys, please don’t make this.”

        • ganner

          Is it wrong to offer an opinion on the course of action like-minded groups should take?

          • TristanLawksley

            No, it’s not wrong. Assumptive? Pretentious? Maybe. While we’re at it, let’s define like-minded here, because I don’t think all the calender examples she outlined fit that bit completely, certainly not once she got started throwing insults.

  • mikespeir

    I agree with her.

  • Grizzz

    Oh what bullshit. Rebecca Watson is singing a different tune because of her little tribe of retards (Adma Lee, PZ and Greta). This is no different than Mitt Romney and his tune du jour. 

    Rebecca, go **** yourself and get out from behind your curtain of accusations, conjecture and hypocrisy. This is the biggest, steaming pile of horseshit she has espoused since she got her panties in a twist because some guy thought she was hot.

    News flash dumpling. Your aren’t.

    • ganner

      And as usual, the crowd that wants us to believe there is no sexism blatantly displays sexism.

      • Helanna

        Nah, Grizzz just trolls here. He can be safely ignored. 

        • Grizzz

          Right….I have a dissenting voice so by default in Helanna world that means it is trollville. Nice world view lady.

          • Kristi

             No, you have a dissenting voice…and you ignore facts that don’t fit your preferred worldview…and you’re an asshole.

            • Grizzz

              Okay, if you can call me an asshole without censoring, then I can call you an ignorant cunt. Which is what you are Miss Kristi, and ignorant cunt that lives with a HUGE double standard that is not steeped in any form of evidence for validation. Okay Miss Kristi?

              • IndyFitz

                Oh, Grizzz, you know the double standard… we can be called assholes, but let the man throw the C-word around, and it’s all over.  We’re automatically misogynists, but somehow the same criteria doesn’t apply to result in them being misandrists.  I was once banned from this blog because of a battle like that.  You can’t win it, that’s for sure.  Reasoning with folks like that is like trying to talk logically with a fundamentalist Christian.  Unfortunately.

                • Grizzz

                  What happens if I call you a cunt? Or if I call myself a cunt? I am a daffy cunt!!! I big dopey daffy cunt! That’s me, county McCunterson! To quote Kenny Rogers you can call me the “Cuntard of the County”….I am betting it would be okily dokily to call myself a cunt, or you a cunt but if I call Miss Kristi a cunt, or county-pants or any such derivation of cunt it would be wrong.

                  Dang. Damned if I do, damned if I don’t. Personally, I blame the cunts.

                • Grizzz

                  I know, right? It is a bit like if I were to draw a cartoon of Mohammed! I would be pasted into a concrete coffin lickity split (double entendre intended….get it!)

                  It is the same thing with this crowd, utter the word cunt and the next thing you know, Men’s saunas and bath houses are getting burned to the ground and a fatwa is being issued for the testicle addled cunt-utterer’s “head”…..(double entendre intended AGAIN! Man I am on FIRE!)

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  That’s like the nigger vs. cracker argument. Nigger is highly offensive to black people because of all the negative connotations. Cracker may be an insult, but it has never carried the same weight to you as nigger has to them.
                  When a word is not only used to insult people, but also to put them in their place as lesser human beings, then yeah, it’s a bit more offensive.
                  Being called an asshole is like, Oh darn it, someone called me an asshole. Being called a bitch or a cunt (not in a joking way) makes me feel worthless.
                  Actually, I like it when people call me an asshole because it makes me feel like they at least think I’m equal enough to receive the same insults as they receive.
                  Besides, we all have assholes. 

                • IndyFitz

                  Serious question: How can a woman be called a bitch or a cunt in a joking way??!! I can’t imagine a situation when that wouldn’t be horrible, and wouldn’t get the name-caller kicked in the teeth (or worse!). :-)

                  I disagree with your statement, which sounds like a woman justifying what she says while demonizing men for the same thing. The offense of a word, I think, is the intent — which you alluded to. If someone is truly angry and hateful and calls me an asshole, then it’s an attempt to lessen me as a human, and I take offense to it. Claiming that men can’t possibly be offended by that like women are for other words smacks of elitist behavior. It’s okay for one but not the other? So what words does a man have to endure before he’s called a word offensive enough that he is justified in being offended?

                  I personally very rarely use words to hurt people. I would never call a man an asshole or a woman a cunt unless I truly, truly believed he/she was earning such a response. Words are powerful, but also weak. Too easy to hurt with them, and too weak to use them when better words and discussions can be had. Like this one… we’re exchanging opinions and not hurling vile insults, even though we’re on different sides of the coin, even if we toss sarcastic remarks around.

                  But I give you the smiley, just so you’ll know I do respect you, this chat, and your opinions. :-)

                • Grizzz

                  My my my, what a lovely little world of delusional self-rationalizations you live in.

