Knight of Mars (sailornash) wrote,
Knight of Mars

  • Mood:
  • Music:

*Insert Dumb Blonde Jokes Here*

Okay, I know I'm about to piss off some people, but I keep hearing about this on the news and it's starting to piss ME off and I just gotta say something.

Everyone's heard about Miss California by now. And if you haven't, here's a clip:

As you can probably imagine, this set off an epic-level shitstorm that the media's been covering ever since.

And that kind of pisses me off.

Before anyone gets offended, keep in mind that I was one of the first ones to cry out "amazonfail" along with everyone else, and that my answer to this whole gay marriage "crisis" (lol) is that straight people should be the ones to start getting civil unions. Seriously. But at the same time, I see absolutely no reason why this poor girl should be mocked and ridiculed and outright attacked the way that she has been.

Let me break this down as simple as I can. Contestants are given a question. They reply with one of two possible answers. This was ultimately a "yes" or "no" question, and she responded appropriately. That's the whole point of a question and answer segment - you ask someone a question with several equally valid answers to see how they will respond, and you allow them to respond with any of the possible answers that can be selected.

People are getting touchy about this because of the gay marriage thing. It's a hot-button issue, but as I understand it, these kinds of thought-provoking questions are supposed to be about current events and about serious, pressing issues (hence the stereotypical answers about "the need for world peace" and all that). So let's use another example. How about abortion? Let's forget about gay marriage entirely for a moment. We could ask her if she likes murdering babies, or if she supports the government stepping in and forcing decisions on women by taking away their rights. I could have rephrased that as "Pro-Life" and "Pro-Choice", but the point is that an answer that agrees with one side would surely piss off everyone on the other no matter which side you're on. Or how about the Middle East? Does she support the Jews killing those evil Palestinians, or the Palestinians killing the evil Jews? Nevermind, now we're back to "world peace" again. Bah.

Maybe this is regional? Is it because Miss California, one of the most liberal states in the Union, expressed a decidedly conservative value so publicly? If it were some sweet farmer's daughter like, say, a Miss Kentucky, would there still be this kind of outrage? Or would that kind of answer be tolerated, or maybe even expected on some unspoken level?

I don't know what else they could have expected. Why ask a question if you're not prepared for the answer, and especially if there's a 50% chance that the answer will cause such an unstoppable national controversy. Her reply wasn't even all that controversial, really. Perhaps not eloquent, either, but she was respectful and polite as she replied and stated her beliefs and her opinion. It just might not have been the most popular response, especially not with someone like Perez Hilton.

At this point, I think it might be important to make one thing clear. Keep in mind that this isn't about whether you agree or disagree with the remark itself. This is about whether a person has a right to voice an opinion.

Otherwise, if you strip away their thoughts and their personality, this whole Q&A thing would be completely and totally sexist. Instead of proving that these sculpted pieces of silicone actually have brains, they would instead be confirming the image of the dumb, bubble-headed blonde they should be fighting to avoid:

"Was Hitler a bad man?"
"Yes, he was very bad."
"You're right!" *headpat* "NEXT!"

"Do you like puppies?"
"Yes, I like puppies."
*headpat* "Good girl. NEXT!"

Sure, no one would be offended, but we may as well be ogling department store mannequins at that point. Just give us some fake curves, put them in the right places, and who cares if they actually have brains or personalities or anything like that. Just stand them up and put them in a dress or a swimsuit and we'll be fat and dumb and happy as we watch it on TV. Though it might be tough for the Mannequin Queen to do anything with the scholarship she wins as part of her prize.

Moral of the story here is not to ask someone a question if you don't really want to hear the answer. And since they apparently didn't want to hear her answer, all they must have cared about was her rack anyways. That theory was confirmed when she won the competition despite her Q&A segment that she's being universally scorned for. (And by the fact that nude pics and fake tits are perfectly okay by them, even if it breaks the's all that troublesome thinking that she's getting in trouble for.)

Speaking of nude pics, though, it is Saturday. I really should be lounging around here in my easy chair, scouring the web to find some nice nekkid pictures to tack onto this post"research purposes". Yeah. It is relevant to this thread, after all. But, I've actually got to get ready and head in to work today. Finally got some equipment in and am about to turn my server room into an actual server room (more or less). Softcore partial nudity may have to wait until I get back tonight, unless people start having fun in the comments section while I'm away. ;)
Tags: freedom of speech, gay rights, news, sexism, stupid people, tv
  • Post a new comment


    Comments allowed for friends only

    Anonymous comments are disabled in this journal

    default userpic

    Your reply will be screened

    Your IP address will be recorded