A sequel to “personal attacks” on Lolo’s “Immigration Debate …” posted on this site on April 27, 2008.
Universal not personal opinion is required to win the title, but a judge that attacks a bungling beauty contestant has no place in the pageant.
To beauty pageant judge Perez Hilton, a “dumb bitch” can never win the Miss USA title.
First runner-up Miss California Carrie Prejean lost the Miss USA 2009 title due to poor understanding of what the beauty pageant was all about. Hilton described her as a “dumb bitch”!
To win the Miss USA Crown, it is universal opinion not personal opinion that counts.
Every contestant should know that in the crucial question-and-answer part of the competition, if a personal opinion is asked, the beauty candidate must see to it that the answer to the question asked has a universal appeal.
The beauty pageant is politically “wired”. When answering “loaded” questions judges ask, the contestant must be extra-careful – she must be politically correct, not just necessarily correct.
Miss USA is a beauty and brain competition. The question-and-answer part of the contest is a selection of the brainiest among the fairest. The smartest is either a natural-born diplomat or a schooled euphemist.
Euphemism is the “… use of a word or phrase that is more neutral, vague, or indirect to replace a direct, harsh, unpleasant, or offensive term.”  I used euphemism as a tool in diplomacy, especially when responding to emotionally fired confrontational questions common in debates in the United Nations where I spent quite a number of years.
Response to the question on the issue of gay rights must be inclusive not exclusive. It is not about the contestant’s personal belief that is indifferent to that of others … it was about the inclusive beliefs of all not just part of the population of the United States no matter how contrary to each other those beliefs are.
The reason for that does not need a brain of a rocket scientist to figure out: The pageant is looking for a winner that will represent the whole not just a part of America in the Miss USA contest, or the whole not just a part of the Universe in the forthcoming Miss Universe challenge to the world’s most beautiful women who will represent their respective countries.
If a beauty contestant does not know this fundamental requirement, there is no way she can win the Miss USA title or the Miss Universe Crown. Judges will react in a very frenzied way, like Hilton who practically went amok.
It is pathetic to hear protests from conservative supporters who were crying out for blood over Miss Prejean’s loss of the Miss USA 2009 title. They cannot be less ignorant than their candidate for not understanding what this beauty competition is all about.
Let’s get the winners and their winning scores straight from the horse’s mouth as reported by the Media. On April 19, 2009, the 58th Miss USA pageant was held at the Theater for the Performing Arts in Planet Hollywood Resort & Casino, Las Vegas, Nevada. The winners were Kristen Dalton, North Carolina, Miss USA 2009; 1st Runner-Up, Carrie Prejean, California; 2nd Runner-Up, Alicia Blanco, Arizona; 3rd Runner-Up, Laura Chukanov, Utah, and 4th Runner-Up, Maria Montgomery, Kentucky.
The final competition scores were close. The top five candidates were selected from their scores in the Swimsuit and Nightgown competitions.
NC has 9.198, 1st in Swimsuit, and 9.470, 1st in Nightgown, respectively. In the same order of Swimsuit and Nightgown point-scoring, California has a Swimsuit score of 9.033, 3rd, Nightgown score of 9.275, 2nd; Arizona 9.092, 2nd, 9.189, 3rd; Utah 8.851, 5th, 8.849, 5th, and Kentucky 8.963, 4th, 9.047, 4th.
At this point any candidate in the top five could win the title depending on how each of them would answer the final question the designated judges ask.
Carrie Prejean, an outstanding beauty from San Diego, California was the crowd’s favorite to win the title. She was asked by Judge Perez Hilton “whether she believed every state should legalize same-sex marriages. Ms. Prejean responded that she did not…” [!] Then the cookies crumbled.
It was a sensitive gay right question. Before she responded, she should have reflected in those split seconds the impact or consequence of what she was about to say.
At this critical point of the competition, the title-holder that the pageant was looking for is supposed to be an embodiment of beauty and brain. It was obvious that Miss California, the pageant’s favorite, showed more beauty and less brain.
Gay judges were in the panel. The pageant put them there to see to it that the winner the judges pick would represent the great divide --- the multicultural United States of America -- in the coming worldwide Miss Universe Pageant. Shades of bigotry and intolerance interpreted as a consequence of Miss California’s response cannot be represented in those competitions.
