The Miss America bruhaha has been going on for a couple weeks now. As much as I found the whole concept of Miss America, and beauty pageants in general, to be rather goofy and lame, much of what has been happening concerning the latest goofery is anything but.
It's sad, but too often the case, that bigger societal issues arise from something that is inconsequentially meaningless.
But in this case, much of what is generally wrong with us, as a society, is on display. And in a very ugly way.
I would expect judges of any competition to be fair and impartial. And their judgement calls should not be personal. If we can't trust those who are given this duty to follow it dutifully, we don't honestly have a competition. This holds true regardless of whether the prize is the Lombardi Trophy, or some fake jewel encrusted tiara.
So, no matter what some folks may want to believe, we must assume that the judgement in Miss America was accurate and just, especially since the criteria is not readily publicized, and the judges obviously have wide latitude.
(Why they had a homo judging that which he has no real world appreciation for can be discussed on another topic, but not here.)
And keep in mind, Carrie Prejean's answer to the minefield question was not what I would call an eloquent one. If eloquence mattered, she didn't help her case.
But, in the follow up coverage of the whole dopey debacle, Miss Prejean seems to be coming under heavy fire from those who are in the minority on the issue through personal attacks aimed at smearing her character. Not for anything she has done or said in harm to anybody else, but for a principled and traditional moral stand in which she believes.
What is not such a big deal, but should be, and seems to be lost in the murmur, is the personal attack first dealt soon following the pageant, by the homo, angrily calling the contestant a "dumb bitch", and admitting that he had marked her down on the substance of her answer (which is his prerogative.)
"Dumb bitch", dare I say, might be just a little out of line, and wholly unprofessional when given the responsibility to judge fairly and impartially?
But this point has not been brought up, and the homo gets a free pass while his media supporters set out to further destroy the contestant who has already lost the contest.
We hear a lot about 'hatemongers' and silencing 'hate speech' from the progressive minded media morons who, for the most part, try to dictate what the rest of us should think and feel, while reserving the right of name calling for themselves.
But if the majority, on any issue, allows itself to bullied into acquiescence then the barbarians will eventually take over, if they haven't already.
This isn't about gay marriage. This is about holding to higher standards those who are given certain privilege over our collective media culture.
I believe in 'keeping it real' just as much as the next person, but 'real' doesn't have to mean 'profane' in those situations when decorum should be the expected rule of the day.
And it's not wrong to expect those who earn their living with words to be able to find more creative and polite ways to use them.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
4 comments:
Speaking as one who both loves free speech and would very much like to see people able to marry each other in any damn combination that they please, I consider the whole Miss California thing to be good news all around.
The facts that 1) a beauty contestant is able to make a politically controversial statement as a contestant, and 2) opposition to gay marriage is widely considered controversial, are, to me, both very good things!
That said, I'm not sure that "dumb bitch" is objectively more offensive than "the homo". (Of course, I support everyone's freedom to use both.)
BTW, I do realize the distinctions between him in his "professional" capacity and you writing on your blog...I'm just not convinced that any event involving women in bathings suits and high heels (at the same time) really calls for that much decorum...
I've never been entirely sure what the judging criteria was for these sorts of competitions... nor what the point was anyway... but it seems like they are being elected to be some kind of roll model - and in that regard their opinion on social issues would come under scrutiny. Being marked down because the judge doesn't agree with their opinion on something seems to be the whole point of that Q&A portion.
(This brings to mind that scene in "Miss Congeniality" where they ask her how she wants to improve society, and she answers "harsher punishment for parole violators" and everyone is silent... then she continues... "and world peace" and everyone applauds. Not sure that fits into this conversation, but that's the little thumbnail that comes to my mind when I hear "beauty pageant")
But the dude calling the contestant a "dumb bitch" is just shooting himself in the foot. If you want to effectively state your point and your goal is to have people on your side of the debate, reducing your tactics to name-calling is not the way to go.
Perez Hilton has always seemed to me to be a follower of Andy Warhol's dictum: don't read your press, weigh it.
And remember, it's a lot easier to attack a beauty queen than to attack someone who might actually be able to make a difference, like the gay marriage opponent who lives at the end of Pennsylvania Avenue.
Kabuki theater, inartfully staged.
And in the end, Carrie Prejean is the big winner of the pageant anyway. No one is talking about the gal who won the contest. She should probably write ol' Perez a thank you note.
brian: i refered to him not just as 'homo'. read the post title.
and i was being kind.
i never did like him.
Post a Comment