Wednesday, April 22, 2009

Miss California

So... this happened: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30322005/

Short version: Someone evidently thought it'd be high comedy (they were right!) to ask the beaming plasticene f*ck-dolls at the Miss USA pageant questions about complex issues of political policy, which led to gossip-blogging irritant Perez Hilton - acting as a judge in this case - ask Miss California Carrie Prejean about gay marriage, which led the robotically-sexy young lady to give the crowd her best Anita Bryant impression. In any case, she didn't win, and now someone has decided this is the Culture War Skirmish of the week.

Egh... Perez Hilton versus a plausibly-homophobic beauty pageant contestant. It's likr the "Destroy All Monsters" of utterly worthless human flotsam. The big "to do" has come down to the issue of whether or not holding this particular opinion "cost" her the crown, something thats become somewhat difficult to deny since Hilton keeps saying (and then un-saying) that, in fact, it did. Oh, dear...

Me? I'd have voted her down, too. Here's the thing: Last time I checked, the overriding point of this is to pick the best-looking woman in America, yes? Well, to me, answer like that makes her less hot. Plain and simple. Oh, she's GORGEOUS, don't get me wrong... there's no bigger buzzkill in the world than a smokin' hot chick who turns out to be uptight about sex - it's always either a tease or a trap. When you hear that kinda "square"-ness coming out of a face that pretty, it means your wasting your time: Woman like that usually gives the best handjob in five counties, sure, but if your looking for anything MORE than that it's gonna cost you a big-ass diamond and one HELL of a lopsided pre-nup.

Or maybe I just don't like her for forcing me to even KIND OF "side" with Perez Hilton. Either one works...

6 comments:

Anonymous said...

He even left her an out too "do you think the rest of the country will follow suit". She could have sidestepped the issue by talking about state's rights to decided such matters. Instead she took it as an opportunity to talk about what her personal beliefs were, although she completely skipped the "why or why not" part of his question.

Still, considering most of the other contestants didn't really answer their questions either... meh.

Bob said...

If you listen to the whole thing, the early part of her answer is in the "proper" pageant format - i.e. it's a nigh-incoherent stream of babble about how great it is that everyone can choose or not choose. The crowd even started applauding, thinking she was finished, before you piped in with her "but..." So, absent even the content, she basically blew it since the whole point of the Q&A (aside from making less-gorgeous women watching at home feel better about themselves via the reminder that most of these girls are dumber than a bag of hammers) portion is to test their composure and ability to think on their feet.

tyra menendez said...

what's funny, to me, is that most of these "between a man and a woman" people, cite the bible as their source, while the bible itself describes marriages that more resemble some of these polygamy cults: one man, multiple wives, mistresses, etc.

Anonymous said...

That's the funny thing about Christians doing that. Jesus tossed out all the old "procedural" rules from the Old Testament, because the obsession with following the "letter of the law" meant people were missing the "spirit" of the laws.

Plus scholars have always argued that half of Leviticus looks like civil law codified rather than "laws from heaven".

Bob said...

If you really map it out, Leviticus is actually an INCREDIBLY well set-up long-term social-engineering guide for sustaining and growing a nomadic group AND eventually making them capable of mounting a civilization and a standing army in a relatively short amount of time. So, whoever it was, SOMEBODY was rocking a grasp of big-picture genetics way beyond their time.

Which, however interesting, doesn't have jack shit to do with why the HELL it ought to have any influence over American civil law in the 21st Century.

M said...

First off, love this post, Cousin Bob.

Secondly, loved your Wolverine trailer thingie on Escapist. But c'mon, I'd think even straight guys would be happy to see Gambit on screen. Gambit? C'mon. He's wicked cool. I had a student last year named Remy, and I said, "Like Gambit?" and he didn't know what the F I was talking about. Yes, Gambit. FTW!