Loading ...Maybe she can pitch orange juice…
flockwoodAmerica’s prettiest anti-gay-marriage spokesmodel has been fired as Miss California USA by that great paragon of American virtue, Donald Trump.
I don’t watch beauty pageants, so when I heard that a certain Ms. Prejean was under fire for her views on marriage, I thought to myself: “Why would anybody want to pick on that nice, elderly Catholic anti-capital-punishment “Dead Man Walking” lady. …
Fortunately, our newsroom has cable television. This enables us to keep abreast of BREAKING NEWS of grave national importance, such as the political views of beauty queens wearing swim suits and high heels.
So I wasn’t in the dark for long.
The truth is, I don’t have a dog in this fight. I don’t really care if Miss California is pro-gay-marriage or anti-gay-marriage, whether she wants to save the rain forest or save the whales. I don’t care if she wants to teach the world to sing in perfect harmony. I don’t care if it’s a “beauty pageant” or “scholarship pageant.” I don’t care if it’s natural or bleached, original or enhanced.
I do hope Prejean enjoys her 15 minutes of fame, and I hope she’s careful about the decisions she makes next. Otherwise, she risks becoming the Anita Bryant of the 21st century. Bryant was also a beauty pageant runner up, an anti-gay rights activist and a hero of the Christian right. [I remember, as a kid, seeing her on Jerry Falwell's Old Time Gospel Hour.]
But the political activism eventually cost Bryant her gig as a spokesperson for Florida orange juice (apparently the breakfast beverage industry wanted gays and straights to get their daily-recommended allowance of vitamin C.)
And after Bryant’s marriage fell apart, she kind of vanished from the national stage.
Becoming the poster girl for heterosexual marriage is a risky move for Prejean — especially if she plans on entering a heterosexual marriage herself. Her marriage will be scrutinized. And if it fails, there will be plenty of people who celebrate her failure.
June 11th, 2009 at 2:09 pm
every time I see her name I think the same thing, Frank, about Helen Prejean–and she looks nothing like Susan Sarandon!
We surely don’t need another Anita Bryant. She was a laughing stock among even conservatives for her self-righteousness when I was a kid.
June 11th, 2009 at 2:30 pm
Or, like Sarah Palin, maybe she can become governor of some state that has low standards in its public servants. Oops, that would be all of them . . . Maybe not.
June 11th, 2009 at 8:47 pm
And not all the gay marriages end up happily ever after, as, indeed, the straight kind:
http://themoderatevoice.com/34682/gay-divorce/
I doubt that this dyed blonde ever really thought about what came out of her lips beyond the diatribe she’d been fed–and after the nudie pix started showing up, wasn’t she quick to cry “mean liberal press”?
June 12th, 2009 at 5:00 am
[...] Speaking of which, there’s a bit of a Carrie Prejean and Anita Hill connection. [...]
June 12th, 2009 at 6:01 am
She was exploited because of her beauty, the only problem was she had an opinion.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:06 am
What a silly thing for her to do, to skip official Miss California events in favor of unsanctioned ones. The Donald had gone out on quite a limb for her, and she kept pushing the envelope. I’d forgotten about her already (and her little dog too–I mean Perez Hilton!) but she couldn’t leave well enough alone.
Could she be upset that all that preening–all that anti-gospel vanity she gets rich from–doesn’t stir every single man in America? Is she feeling unappreciated? Does she feel a need to boost her base of support (and I don’t mean her outfit)?
The only thing separating her from pornography is a teeny bathing suit, and she feels morally superior to homosexuals?
This is precisely what Jesus Christ warns us against when He rails against the Scribes and Pharisees. At least then they had Scribes and Pharisees. What an unworthy opponent Ms. Prejean is.
She should invest in some tweed, immediately.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:08 am
Exploited for her beauty, indeed. No one forced her into that contest wearing shackles. she could have easily earned a JD degree in the same amount of time she spent sculpting her figure.
I’d just as soon not see Prejean defended on the sorry grounds of “exploitation” and “women having opinions.” And my mother agrees with me.
