WRFH/Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM - Flyover Features: What is Make America Hot Again?

Episode Date: April 3, 2025

Emma and Sophia discuss an article that contrasts hotness and beauty. 

You're listening to Flyover Features on Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM. This is the radio show where we discuss a recent features article that's been in the news and discuss the implications of it. I'm Emma Verini and I'm here with Sophia M.A.M.A.M.A. Today, we are going to be discussing an article called The Pitfalls of Making America Hot Again by Virginia Abram. This article was released on March 24th, 2025, and I believe this is the first thing. article. Yes, it is from the famed publication, first things, well known in the spheres of religion, philosophy, culture from more conservative, right-leaning perspective. And this talks about a new catchphrase inspired from the MAGA movement, Make America Great Again, called Maha,

Make America Hot Again. And they joke about how in the article, it was a dark time when the held that every size movement reign supreme. And questioning the attractiveness of transgender people resulted in cancellation. So do you remember that period or do we still live in that period? We're just not really in it when we're here at Hillsdale. I don't remember ever hearing anything about Make America Hot Again. I don't remember this being a slogan. I don't remember seeing the hats that this article talks about where there were hot pink. Make America Hot Again. hats that people were supposedly wearing. No recollection of any of this. So this is an interesting thing for me to read because it makes me feel like I'm pretty removed from the cultural

mainstream, which might be true. But yeah, reading this article was super confusing for me because I am not familiar with this topic whatsoever. But nonetheless, I think it's an interesting article and I think it's worth discussing because it talks about a lot of the things that we seem to want to talk a lot about at Hillsdale, for example, it emphasizes the importance of beauty as opposed to just hotness. And I think I have some opinions about it, just based on some of the looking that I've done at some of these controversies that talks about. But yeah, what did you, what did you think about this one? What's interesting is I was definitely out of the loop when it came to the maha or make America hot again movement because I'm pretty disconnected from Trump type politics.

But the ideas of just hotness and bringing back beauty or whatnot, I've definitely seen on the inner webs of like, you know, attractive people doing attractive things, which is just doing stuff normal people looks, except for it looks cooler because they're hot to look at, like just a bunch of nice looking slim Italians chilling on a sailboat or something like that, you know, like the general vibes I feel like I'm somewhat familiar with. But not the specific of just, you know, like, I don't know, that slogan. It's also kind of funny because I remember the health at every size and the covers of, you know, Cosmo being people that were a bit overweight.

and it's strange because now people are talking about, oh, Zemphic and like all of a sudden you're seeing that less promoted. But then it's also like, I don't know how many people are actually taking Ozempic? I don't know anyone who is. There probably are people. I'm out of the loop on that. I'm not sure. And I'm not really sure if these Trump supporters would support OZemPEC, to be honest with

you. It seems like something they might not approve of, especially if they're in the more RFK crowd. So you would have to fill me in on that as well. It seems like it's just attracting really niche, weird groups of people. I don't know. But also, a Zempec might be a totally different thing, I guess. But yeah, they talk about hotness and the hashtag conservative dads megabababes make America hot and healthy again 20-25 calendar.

So a conservative beer company is just showing, you know, scannily clad influencers, as the article mentions, which is, you know, definitely representing traditional strands of conservatism, just, you know, your father having women and bikinis to admire before he goes to church or something in your Louisiana Bayou home or something. Well, that's the thing that I find strange about this article is that it's jumping from one thing to the other, it feels like. For example, it starts out talking about the slogan, Make America Hot Again, and then it jumps to all these examples of people who have been trying to do that, or people who are right-wing,

but not necessarily conservative who, you know, want to make America hot again. But what's so odd is then later she says, well, this isn't like actually a traditional or conservative value. And it's like, well, nobody said it was. Yeah. I feel like the people doing this are not traditional conservatives. Like the focus on the family Christians are not being all like, Maha, make America hot again. And I say that because that is what a lot of my family members are. So what's weird is like she's like, yeah, she's, but it's like these are the people that like voted for Trump but aren't necessarily super conservative to begin with because they like his economic policies of the vibes he brings. And what's also weird is that, yeah, this was an interesting article because I brought interesting aspects of culture.

I didn't agree with all of it because I'm not 100% sure if we're talking about the same instance. But she critiqued this girl called Natalie Winters who she thought was wearing like an inappropriate outfit for a White House briefing. And I looked it up and to me it was like perfectly modest and professional and acceptable looking. It was like, as she says a short skirt, but I looked at the skirt and it's like just above her knees. So it's not like that short and like a, I don't know, black top that's not like even tight fitting with like a collar. Like it looks like a normal outfit to me. So that was kind of a weird example. The other one they have is better because they talk about the raw milkmaid dress.

where it's like, you know, oh, bring back tradwives and traditionalism, and it's like freaking designed to look as hot as possible on someone as it can, which is a way of saying it's not exactly a modest Christian type of attire or whatever. So, you know, like, that's a better example of, okay, this is weird. But also are the people wearing raw milk made dresses claiming to be trad conservative Christians? I guess some of the online grifters are, but, you know, I don't think your local Baptist church is having,

a raw milk may dress sale anytime soon. This piece is just like, it sort of reads as this very absurd, like, cultural critique that not a few, not many people would even be able to understand the references in the first place. And it's sort of saying that it's going to go about critiquing one thing. And then it just, it seems to go off the rails. Like, like I said before, it. It says that it's talking about make America hot again. And then later she's complaining about why make America hot again isn't conservative or why it needs to become conservative.

