Tuesday, April 28, 2009

Pretty Persuasion

I'll make this quick -- mostly because I've tried my damndest to avoid talking about this subject at all but, astonishingly, it refuses to die the news cycle death it so richly deserves.

No, of course Carrie Prejean, AKA Miss California, shouldn't apologize for her remarks about gay marriage, as some are still insisting she do.

By now you know the story, so I'll do you the favor of not rehashing it. Suffice it to say, being painfully stupid isn't a crime; if it were, that shameless little turd Perez Hilton would this very moment be on the business end of a shower rape in a Supermax facility somewhere, rather than milking this "controversy" for all it's worth in an effort to extend his inexplicable 15 minutes of nano-riety. On the contrary, I actually think it's kind of refreshing that Prejean answered the inarguably loaded question about same-sex marriage honestly, rather than trying to duck it or, worse, cobbling together an innocuous response that was short on anything resembling an actual opinion. (Although, to be fair to anyone not dumber than a sack of gravel, as Prejean seems to be, I'm not sure she knew she was taking an actual position while she was doing it.)

Speaking of which, is anyone surprised that Prejean -- like Sarah Palin, and, I don't know, maybe Forrest Gump, before her -- has suddenly become an inadvertent icon of the religious right? She has all the makings of the next martyr for their cause: She's cute in a harmless sort of way, not very bright; she unquestioningly embraces mildly ignorant values and pisses off the elitist liberal element in the process, simply by nature of the status she's achieved through no real work or talent. Hell, I'd be shocked if someone hasn't already printed up "Palin-Prejean 2012" stickers, which will soon begin popping up on the bumper of every pick-up blasting Big & Rich from Orlando to Ojai.

The bottom line here is that Carrie Prejean's views on gay marriage may be less than cosmopolitan, but they're her views. The last time I checked, people didn't have to apologize for their opinions, and anyone who thinks otherwise in this case is guilty of the kind of draconian political correctness the left is often accused of trying to enforce. I wouldn't call Prejean's remarks "intolerant," but even if they were -- so what? Doesn't the entire concept of tolerance naturally imply a certain amount of magnanimity toward the intolerant?

Besides, would another one of those ridiculous, Burson-Marsteller-approved forced apologies -- which by their very nature aren't apologies at all -- really satisfy anyone screaming for Prejean's pretty little head?

And don't answer that like a beauty pageant contestant.


Riles said...

I Googled "Palin-Prejean 2012" and there's already an image of a bumper sticker up. It doesn't seem to be a conservative site, or a serious posting at all, but still...


Anonymous said...

I have to say I do, in principle, admire the fact that she answered the question truthfully and in a fairly straightforward way, and didn't back down just because it made her unpopular. If she had backed down, it wouldn't mean that she'd changed her views any; it would just make her a coward.

But I have to stop short for respecting her for it.. Imagine if it were the 1960's, and she were asked about interracial marriage, and she said that she was raised to believe that people of different races weren't meant to mix.

I think what bothers me most about her answer is that her bigoted ideas about gays are mainstream enough that they aren't universally dismissed as such. And that is reflection on how far we as a society have to evolve.

Tony said...

"Doesn't the entire concept of tolerance naturally imply a certain amount of magnanimity toward the intolerant?"Already one of my top 10 DXM quotes in the "Uncommonly Commonsensical" category.

And as for you, Anon 5:34pm, you's misceginated!

Michael J. West said...

Tell you what. I'm willing to meet Perez Hilton halfway. As soon as he apologizes for every (allegedly) closeted gay person he's outed against their will, and promises upon pain of death never to do it again, I'll join him in calling for an apology from Miss California.

The B and T's said...

World Peace... wait, what was the question again?

Anonymous said...

I disagree with you in your idea that she is “painfully stupid." Why is this? What is it that makes her so? Is it the fact that she’s a Californian, “a beauty queen/pageant contestant, a blonde, a woman? Perhaps it’s simple fact that she doesn’t agree with your beliefs or ideology; thus everyone who doesn’t see things as you, is an idiot? Who’s being the "elitist" now?

Answer me this: How far back can you remember? Handicapped parking spaces weren’t always around. They appeared en-masse about a few decades ago, though they are a great idea for those who truly need them. So how come they weren’t always around? Bottom line, it took time for people to realize the need for them, and agree that we should have them.

It takes time to change people’s thinking, be patient. It’ll happen soon enough. Then, you can get come out of your closet. (Just kidding, so don’t get your panties in a wad!)

In as far as Perez Hilton goes, I don’t see what your beef with him his. In reality, your lives are almost parallel in a sort of way. You both blog, constantly make fun of others, etc… You WISH you were as “famous” or “infamous” as him. You’ve probably always dreamed for your 15, and yet it still eludes you. Why is that? It’s probably because you’re not half as obnoxious as that Jack off is.

Now, I agree when you say that it was refreshing that she answered the question honestly. I’m tired of generic, practiced, politician-like dodges for answers, designed to get a sure win.

What people fail to realize, accept, or acknowledge is that the beautiful thing about this country is that everyone, whether RIGHT or WRONG, is entitled to his or her opinion(s). Even an “A-Hole,” like me.


Anonymous said...

Her opinion did not bother this homo. No way. Even dumb shits are entitled to be mindless, Pastoral pawns, whether she knows it or not. (In this case, she is a member of a San Diego based Church whose Pastor was a big-wig on the Yes on 8 campaign.)

No, what bothered me was her stumbling bumbling way she expressed it - you could just tell she was some know-nothing out of the Sarah Palin stable as you say. But one of the judges said it best, the POINT of her purpose on stage is to avoid taking hard positions, being controversial - which of course she was and did. Chez, you are so right to suggest she was too dumb to figure out the politics at the instant moment, but my Miss USA (or Mr. USA) should be able to think quick and competantly knowing that grace and avoidance of controversial issues trumps all. You are not there to be a politician you are there to be an ambassador - albeit, for what, I have no clue!

My problem with this is that she is way too dumb to be anything of worth that warrants media coverage. But so was Palin.

By the way, aren't evangelicals against these tasteless, ungod-like dog and pony shows? Like pre-martial sex? Right Bristol?

Chez said...

JK, if you can't figure out just by listening to her that she's not very bright, then you're apparently not very bright. It has nothing to do with her agreeing or disagreeing with my opinions.

Oh, and famous or not, the day I have anything in common with Perez Hilton outside of the fact that we happen to work in the same medium is the day I hang myself in the shower. A four year old can draw semen stains on a picture and call it funny.

Terry Heaton said...

Well said, Chez (what else is new?).

Chesterton wrote, "Tolerance is the virtue of the man without convictions." In order to tolerate something, you must also be in a position to not tolerate it, which is incomprehensible to those who wish toleration. So tolerance isn't really what Perez Hilton seeks; he wants absolute equality, and, unfortunately for gays, that will always be a matter of personal conviction, not legislation.

celery said...

what i find odd is her outrage that she lost because of her answer to the question. isn't the purpose of the question and answer segment to determine whether that individual should represent america on the world stage? and then isn't it fair for the judges to decide that they don't want someone who holds her beliefs to do so?

supporters of pageants can't at once insist that they aren't purely superficial and then argue that the real content of a contestant's answer should not determine her success of failure.

these stupid shows and the "training" of little girls to compete in them should just disappear. it's fucking embarrassing.

Anonymous said...

"Carrie Prejean, what are your thoughts on same-sex marriage?"

"I just want world peace, motherfucker. Crown me."