June 12th, 2009 at 7:04 am
Think about this, without her looks, she wouldn’t be in this situation. She knew this, she exploited herself as much as any pageant did. She was looking for gain, she got it, and then lost it by voicing her opinion.
June 12th, 2009 at 8:09 am
I don’t know folks… I think there’s been a lot of unfounded, unnecessary criticism directed her way. She was basically asked a politically charged question out of left field, gave an answer that was coherent (and in line with a solid majority of California voters), did not stumble like the infamous Miss Teen South Carolina (Google it), and was then excoriated by activists on the issue.
So, what have we learned from this? That there is now a political litmus test for being in a beauty pageant? That it’s somehow unacceptable to hold a mainstream view of marriage (shared by many a politician and a majority of state constitutions)?
And comments like:
I doubt that this dyed blonde ever really thought about what came out of her lips beyond the diatribe she’d been fed–and after the nudie pix started showing up, wasn’t she quick to cry “mean liberal press”?”
Just demonstrate a mean, intolerant response. Somehow I always thought that being a liberal meant accepting diversity. And I have always been a liberal because I thought we had better arguments, were less authoritative, and tried to persuade rather than bash others….
June 12th, 2009 at 8:29 am
And one other thing….
What would you all have had her do? “Suddenly” become as enlightened on this issue as some of you are? Lied? Been evasive?
I’m sorry, but these type of questions in such settings are manifestly unfair. And such tactics have been used against liberals so often that we ought to know better… What would we be saying if a liberal contestant had been asked about the War in 2003, and was berated off stage for peacefully opposing it?
June 12th, 2009 at 8:30 am
Good question, UK Lutheran: is there a litmus test? My answer: there shouldn’t be.
However, when asked that divisive question, the lady should have had the presence of mind to say something conciliatory.
That is: isn’t America great, where we can have these discussions and still love our country?
Or: I respect all of our citizens, and hope to be Miss America for them all. You’re all wonderful: I love you!!
Or: America is the greatest country on earth, and we have always managed to work through our problems and differences, no matter how serious…
OK, I know you didn’t like that last one. But that’s the idea. She’d have the crown if she’d been handled the question with more grace and nobility. Even in America, we can tell a true queen from a false one.
Furthermore, Prejean has just gotten fired as Miss California for breaking her contract, and gallivanting off to support an controversial cause with her crown. Certainly she’s the one with the agenda–the litmus test. She didn’t need to be doing that on company time.
And nudie pix? And lecturing on sexual morality? My, my, what would Hosea say?
I think Mr. Lockwood is right in thinking that Prejean may come to be associated with Anita Bryant, and that her career may be over before it begins.
June 12th, 2009 at 10:53 am
UKLutheran,
When I was growing up, we kept the TV burning nearly round the clock. It was a 12-inch, black and white set, if I remember correctly, with rabbit ears, and from time to time my family would watch the Miss America pageant. (We didn’t have a lot of options — we didn’t have cable and only could pick up three channels…)
The interview segment, as I recall, was always laughable. Questions along the lines of: “Some people say that what the world needs now is love, sweet love. Do you agree or disagree?”
The questions were never along the lines of: “Should busing be used to help integrate our schools” or “Give us your thoughts on Griswold v. Connecticut, the case that established a constitutional right to use birth control…”
Prejean was put in a tough spot. And it would’ve been a tough spot whether she said ‘yes’ or ‘no.’
June 12th, 2009 at 1:49 pm
Dr. Newark sez:
“She should invest in some tweed, immediately.”
Dr. Newark, maybe you are a real Episcopalian after all . . .
June 12th, 2009 at 4:50 pm
As one who preaches freedom and tolerance of others let me remind you that:
Donald Trump had the right to invite Perez Hilton to be a judge.
Perez Hilton had the right to ask a provocative and difficult question.
Helen Prejean has the right to her opinion regarding same sex marriage and she had the right to answer the question as she wished.
The judges had the right to pick the winning contestant based on their subjective evaluations of the criteria.
Prejean had the right to complain about being a victim of liberal values.
The public had the right to support Prejean or, alternatively, scoff at her.
Trump had the right to dismiss Prejean for failure to comply with her contractual obligations.