                  Complete bullshit and nonsense, but if the sun is shining in your little world of delusion, knock yourself out.

                  Just know that you are full of hypocritical poo-poo. You know, the brown stuff that comes out assholes.

                • Grizzz

                  Oh yes. You are an asshloe. You said you liked it, so from know on I will refer to you as asshole.

                • Grizzz

                  Oh yes, julie ol’ girl, what about the folks who live ‘cross the pond in Merry Ol’ England. Cunt has a much different meaning and use over yonder way, but that wouldn’t matter to you would it? No, no it wouldn’t.

                  Enjoy your life of double standard hypocrisy. Personally, I’d rather hang out with people who are honest with themselves – you know, intellectually honest – then with people like you.

                • TristanLawksley

                   As a teenager living in rural Karnack Texas – and area dominated by Africa-Americans I was called a cracker on a daily basis. To me that word carried the same weight as the word nigger does to African Americans. Until you are on the receiving end of discrimination you cannot make claims such as that. Perhaps for *you* being called a cracker isn’t that big of deal… for a 105 lb. 8th grader being called it by 11th grade football players you can bet your ass it was a big deal.

                  You also, as a woman, cannot make claims regarding how a man does or does not feel about being called an asshole, despite sharing one. For some men it carries it’s own emotional baggage that could easily be on par with the issues you have with being called a “cunt” or a “bitch”. Imagine if a little boy spent his childhood being called a little asshole by abusive parents… would he then not feel worthless? You have to be very careful about making claims like that.

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  Responding here to Indy & Tristan so I have more space. Grizzz would rather stick to insults than have a rational discussion about them.

                  A better way to say it is that gender/race/orientation specific insults carry added weight to them. As in, not only are you a terrible person, you are a terrible person because of your gender/race/orientation. Dick is a more comparable insult to bitch/cunt than asshole is, because like I said, everyone has assholes. Tristan, I do apologize. I know that some of this does depend on personal experience. I was not meaning to suggest that it is okay to call someone a cracker; just that insults related to the generally more well-off class don’t carry quite the same weight. That definitely applies where I’m from, but I can see that if you’re outnumbered, it’s a lot more offensive. It still is an insult about a person’s race which is why it should be off-limits.The ideal solution is that we don’t resort to name calling in arguments, but that is easier said than done. But if asshole is really just as offensive as bitch/cunt, than why is it that women are rarely called assholes and called bitch/cunt more often? It’s because when you insult someone, you are specifically looking to hurt someone. People know that bitch/cunt hurts women most, which is why they call them that instead of asshole. I just think that if you’re insulting someone, you should at least show them the respect of insulting *them* not insulting their demographic. Whatever their faults, it is because *they* are a shitty person, not because they are male/female, gay, or a certain race.

                  I hope that makes more sense than my first post.
                  And Indy, friends sometimes throw around insults in a joking way, like “bitch, please.”

                • Grizzz

                  You will just justify and rationalize until the cows come home won’t you?

                  You are a hypocrite who operates with an obvious double standard. I could live with that if you just had the guts to be HONEST about it. Instead, you choose to try and create some semantic smoke and mirrors to justify such double standards.

                  Frankly, it is people like you along with the radical right that create the troubles and frighteningly Orwellian environments. I could care less if you live with double standards if you would only be honest about it.

                  You don’t get to have one thing one way, and then turn around and rationalize out the opposite as being hunky-dory, okily dokily, magically delicious.

                  And go get butt-hurt over the word choices, I don’t care. But, when you start throwing around ridiculous double standards and try to justify your piss-poor idiocy, I will call you out.

                  Hugs and kisses,
                  XOXO

                  Grizzz

                • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

                  And how would an argument about the meaning and use of words ever be anything but semantic?

      • Grizzz

        Watson’s 180 is nothing better and no different that Mittens Romney as his cavalcade of changing views. Watson and Romney change views as fast as a snake sheds its skin.

        And they change these views when it is convenient for them.

  • DrewHardies

    I’m unimpressed by Watson’s article.  It seems like it’s starting to use “Objectification” in the same way that libertarians use “Markets” or the religious use “Faith”.  The terms can mean something (and do) in some contexts.  But in practice, it just reads like:

    *Says Coded Word*
    *Everyone Nods, and assume the word covers the topic*

    In her article reasons, reasons 2-5 aren’t actually reasons about problems with other groups doing calendars.  And problem 1 is ‘objectification’.

