This is apparently the new position of the Miss USA pageant. Carrie Prejean lost her crown as Miss California after some racy pictures of her came out, although some think her position was already precarious after she defended her position on gay marriage (against it). The pictures of Prejean were racy, but they certainly weren’t any racier than anything you could see in Maxim magazine. And now, the pageant is doing the exact thing that they supposedly took away Prejean’s crown for.
Miss USA contestants are letting it all hang out this year!
Vamped up, cleavage-baring beauties — dressed in no more than lacy lingerie or fishnets — are gracing the Web site of the Miss USA pageant, in an eye-popping reversal from the competition’s traditional, homespun look.
Now the girl next door is lucky to have a bra.
The new sexy version of Miss USA, which airs this Sunday, comes a year after Miss California Carrie Prejean lost her crown when seminude pictures of her emerged after the competition.
So, just to recap.
Bad:
Good:
Skanky:
Sexy:
Trashy:
Classy:
Guys, try to stop drooling and think logically.
It isn’t that I have such a big problem with the Miss USA pageant shameless exploiting the looks of their contestants. You can see racier stuff on the cover of Maxim. But the hypocrisy is unbelievably blatant here, and frankly, exposes one simple fact: that Carrie Prejean was not really fired for the semi-nude photos. What’s the difference between Prejean’s photos and the other three above? A little nip slip? There’s really no substantive difference whatsoever. Putting the pictures in black and white doesn’t exactly turn a skanky photo into a classy, tasteless photo. A girl in her underwear posed with her legs spread from New York to Texas is still going to look skanky. Period. And if the Miss USA pageant needs that to boost their ratings, then fine. But the fake moral posturing towards Carrie Prejean couldn’t look more bogus now. There’s one reason she was stripped of her crown, and one only.
The pictures were just a convenient excuse.
Hat Tip: Jammie Wearing Fool
You’re right, Prejean wasn’t really fired for the racy photos.
As numerous legal documents that have been made public make clear, she was fired because she was failing to live up to hear contractual obligations
Rob says: “As numerous legal documents that have been made public make clear, she was fired because she was failing to live up to hear contractual obligations”
That is what the Pageant claimed although the stuff her legal team released made it clear that there was a concerted effort to force her out and that the contract breaches were bogus. The fact that accoring to the leaked reports of the actual settlement, they paid Prejean’s costs even after an actual breach emerged- the sex tape- suggests that their original grounds for sacking her were very shaky and almost certainly motivated by their intolerence of her politely expressed position on gat marriage.
The Miss California organisation had tried to fire her over the photos a month earlier but Donald Trump blocked it, so Trump isn’t being hypocritical about it, but the other pageant officials plainly are.
Daredevil says: In actuality, neither side live up to their contractual agreements. If anything, the Miss USA group before any of this came out did alot more from the get-go then she did to violate its own end. Attacking her publically after the contest. What part of the contract allow them to do that to one of their contestants?
Or outing her on breast implants?
What part of the contract allow the release of such info?
Or attacking her for what they say is violating contract by doing interviwws, when those interviews are responses to attacks on her by them? Talk about conflict of interest there to demand she live by her contract so they can keep attacking her without her having recourse to respond.
The difference is that Carrie Prejean, in return for goods, services and promotional assistance from the pageant, signed a sworn statement saying she hadn’t taken any photos like that (and she was provided a space to tell them if she had so the pageant wouldn’t be blindsided).
She lied for material gain.
That’s not OK in my book. Several other contestants had worse pictures, but they disclosed them and the pageant had no problem with that because they were informed as they had requested.
Dishonesty isn’t a winning strategy especially when you gain financially from it.
RuthenianCowboy says: Guys, try to stop drooling and think logically.
Sorry, blood flow diversion has reduced my logical thought capacity to zero.
They all look skanky to me. I’ll stick with my fully-clothed wife when I want a hot babe.
But to some extent, the pagent sets its own rules, and can be as conflicted as it wants provided it continues to make money and get people to watch (which makes money). If they believe that being ideologically inconsistent but consistently liberal… then we’ll see how that works out for them.
Guys, try to stop drooling and think logically.
What did you say? Sorry, I was looking at something…
Rob says: Cassandra, you rightly say that other contestents had worse photos but had disclosed them, which is fair enough but that does undermine the argument that she gained financially from it.
Therefore it seems like a minor oversight at worst and not something which would have raised eyebrows had there not been a hate campaign against the poor girl. Remember before the photos with a hint of nipple showed up, the pageant organisers absurdly tried to claim that the bare back photos were “semi nude” (if I clicked a link promising semi nudity and saw a woman’s back I’d be pretty angry) so they obviously had it in for her.
BTW-did you used to post at “Blame Bush”? If you are then it’s nice to read you again, I used to post there too ( under another name, I’m currently using a pseudonym)
I R A Darth Aggie says: signed a sworn statement saying she hadn’t taken any photos like that
And Trump waived her failure to disclose. QED, no longer an issue.
Zing Angel says: Maybe our morals have evolved since and pictures are no longer an issue.
Lady Irish says: Excellent observations. You cut right through the PC crap and went straight to the heart of the matter – oppression by gays who want to be given rights and protections the rest of us don’t have and placed on a gaudy pedestal.
13 Comments