The Sexist

Pro-Gay Beauty Pageant Still A Fucking Beauty Pageant

[youtube:v=3xWdelybsXw]

Yesterday, Keith Olbermann and Michael Musto took five minutes out of their busy schedules to skewer anti-gay-marriage Miss California Carrie Prejean after the "news" broke that the Miss California Organization had paid for Prejean's breast implants. Olbermann and Musto choose to shame Prejean by tearing into her body—riffing on boobs as "performance enhancers," saying the Miss California Organization's comments "added saline to the wound," and comparing her breasts to basketballs.

A blogger at the Conservative XPress responded to the Olbermann segment, writing, "Anyone know of any women's rights groups defending this woman yet? Nope? Didn't think so."

I'll do it.

Why is the commentary on Prejean's anti-gay commentary so devoid of the context of the Beauty Pageant?

So, Carrie Prejean is a homophobe. Is that any surprise, seeing that she's a product of a pageant machine which proudly parades its sexism in front of television screens across America? And now, the mainstream media is shaming Prejean for her pageant-consistent beliefs because she did something that would—what—help her win a beauty pageant?

The Miss California Organization leaking the news of Prejean's boob job is not sweet revenge for her intolerant comments. The organization paying for her fake breasts only reiterates the fact that pageant organizers deal in and profit from sexism, not public service. Meanwhile, they act completely sanctimonious when one of their fembot minions voices another shameful view? What a clusterfuck.

Try to think of a situation where a man is forced to parade his near-naked body in front of celebrity judges and millions of television viewers for an hour, and then speak for about ten seconds on public policy. It doesn't happen. Everyone knows those women weren't chosen for their policy positions, and that they essentially have no business commenting on political issues. And yet, the Q&A section remains. Why? To produce Youtube videos of pretty girls stumbling over "thinky" questions.

Perhaps the Prejean blowup will move pageant organizers to be more careful about coaching their representatives on the Q&A. But who cares? It's still a fucking beauty pageant.

  • DW

    I miss my wife.

    I got a dick that just don't smell so right.

  • http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist Amanda Hess

    um, what?

  • Conrad Davis

    "And yet, the Q&A section continues remains. Why? To produce Youtube videos of pretty girls stumbling over “thinky” questions."

    This got me thinking. Why DO these contests that are otherwise completely superficial have an interview section? And why are the contestants so bad at it?

    1. The pageant organizers know that they run a beauty contest, and use the talent and Q&A sections as a veneer of legitimacy. However, contestants and judges know that these sections are a facade, that scores are given for looks and form, and that the content of the questions is unimportant. With no incentive to provide answers that make sense, contestants just shit out whatever while they focus on perfect posture.

    2. The pageant organizers believe that banal or uninformed opinions one are not only legitimate, but preferable for a woman to hold. Contestants either dumb down their answers or are eliminated, and thus the group of finalists is uniformly uninformed.

  • Coleman

    'And yet, the Q&A section continues remains. Why? To produce Youtube videos of pretty girls stumbling over “thinky” questions.'

    Nailed it. What keeps such anachronistic cultural holdovers from honest-to-goodness modernity profitable these days? Tabloid commentary, naturally, whether on YouTube or Olbermann.

  • http://twice-immigrant.livejournal.com Shaker Caitiecat

    Brava - good analysis, and well done. No woman deserves to be judged based on her choices about her body - and before any troll pokes in my face to say that's what she does for a living, there's a teeny little difference called "consent" involved. You may need to look that one up.

    Excellent article. Followed over here from Tiger Beatdown, which I found through Shakesville - where I'm also Caitiecat. :)

  • http://www.washingtoncitypaper.com/blogs/sexist Amanda Hess

    Thanks Catiecat :) Any fan of Tiger Beatdown is a friend of mine. I've found that most of the trolls on ladyblogs have a particularly difficult time with the idea of "consent." See: everything I've written on rape. Funny how that works.

  • mdesus

    My real question is, is Coleman the Coleman I know? What a weird fucking name.

  • amellifera

    Did he actually ay she's just a beauty pageant contestant with "some falsies and an opinion?" Then there was the comment about her problems finding a man who wants a virgin with breast implants. I just... What?

    I think she deserved to lose the pageant for expressing an intolerant opinion (I was surprised they still took place, but whatever). I even think she deserves some ribbing for "opposite marriage." I really don't see what her breasts have to do with anything. How is this a rebuttal?

    The same organization that PAID for them is now using them to shame her for it. Don't tell me she didn't get any "advice" over how it would "help" from these same people. It certainly shows how much respect they have for their own "scholarship" contestants.

  • Pingback: NOM and Perez Hilton In YouTube Pissing Match - The Sexist - Washington City Paper

  • Pingback: The Carrie Prejean Shaming Has Gone Too Far - The Sexist - Washington City Paper

  • Sam

    You can count yourself amongst the useless mass of bloggers who cause more trouble than they resolve.

    You referred to as a homophobe. That's not only unverified. It's ignorant to presume it based on her preferences for her society.

    But, now one thing is for certain... you're a shoddy informer whose invective makes this blog less worthy than the roll of toilet paper it should be printed on.

...