The Miss USA 2009 winner that will go to the Miss Universe contest cannot represent the views of Americans who believe like Ms. Prejean does, that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, to the exclusion of the rights of lesbians and homosexuals to enter into same-sex marriages. That would only be representing a part of the United States that strongly believes marriage should only be between a man and a woman. The other part of the country where millions of Americans believe and practice same-sex marriages is left out.
In the minds of the Judges, Ms. Prejean’s answer to this human right question clearly smacks of intolerance that could stir a hornet’s nest. No amount of explanation, viz: that she didn’t mean it to be that way, could save her from losing the title.
You need to check this out: The title holders of Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants are tasked to do at least a year-long tour doing a lot of promotions and charity works. Imagine that anywhere she goes she would be met by massive demonstrations of gays and gay rights supporters as well as human rights activists. It is not good for her personal safety, it is not good for the security of the nation, and probably it would mark the end of the beauty pageant if riots erupt and there would be bloodshed in the streets, not to speak of the ugly and costly destruction of life and property.
There was a disturbing irony in the mud-slinging that followed. Both accusers of intolerance were in pare delicto. Let me explain this: I can understand how Liberals and homosexual activists would go to war against the conservatives at a drop of a hat on the issue of gay marriages.
When then President George W. Bush sent a proposal to Congress to amend the Constitution providing that marriage should only be between a man and a woman, millions of Americans with doubtful gender or sexual orientations ganged up on him. There was a threat to national security when sexually discriminated rebels went berserk. Obviously, Congress was scared. The proposed Constitutional Amendment died of cardiac arrest almost instantaneously.
Perez Hilton, said to be the gay judge who asked Ms. Prejean the sensitive question, was angry. He was reported to be fuming mad at the implied intolerance to gay rights that Ms. Prejaen’s opinion projected to millions of TV viewers not only in America but around the world.
To Mr. Hilton, it was so offensive that he had to use the Media to chastise Ms. Prejean. At the ‘Celebrity leech/trash blogger’, the opinionated beauty contestant was described as a “dumb bitch”.
Keith Lewis, director of the pageant, fanned Hilton’s outrage by sending him a note saying: “I am personally saddened and hurt that Miss CA USA 2009 believes marriage rights belong only to a man and a woman … Religious beliefs have no place in politics in the Miss CA family.” The note was like gasoline thrown into the fire.
Conservative blogs picked this up as another leftist declaration of war on gay rights. Talk show host Michael Medved and columnist Michelle Malkin attacked Hilton for his “inappropriate expression of intolerance” that Ms. Prejean’s answer shouldn’t have been interpreted to be because she was just expressing her personal view. The pressure of this conservative counter-attack was so threatening that Hilton recapitulated and apologized.
I don’t think that it was appropriate for a judge to attack the person of any bungling beauty contestant, in public. Name-calling as a practiced art of debauchery is not showing a civilized behavior at all, but rather exhibiting a reflection of one’s gutter mentality. This personal attack of a judge is an unnecessary indulgence, an excess of emotional immoderation and pointless arrogance.
Hilton’s “dumb bitch” media bombardment was directed against Ms. Prejean’s perceived intolerance to gay marriages which was not even direct but only implied, and yet Hilton himself was intolerant of Ms. Prejean’s personal view that he has to go abrasively crazy about it in public. If you ask me, emotionally indulgent anti-right-to-same-sex marriages reactions based on how judges see the world between their legs, are abominations that scandalize beauty pageants.
To be honest about one’s opinion, and similar virtues like self-respect and respect of others are not in the vocabulary of condescending radicals like Hilton and Lewis. Their mantra of liberalism and freedom is that there is no need to be truthful as Ms. Pejean was trying to show. You need only to be politically correct. With this motto of the Miss USA pageant, everybody fits in – the organizers, pageant managers, show props, judges and contestants -- except the likes of Ms. Prejean.
Needless to say, politically “wired” beauty pageants are intimidating. The red flag I want to wave for all to see is that, beauty contestants should be careful, more so when the panel of judges are star-studded with Liberals that are gays or homosexuals who are overzealous in protecting their different sexual orientation.
Take it from Mr. Hilton. Any aspiring candidate, who is against same-sex marriages, is a “dumb bitch” that can never be crowned Miss USA. #
© Copyright Edwin A. Sumcad. Access FP.com April 29, 2009.
The writer is an award-winning journalist. Know more about the author by reading his published editorials and feature articles or you may e-mail your comment direct to firstname.lastname@example.org