If you’re sexy and you know it, submit a photo to Think Atheist ASAP! We’re putting together a fund raising calendar for the website of our most lovely-looking ladies for 2010, and we need some steamy photos FAST. So if you’ve always wanted to be one of those lucky calendar girls, now’s your chance!

Here are the official rules:

1. NO NUDITY. This is very important and must be strictly adhered to. Be sexy and racy, but no full frontal nudity will be used in the calendar.

2. No full names will be put on the calendar to protect the privacy and safety of all the girls. Only a first name and the girl’s TA profile URL will be used. Girls may also choose to use a pseudonym for the calendar if they wish.

3. Girls may request a month to have their photo associated with, but we cannot guarantee that every girl will get the month they chose.

4. Submissions must be in by no later than December 17th, 2009 at 11:59 pm. We understand this is kind of soon, but we need to get the calendar done before the new year!

5. There are only 12 months, so only 12 girls will ultimately be chosen. All decisions are to be made by Think Atheist staff members and are final.

6. Only one photo submission per participant allowed. Choose it wisely!

To submit a photo, email it to thinkatheist@gmail.com as an attachment. Photos should be jpegs, in the biggest file size you can make. A suggested pixel size of twenty three hundred by eighteen hundred is recommended. Questions or comments? Drop us a line over at the forum:

We can’t wait to see what you guys send in! And as always, thanks for helping out the community here at Think Atheist.

Views: 3917

Reply to This

Replies to This Discussion

It seems to me that objectification of women is the intention here; the calendar is intended to show that there are ‘sexy’ or at least ‘attractive’ in the broadest politically correct sense, atheist women.

It follows in the footsteps of the Pirelli calendar and similar publications, promoting a product with sex, whether that be of the mind or of the body.

In reality, regardless of its ethics (or attempts to dampen down its motivation with apologism) it will probably attract the attention of both sexes. The majority of cover photographs on magazines for both men and women are female, these are the facts and I can’t be bothered to explore the reasons here.

The question is, do we think we should be morally and intellectually above using sex to sell things?

Is this a sacred cow, because of the undoubted suppression of the female over the centuries?

It is interesting to note that suppression of a female’s sexuality and right to choose what she can do with her body and her beauty is a key part of that oppression and still remains so today, Barbie Burka’s spring to mind.

How both women and men will come out at the end of this last century’s sexual revolution is of not inconsiderable interest.

Non Theists will need to play an important part in this debate, as let’s face it the theists have totally cocked it up.

I would recommend that all remain in the discussion and hold their corner, there are people to convince here and it is nice to have some areas where controversy rules consensus.

It makes one think we still have things to work out between us.
How about using quotes from our Quote Group to accompany these sexy photos?
How many times do I hafta say it till someone pays attention??? (Im not usually such an attention hound, Ive been pouting cuz no one has said anything to 3 other posts....sniff sniff)
And May the 4th???
Nakie under the costume FTW!!!
But.. but.. it's underneath the costume... I can't even get a thought that you could be nakie underneath? Damn you Rule #1! Damn you to Tartarus!
So, you'll be wearing clothes under your clothes? Kinky. :)
As long as they aren't granny panties.

I saw it and I had to.
I am so very sorry.
That has to be the most beautiful thing i've ever seen.
Can that be in the calender?
I am not very photogenic (as I have been told my several people throughout the years)

Who the hell would say such an asinine thing? You don't look unphotogenic at all in your pics. Besides, it is largely up to the photographer to make someone look good or not with various angles and lighting. It sounds like a few people deserved to be smacked over the years (not that I advocate physical violence, I swear).

But I do love the banana idea. ;)
Ah, I feel the same way; it seems like the camera always snaps at that awkward moment where one of my eyes is halfway closed and I'm about to sneeze, lol. Digital cameras are the best invention ever; as long I can just snap 143420934023 pictures, then one of them has to come out decent!

I still say Reggie deserves a smack! I mean, all husbands do once in awhile; they must be kept in line somehow, right? Oh snap, bringing sexism back to the thread!
I have the same problem...unless the picture is taken by a professional or I'm just lucky the camera always manages to accentuate my bad side....or I'm slouching, my hair is messed up, blinking etc.


© 2015   Created by umar.   Powered by

Badges  |  Report an Issue  |  Terms of Service