    While I agree that ‘objectification’ is meaningful in a lot of contexts (as is ‘faith’ or ‘Markets’) it doesn’t create an actual argument when inserted here.  There just isn’t a causal connection between “An organization sells calenders” and “Some person takes a harmful action that they wouldn’t have taken before.”
    And, by calling for an end to calendars, she’s asking charitable organizations to forgo funds that would otherwise have been used for good ends.  So, the suggestion entails a real harm, and nothing beyond *coded word* for benefit.

    • Thegoodman

       We need a paradigm shift in the regions that exploit objectification and faith as we break through the glass ceiling and diversify as a market leader. *

      *Brought to you by corporatebullshit.com

    • IndyFitz

      Good points.  It seems like going over the top with this sort of thing cheapens what sexual harassment is really about.  Someone might be offended to find a nude calendar displayed, and hopefully the calendar owner will have common sense about where to hang it… but to imply it’s somehow overall sexual harassment because it objectifies women seems a bit extreme.

  • Thegoodman

    How about people who want to make them and pose for them continue to do so, people who do not want to make them or pose for them do not?

    “Why I stopped making calendars.” might have been a more effective post. Her plea to everyone else to follow her opinions is annoying to me. Agree with them or not, but asking a bunch of misfits like the skeptic community to do something because of a few opinions is not something that is generally well received.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=639378446 Bridget Gaudette

      You make a good point.

  • Grizzz

    You know the worst thing we could do to Rebecca Watson and her merry band of dinkwads (Adam, PZ and Greta)?

    Ignore ‘em.

    Give them no quarter. Even if they sneeze, don’t offer them even a “Thor Bless You.”

    Seriously. These media-mongers just CRAVE the dissent and controversy, and the worst thing to do to dinklenuts like that is to simply ignore them. 

    And who is Rebecca Watson to give such directions in the first place? Last I heard she hadn’t even run for student body president let alone get elected. 

    And, it does bear repeating – Miss Watson’s change of heart is no different than ol’ Mittens Romney and his Olympic level flu-flopping. It is done for mere convenience and when done it removes any and all credulity to the dictates and ideas.

    Miss Watson, like Romney, sheds ideas faster than a snake sheds skins.

    • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

      Oh, do fuck off. Not everyone here is on the same #FTBullies/anti-A+ page as you are, and it gets old to see you flooding this page with your brainless vitriol (and frequent mischaracterization) of the people you criticize.

      • Grizzz

        I Like you! You’re silly!
        :)

        XOXOX

  • http://skepticsplay.blogspot.com/ trivialknot

    Wait, skepchicks stopped making calendars in 2007?!  I am seriously behind the times.

    I remember back before 2007, the Skepchick calendars felt a bit off to me, but I thought they must be okay because they were endorsed by Skepchick and Phil Plait!  I never really thought seriously about their advantages and disadvantages back then.  But in the current climate of the skeptical and atheist community, it seems obvious that they’re a bad idea.

  • Grizzz

    And another glaring example of the double-standard that is Miss Watson and her crew of sexists – Greta Christina.

    Greta writes EROTICA for chrissakes! And Greta’s blog and column is more often than not about her vagina, orgasms, sex, sexuality and the objectification of women TO women. So how does this differ from a calendar of partially clad people?

    When Greta writes ad nauseum about her whizzy-biscuit and also writes EROTICA (the whole genre is based on OBJECTIFICATION) how does Dear Miss Watson rectify her sycophantic love of Miss Christina without giving her a dictate to cease and desist on the dirty story telling?

    Watson’s whole shtick reeks with double-standard and self-serving idiocy.

    • Kristi

       Hey Grizz…

      I don’t have the time or the energy right now to confront the enormous degree of WRONG throughout your posts, but can you at least show Greta and Rebecca the respect they deserve as grown women and stop calling them “Miss”? Just that one word choice speaks volumes about your attitude towards women, frankly, and it’s pissing me right off.

      • Grizzz

        Well Miss Kristi, you go right ahead and get the vapors and clutch at your pearls. The fact is, the double standard is there and no matter what spin you want to put on it, you will do nothing but show the terrible hypocrisy and double standard that is your side of the fence.

        Now then Miss Kristi, do go and enjoy your night.

        Kisses and Hugs
        XOXO
        :)

        You see, emoticons make it all better, right Miss Kristi?

        • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

          You’re really not helping yourself here, you know.

          • Grizzz

            You are cuter than a box full of kittens!

            In fact, I am going to nickname you “pussy-box” from now on, ‘cuz you haz silliness!!!

            XOXO

      • TristanLawksley

         Kristi,
          If you’re going to get butt-hurt over the titles people use then it might be doing you a service to learn about those titles in question. You seem to be making the case that calling a “grown” woman “Miss” is disrespectful. It’s not.

