Miss California Is Right to Scream Foul
Miss California nee Carrie Prejean is right to scream foul at the scalp hunters who want hers after the pictures of her clad in revealing pink drawers with her back turned to the camera in a suggestive pose ripped around websites. Miss USA Beauty pageant organizers wasted no time in very publicly saber rattling Prejean with the threat of snatching her Miss California crown away for violating the "ethical and moral" standards of the contract all contestants are required to sign.
What nonsense. The real issue is still that Prejean opened her yap and told beauty contest judge Perez Hilton what she honestly thought about gays and her rock solid devotion to her Lord and savior Jesus Christ. Since then Prejean has been the target of a protracted, noisy, and vicious campaign to tar and smear her.
Prejean answered a question that probably shouldn't have been asked. She answered it honestly, and she answered it after she pranced round nearly nude in a contest that is the ultimate in hype, hypocrisy, and female commodization. So whether she pranced around for racy photo shoots in her pink undies is irrelevant. A beauty contest is to crown a beauty queen not a moral, values, religious or atheist queen.
They win for one reason and one reason only. They are deemed the most gorgeous, not the brainiest, most charitable, religious, or non-religious, or any of the other feigned school girl virtues. To pretend they win for any other reason than having a pretty face, curvy figure, and sculptured legs piles hypocrisy on hypocrisy. To put it more plainly, plain women don't win beauty contests no matter how much they talk and act like Mother Teresa or Joan of Arc. In fact they're not going to get in the door. The notion that judges prize intelligence above curves is garbage. That quality has not or ever topped the femininity rating scale.
By contrast the prized values that top the ideal male masculinity scale for men are he-man toughness, shed no tears, show no feelings, or sensitivity. These qualities are false, phony and corrosive to men, but few would call them qualities that a male glamour contest judge would drool over. They look at their bods too.
As for morals, in years past, women who have posed nude, did drugs and beauty crowns. Their alleged misdeeds if they were ever caught stirred scandal way after the judges had plopped the Miss State, Miss America or Miss World crown on their head.
Feminists and Hindu nationalists demonstrated at the Miss World contest in Bangalore in 1996. Hundreds were killed in riots in Kaduna in northern Nigeria that left more than 200 dead when the Miss World contest was slated there in 2002. The contest organizers didn't miss a beat. They promptly high tailed it out of the country to London. The organizers and sponsors didn't utter a peep at the prospect that a woman was condemned to be stoned to death for adultery in Nigeria. The case touched off an international furor and ultimately the government backed down. The silence of the Miss World contest backer's was yet another testament to the competition's hypocrisy
As painful as it is for some feminist opponents of beauty contests to admit, beauty contests have been major steppingstones for many women to climb the business and professional career ladder. That's because there are still far fewer opportunities in business, especially corporate business, universities, the professions and the trades for women than men. When it comes to the top spots, it's still pretty much a good ole boy dominated world. And nobody says that the boys have to look like Adonis's in Speedo briefs to climb to the top power spots.
Halle Berry, Michelle Pfeiffer and Sharon Stone are textbook examples of former beauty queens who parlayed their wins into barrier breaking spots. They in turn were able to use their notoriety as chips to promote charities, social causes, and to raise tons of money for those causes. They got the eye and ear of a public and a media star and celebrity struck by beauty and glamour, even as they spout the delusional correct line that they admire the beauty queens for their smarts.
Prejean should scream, and scream loudly, that she's being slapped in the face with the proverbial double standard that holds that a woman who flaunts her body is somehow less moral, virtuous and fit to win a beauty contest. Or as she put it that openly mocks her Christian faith. If that's hypocrisy, it's hypocrisy she didn't make. May she keep and wear her crown well.
Earl Ofari Hutchinson is an author and political analyst. His weekly radio show, "The Hutchinson Report" can be heard on weekly in Los Angeles on KTYM Radio 1460 AM and nationally on blogtalkradio.com
Loading comments…
Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to
All of you crying about unfair attacks need to tell us when and what rules apply. She lied, she broke the rules and she lied about it twice. She signed a contract that stated that she had not posed naked and she had. Those are just the facts. Those that want to claim she should be "left alone" or not "attacked" are ignoring those facts and focusing on what they perceive as a motive for them. Whether they are motivated by hate or motivated by superiority Christian complex, the facts remain. She broke the rules and she lied. You cannot condone ignoring the facts because you agree or disagree with the motives of those presenting them. If she had never posed nude, these “attacks” would be unjustified. That is not what happened here.