As for me, I gladly exercised my right not to watch the pageant at all, nor the many subsequent appearances by Ms. Prejean on talk shows. From what I have heard, though, it would be a gross mistake to assume that Prejean lost the contest merely because of her answer to one question, or that she was fired from her job because she continued to hold that opinion. Litmus test my foot!
It’s awfully hard to have much sympathy for these three personalities, each of which is using the others for personal gain.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:04 pm
Frank, let’s be honest here. If she would have answered the question the way the Perez Hilton wanted, this would have never been an issue. She would have been hailed as wonderful by the liberals and she would still have her position. Of course she would have been railed at by some conservative groups, but it would have ended within the week because very few media outlets would have continued to cover it at that point.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:05 pm
And conservative or liberal, if she broker her contract she should be fired.
June 12th, 2009 at 6:47 pm
*broke*
June 12th, 2009 at 8:00 pm
Well David, she denies breaking her contract but who knows…. I guess it really doesn’t matter.
And Jose, I am always puzzled by your peculiar understanding of “rights” and “tolerance”. Of course everyone had the “rights” you mentioned… no one is suggesting otherwise. But that does not detract from the incredible self-serving and inappropriate nature of Hilton’s question and the vitriolic response by some “liberals” towards Ms. Prejean.
And none of us would be talking about this if she had been asked a question like the ones Frank mentioned, or gave a response like Dr. Newark Survivor recommended. So I hardly think its a “gross mistake” to think that this whole tempest in a teapot can be traced back to her answer to one question.
As to your foot being a litmus test… well, I guess that depends on the pH level of your metatarsals.
June 12th, 2009 at 8:41 pm
Its hard to believe that with of question of this content, as with most pagents, the answers weren’t rehearse or coached. I wonder if part of breaking her contract was deliberately deviating from a rehearsed answer.
June 13th, 2009 at 10:49 am
I say a pox on all their houses.
I think the very idea of a beauty contest should be offensive to both men and women, but apparently it’s still okay for the tv networks to parade scantily clad teenagers around and claim it to be uplifting entertainment. Most of the women I know would be highly offended to be objectified in the manner that beauty contestants are, and would be even more highly offended that the male judges would use simple questions like the ones they normally use to show that these vapid airheads have some level of intelligence.
I rank them like this: Ms. Prejean is the third worst player in this. Ms. Prejean, whose IQ couldn’t be far above plant life, given the number of stupid things she’s done over a short period of time, should have known better than to actually give a straight (no pun intended) answer to any question that was asked of her. I mean, did she get no coaching at all? As much as I make fun of Dr. Newark and his 1928 prayer book, he’s right: She should have said something moderate and vague and inclusive and inoffensive. “I think it’s great that we live in a wonderful nation where people are free to disagree on things like this” would have done fine. If she didn’t know enough to do this, that’s either bad coaching, or she really is as dumb as I think she is. Beauty pageants are not about thinking big thoughts, they’re about thinking as few thoughts as possible. And for those who say that she was right to say what she thought, and damn the consequences, well, she did and she was well damned for it. Freedom of speech is a wonderful thing, but everything you say carries consequences: Just ask Jeremiah Wright.
As an aside, you get some insight into what the right wing is interested in here, given that this girl (and presumably her parents, if she has any) thinks nothing of parading around in a bathing suit for middle aged men to ogle, or of taking photographs to allow them to ogle her in absentia, but blanches at the thought of two people who love each other getting married, because it’s not an “opposite marriage,” as she so wittily called it.
Dr. Trump is the second worst of all, by my estimation, because he is making money on the whole sordid mess. The worst of all, though, is us, the public, because we watch the spectacle on tv. (Well, I don’t, but somebody must, or they wouldn’t put it on.)
June 15th, 2009 at 9:45 pm
Truth be known, Caleb, I agree with you regarding “beauty pagents.” To each his, or better said, her own, but I really wouldn’t be thrilled with any of my four daughters entering a pageant.
June 16th, 2009 at 11:11 am
I don’t have a daughter, but if I did, I don’t imagine she’d end up being in a beauty contest, either because she ended up looking like me, or worse, thinking like me.