        From Wikipedia:

        Miss (pronounced /ˈmɪs/) is an English language honorific traditionally used only for an unmarried woman (not entitled to another title such as “Doctor” or “Dame”). Originating in the 17th century, it is a contraction of mistress, which was used for all women. A period is not used to signify the contraction. Its counterparts are Mrs., usually used only for married women, Ms. can be used for married or unmarried women.

        • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

          That doesn’t say anything about the connotation of the word at present, and even I, as a man, can pretty clearly see how “Miss” can be seen as paternalistic and condescending. You might also note that there is no equivalent unmarried form for men, which itself shows a double standard.

          • Grizzz

            You….are….ADORABLE! You make me want to just pick you up and give snuggly hugs and kisses!

            XOXOX

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=639378446 Bridget Gaudette
  • anon101

    I honestly applaud
    Rebecca for that bit of intellectual honesty. (If they would stop the
    dishonest “Hug me I’m vaccinated” campaign I would be even
    more impressed.) A few days ago when the calendar was introduced on
    this blog I was pointing out the double standard and I was heaped
    upon with bile by people that are now suspiciously quite. I wonder
    why.

    • IndyFitz

      Maybe because Hemant has put his seal of approval on it… do people’s public attitudes change when they know they’re following the leader of the pack?  Just curious.

    • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

      What on earth is “dishonest” about the “Hug me, I’m vaccinated” campaign? I am baffled by that claim. Unless you’re trying to claim that hugs are sexualized (?!), I’m at a total loss as to what you could possibly mean.

  • Miss_Beara

    2013 Calendar: Atheists Holding Snuggly Puppies and Kittens. 

    • IndyFitz

      Yeah, but you’d better make sure those puppies and kittens have clothes on!

  • http://www.agnostic-library.com/ma/ PsiCop

    I could be wrong, but it sure looks as though the “skeptical movement” is becoming increasingly doctrinaire in its pronouncements and practices. I’m not saying sexual harassment is acceptable. I don’t deny that it happens, even if it shouldn’t. And it shouldn’t happen in any setting or context, the “skeptical movement” or anywhere else.

    But … calendars? Really!? You’re going to forbid calendars now?

    • IndyFitz

      That’s what I’ve been arguing all over this forum today.  We talk a lot about freedom and not marching lemming-like behind leaders, the way religions blindly follow their churches and do whatever they’re told.  Now we seem to be closing in on drawing up a list of official positions that all skeptics must adhere to, in the way they’re laid out, or we’re Not One Of Them.  It’s getting a little unnerving.

    • http://pulse.yahoo.com/_6OE7LEYELE4MZTVXGZUSVTBFUI julie

      …no one’s forbidding it…people just have different opinions.

    • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=639378446 Bridget Gaudette
    • http://twitter.com/InMyUnbelief TCC

      It really is tiresome to have people misinterpret a post with the core message “Hey, maybe this isn’t such a good idea anymore” to really be saying, “I forbid you all from ever doing this ever again! Mwuhahaha!” Seriously, I don’t have the patience to deal with such hopelessly overblown outrage.

      • Grizzz

        Okay kitten, you go have a nice saucer of cream and curl up in a sunny spot by the window. You must be all tuckered out! You adorable little pussy-box!

        XOXO

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=639378446 Bridget Gaudette

    It’s a fundraiser, if anyone wants to help make it happen with 50% of funds going to cancer research, here’s the link: 
    http://www.indiegogo.com/atheist-nude-calendar-2013.

  • http://twitter.com/TychaBrahe TychaBrahe

    I do use wall calendars.  Ever since I stopped watching network television I no longer have a clue what day of the week it is.  Besides, an online calendar can’t show enough of what is going on over the whole month to be useful in planning.  Yes, I could go to a lecture on Wednesday, because that time is otherwise unbooked, but it doesn’t immediately show me that I’m already booked for Tuesday and Thursday, and probably should go to sleep early at least one night.

    Why do skeptic calendars have to be pin up calendars?  Why not various atheists, male and female, singles and families (both het and gay), doing ordinary things like cooking, gardening, playing with kids or pets, taking cheesy tourist photos, reading….
    And surround them with quotes, maybe their thoughts on atheism or their favorite quotes from other atheist writers.

    I used to use this particular day planner.  I bought it solely because it had these great quotes.  I opened it to January 1st and it had a quote by Albert Camus: “In the midst of winter, I finally learned that there was in me an invincible summer.”  I used it for five years until the woman picking the quotes started getting them from self-help books instead of actual writers and philosophers.

  • dangeroustalk

    I have to disagree with you on this one Hemant:

    Don’t Do That! – http://t.co/Q7d3ekoX  

  • Gunstargreen

    There’s a 2011 calendar in my room, it’s on November. So that’s the last time I looked at one.


CLOSE | X

HIDE | X