I agree, for the most part Drumbum. She did lie, and she should be called out for it, and in accordance with the rules of the pageant should be dethroned. That said it does not invalidate most of Mr. Hutchinson's argument. He is right about the hypocrisy of a "morality" clause in the contract. These girls are put on stage to look pretty, end of discussion. The same drive that makes people search for topless photos of the Carrie Prejean's of the world also drives the pageants in the first place.
Excellent post. I agree and hope she gets out from under the woman bashing she has been subject to.
Just a quick correction - it was Hindu fundamentalists who protested, not nationalists. Most, if not all, Hindus are nationalists.
The foul came when Prejean claimed her answer lost her the crown. She didn't know the scores. She didn't care. She knew she could prolong her 15 minutes by playing the misunderstood bigot card. She lost because she didn't deserve to win. She is the very definition of a sore loser. And people who defend her are probably the same people who tip over the scrabble board when they see that they have no chance of winning.
Miss California was correct to answer Perez' question in any way she felt appropriate and should not have been harangued for doing so. But she signed a contract and had she been honest about her past, she would have been on sound footing. It's now a civil matter - breach of contract. If she has any doubts about how that works, tell her to confer with Vanessa Williams.
I agree with your comment, even about the contractual stuff. While I don't think it's a big deal, I realize that they had that question in the contract. Now, perhaps she felt what she did in the past probably didn't rise to the level of what they were asking about. Or perhaps she merely forgot. Nervousness makes people quirky and prone to forget things while under the duress of it. I've failed school/college tests due to anxiety, getting even easy questions wrong simply because i was so nervous I couldn't think straight.
Obviously, I won't make excuses for her. Just saying, even people with the best intentions can't always be 100% accurate in everything they do. Also, being a kid is as much a learning experience as is any high school or college course. We all fall prey to the sins of our youth sooner or later. That's why we have the standard by which an adult isn't considered an adult by our government until they are 18+.
I hate to say this.. as I do not like her, but the author above makes good points. I don't think she represents the US. I don't like beauty contests or the idea of them. ON the other hand, if there is a concerted effort to knock her off her throne, i don't feel like that is right, either.
So, considering that, I can only hope that she can keep her crown, but that her toxic personality keeps her away from the limelight. May she rot in obscurity as long as she holds such noxious ideas, but, let HER rot in obscurity. Let's not pettily help her along the way.
Agree that there is hypocrisy, Mr. Hutchinson. But the hypocrisy is with the pageants themselves, not necessarily the contestants. And yes, there was hypocrisy here on the part of Ms. Prejean. It is one thing to present yourself as pure, wholesome, and Christian, if you walk the walk as well as you talk the talk. It is the sanctimony, not the fact that she posed topless, that is the issue here.
Besides, and as you mention, we care about how beauty queens look, not about what is between their ears. Accordingly, who gives a rat's patooey what a beauty queen thinks about gay marriage?
Continued.
Anyways, I think all of these attacks on Carrie are getting way out of hand. I do not agree with her views, but I recognize them for what they are, her opinions. Just because our opinions conflict, I do not think any less of her as a human being. As far as I remember, she didn't slander anyone, nor did she promote anything against them. She simply gave her opinion on marriage.
If anyone deserves punishment for this sorry affair, it should be Mr. Hilton. He took it upon himself to politicize the pageant for his own gain. So what's next? Will they start tracking the political affiliation of the contestants? Will we see the captions on the screen like "Miss Georgia -R" or "Miss Florida - D" and then let that poison our perception of that contestant? By all accounts, it sounds like it's what people want. It seems that nothing is sacred anymore.
I am so in agreement with you on the fact that the pageants largely are nothing more by an eye candy display of beauty. If that offends people, so be it. I'm not offended. I'm a realist, and I think it's better to be honest than to try and squirm through things like "but she's so intelligent and so talented". No, they're not even attuned to such. Miss America has the talent competition, the Miss USA that Carrie was in, does not. Fact the facts, as you pointed out, it's all about the beauty.
Mr. Hutchinson, you made one awesome post. I stand humbly in awe of your grammatical prowess. But if I may, I would like to add a bit to it.