And it's like it never claimed, at least it seems to me like it never claimed to want to do that anyway. And yeah, I do, I did see what you're talking about. So just for context, Natalie Winters, who is the woman that Sophia was just talking about who allegedly wore something inappropriate. to a press briefing is a co-host on Steve Bannon's War Room podcast. So that's how a lot of people know who she is. And she got slammed in the media for wearing something that was not appropriate. And so I'm looking at the outfit right now. Like, totally fine.

And I think something that's important that the conservatives don't really do is like a lot of times there is a fine line between modest. and obscenity. You know, like, this is, this might not be the most modest thing, but is it visually insulting? Is it something that's like actually obscene? No. And, and I think that it looks different on different people. Like, I don't think everyone would be able to get away with what she's wearing. It's not uniformly modest. It's not modest if everybody wears it. But she's, you know, she's like young and thin. She can get away with it and look fine. Like, it's not, it's not obscene. And I think that, you know, calling her out for doing that is just, you know, it's a little bit tasteless and out of touch. Yeah. And it's like, again, in my opinion, like, I mean,

you can complain about even calling her out, but it's also like, yeah, it's not, I mean, I don't find that immodest. It's weird. My Nana wouldn't find that immodest, you know. Yeah. But I mean, I guess to each its own. Um. She also just looks like a. like a cute like very young girl like calling her out for being a modest is just a little bit I think it's a little bit strange it it's it's it's sort of it's giving resentful vibes honestly it's like okay yeah she she's wearing a short skirt but like she she looks like adorable it's not like she's trying to like be inappropriate it doesn't it doesn't look like she's trying to be inappropriate I mean, what does she need to wear like clogs and like a large tape?

Yeah, I mean, I don't know. She looks like a cute young reporter girl because she is. Her job is a reporter and she's attractive, you know? I mean, this is pretty discrimination we're talking about here. Man, I mean, yeah, it's weird. She's being targeted for being hot. That's not okay. Yeah, I mean, like, why do young girls who are, you know, in college or just out of college

have to have to dress like like old maidens. Like what? Why is that something that needs to happen? If that's conservative, I don't want any part of that. That is weird. Yeah, conservatism is wearing like the Mennonite like head coverings and then the long dresses or a conservative is wearing like a business suit and slags because that's more modest than wearing a skirt.

Yeah. I mean, if that's your religion, like, you know, that's. fine. Oh, yeah. Do what your religion calls you to do, obviously. But calling out some girl for wearing shorts, like, that's, I don't want to say that's a traumatic experience, but I think we should be more aware of what we're drawing attention to. Because while this might be inappropriate to some people, you're making things a hell of a lot worse by giving it a ton of online attention and drawing everybody's eyes to it and causing people to over sexualize it when in the first place that wouldn't have happened at all. Yeah. And I mean, like, I haven't looked into this much, but I know this is a huge

deal when it came out. And a lot of people did defend her and her outfit. Because I know a girl did write kind of like, oh, this is so horrible, nonprofessional. But I mean, even if she got a lot of support that had to be traumatizing to be called out for dressing an appropriate to me, she's trying to look cute, but I don't think she's trying to look overly sensual or anything like that. That's what really bothers me. I mean, I think on some level, you know, do what's right, even if others aren't doing it. So no matter what, maybe you should try to be somewhat respectful, so I'm that perfect at. But, like, I think what really gets at me is, like, there's a difference between getting attention because you're wearing a bikini and deliberately trying to maybe have people look at

your body. And in my opinion, that gal is. is not wearing anything that's like even remotely like that. And that is traumatizing, especially because things meant some bodies differently than others, you know. And it's just the way God made you. Well, the reason that this whole thing relates to the article in the first place is because it's talked about in a large graph. It says thousands upon thousands of her fans cheered her on and told her, to keep the tight skirts coming, which is also odd, weird, but whatever. But she ended up defending herself and her outfit choices by turning,

by in turn insulting the journalist who wrote the piece. The article goes on to say, Winters is absolutely right to say she won't be gaslit by people who celebrate obesity and mutilating surgeries, but is it right to believe that being hot excludes you from the rules of decorum? excuse me, I'm sorry, but I don't think that she's actually, you know, excluded from the rules of decorum. I think that if someone who was significantly heavier or, you know, not as young as her, if someone like that wore that skirt, yeah, that would be inappropriate because it's more obscene, not because it's, you know, equally as modest to wear that skirt. I don't, I think there's a huge difference. The, the rules of decorum are not applied uniformly and universally to everybody. Different things look different on different people and are appropriate for certain age groups.