You mention of the stars who transformed their pageant notoriety into superstar fame from which they were then able to give back by way of fundraising for charities, lending their name to causes of all kinds and generally helping the less fortunate among us. That is a very, very noble thing indeed and one we should all admire. And I'd like to mention one name you didn't, Vanessa Williams. Obviously, her scandalous pictures were big news and let's not rehash that. Instead, I think Vanessa turned her infamy into fame by proceeding to move on with class and dignity, rising above it all. She become not only a star that gives back, as you said of the others, but she has also become so many successful things against all of those odds. Singer, Actress, Mom, Wife. And dare I say, she's a role model. She's definitely been an inspiration to me.
More....
The question I pose is would these modeling pics EVER have surfaced if she had simply won the Miss USA title, her grammar-in
If Miss Prejean signed a morality clause that indicates that she did not pose in semi-nude photos and, in reality, she did, well, that is cause for pageant officials to strip her of the title of Miss California. Could they turn the other cheek? I'm not sure at this point. Seems like the pageant officials are a little ticked about her public appearances on behalf of NOM, yes?
This entire ordeal is getting completely ridiculous and reminds me of how far some of us will go to tear someone else down. It goes both ways. I don't agree with her beliefs about same-sex marriage, but I wish the young lady the best.
OPPOSITE MARRIAGE - We need some guidelines
Dear Miss-for the time being-CA,
Please help.
My nephew is going to be opposite married in August. In my country and in my family, we've never had one of these before. I have no idea what to wear to an opposite wedding. When my children were in elementary school they wore their clothes the opposite way--backwards- on opposite day. I don't think my suit would fit me backwards. Wait! Maybe at an opposite wedding we're supposed to wear the clothes of the opposite sex. Hmmm. Do you think those petite pink panties you modeled on your curvy christian body come in a 34 waist-- men's? (OK, it's really 38, but what's a little lie?)
I know NOM (Nothing of Opposite Marriage) and
HRC (Help is Really Crucial).
Realizing you have a busy schedule proclaiming your faith to the world at every opportunity, I will be patiently waiting your advice on opposite wedding attire.
Earl, you're partially right. Perez Hilton looks like a jealous "angstivist" for always picking on attractive women.
Miss California should not "scream foul", because that will not help her career. She should have seen it coming - when a combative blogger who is gay asked about his own right to marriage, she gave a very dumb "angstivist" answer.
Also, it's not congenial for her to be politically opposed to someone else's marriage. She should not appear politically motivated at all in a pageant. If she had better pageant training, she would have deflected the question with a statement about world harmony.
The biggest problem is that she has implants. That's not a good example for lots of young women to follow. I'm very displeased with the people who made her think she needed implants.
She's still very attractive anyway, but I'm thinking there's a very hot Latina who is hoping for a chance to be Miss California. You wouldn't want to snatch her crown, would you?
It seems like coming up with reasons to defend a bigot is the easy way. Whether or not she broke the rules of the pageant, I cannot speculate. But even if she is nothing more than a dupe of Tim LaHaye and other people who hear voices and need meds, she has allowed herself to be the spokesmodel for a group that would make the Taliban proud. She is truly unworthy of any support. Rev. Bookburn - Radio Volta
So true!
Religious based discrimination is one of the most vile forms of discrimination.
It doesn't matter what someone's religion may be, using it to deny civil rights is morally wrong.
For Gods sake whether she believes in gay marriage or not is immaterial. Who would put stock in her opinion on anything. This is simply a you're-eit
Seriously folks, if you can't soundly trounce and embarass Miss California in a constitutional argument on the rights of gays and marriage, then you might as well pack it all in and give up now.
There is no crusade here, Carrie Prejean actually had quite a bit of sympathy from LGBT people until she made the choice to step forward and speak for an organization that has called for the removal and continued denial of LGBT rights.
The fact that you're implying "we" may alienate people like yourself just shows that you have some issues with pigeonholing gay people. Not to mention, an issue with feeling that "we" have to ask "you" for our rights in a nice way, or risk alienating you. No wonder you're sympathetic to Carrie Prejean and her house of cards.
I don't know where you live but I sure as hell don't want her representing me.
"in my country and my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman."
"in my country and in my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a white man and a white woman."
If that were the case, that's okay too and we should want her to represent us because she's so honest and pretty.
You must be logged in to comment. Log in or connect with