And that's not true of everybody. I don't think that she's, you know, violating any major rules. I mean, and honestly, if you go into D.C. when Congress is in session and you see what some of the interns are wearing, I mean, she looks way more done up than most of those people. Seriously, I don't, I can't even, I don't know how the writer of this article even thought to put that in there. Okay. As someone who will be in the belly of the beast, aka D.C. the summer and has not yet experienced this. Wait, can you talk more about these intern outfits? I've heard wild stuff, but I am still distant from that.

Like, do you have any crazy stories about that? No, I mean, it's not like they're wearing something terrible. And I meant to say when Congress is out of session, which, you know, different, totally different environment. But still, nobody is following the rules of decorum in D.C. I mean, some people are, but a lot of people really do not have it together in terms of their style. And I'm not trying to be picky. But in comparison to this picture we have of Natalie Winters, she looks for. fine, you know? I mean, would it be better to wear a bright pink tacky pantsuit? Would it be better for

her to do that? Honestly, I would say it's a little bit better to just look good and be slightly less modest than it is to, you know, obsess over looking modest at the expense of, you know, just looking well done and tasteful. Yeah. On a slightly different note, it's interesting. because she said the author says we need make America hot again was a step in the right direction but it needs now to transcend its aims we need to make America beautiful again and that starts by those in the right cultivating beauty in every aspect of their lives from style to etiquette to faith hot is fleeting beauty and durs so we always talk about the good true and beautiful at hillsdale and it seems like this person's definitely making a distinction between hot as in like physical attractiveness and

I guess beauty, which is maybe more aspects of one's character, which is interesting. What do you, what do you think of that? Well, I think that that's true. I think it's possible to have a beautiful character. But if you're talking about external appearance, then in some ways, beauty and hot are really synonymous. So I don't, I just don't understand. I guess I really just don't understand what this article is getting at because obviously when we talk about making America hot again, we're talking about the superficial. Maybe it's somewhat tied to health, exercise, things like that. But if you're pushing for beauty, inner and outer beauty, I mean, it's super cliche, but it's fine if you want to write an article about that. Why do you have to tie the whole making America hot thing into it?

Why can't you just say America needs to be beautiful and do your own thing? So, I mean, like, yes, there is obviously a difference between just superficial hotness and beauty, but, like, what's the point. I mean, I guess apparently this is logo or whatever has become popular. I was at the Collegian, which is our Hillsdale's college newspaper weekly meeting yesterday, and someone did suggest an opinion article for MAHA. So I guess it's becoming popular, and I'm wondering if it also is with the rise of RFK and health. But it is strange. I think I also agree that like beauty and hotness are separate, but in some cases they're together because like I think it's beautiful if someone makes themselves look hotter by taking good care of their body and exercising and thus looking

good. And I also think it's beautiful if someone, you know, actively tries to make themselves look nice by wearing lovely outfits or things of that nature. So it's like I think they're ultimately like separate, but they can intertwine in certain situations, which is interesting. I think the problem is that I've been really hard on the author, Virginia, Abram. So, you know, she worked hard. She made the article. And I like the painting. I don't know what it is.

That's just this really nice looking, sleeping goddess of the sea that's like surrounded by cherubim and has very nice curves. But anyway, I think the problem is I get what she's getting. out of there's a distinction and it's surface level to just be concerned about hotness and not beauty. I think my problem is she kind of uses weird examples and I was not expecting her to basically take the side against Natalie Winters and most conservatives kind of rushed to defend her, both for reasons we were saying of just like, is her outfit really that bad? Like it sounds like this is just being resentful and honestly mean. And like, okay, is there actually something bad with just being hot? And I mean the implicit message.

The implicit message that she's sending in the final graph when she talks about we need to transcend hotness and worry about beauty is that if you are focused on hotness in any way or hotness or whatever you want to call it, external appearance, then necessarily you must be deficient in some moral way. And I think that is motivated by resentment. And I think that's the problem with this article is that there's that implicit message that, you know, if you support this movement, well, you need to transcend it and worry about internal beauty and all of things. that. It's like, well, what if people are already doing that? You know, why, why is it necessarily a fact that if you support Maha or whatever you want to call it, that you are also just like internally deficient? So I think that's my problem with it. It's, especially at the end, it just it does not tie the piece together while it makes a lot of assumptions that I don't think are necessarily true. Yeah. Well, she says conservatives need better. But I also think the problem is

most of the people pushing this, I don't think are truly ideologically conservative whether you agree with it or not, if that makes sense. That's part of my issue. Like, I get what she's trying to critique, but I don't think she went about it in the best way. So, yeah. Well, yeah, it's like going to people who aren't conservative and telling them to be conservative. And it's like, hey, you know, you guys who are not conservative, you guys, by the way, aren't being conservative. And they're probably like, yeah, well, we know, we don't care. So it's not convincing anybody. It doesn't serve any purpose. Yeah. Anyway, that's all we have time for today. You're listening. to Flyover Features on Radio Free Hillsdale 101.7 FM. I'm Emma Verini, and I'm here with Sophia

Mant.