As the Carrie Prejean fairytale-gone-awry continues, I've grown more and more agitated by the swarm of inconsistencies surrounding this mess. On one hand, I can't really blame the girl for capitalizing on her fifteen minutes of fame. I mean, in a capitalist society, smart people capitalize. Even if I despise her argument for marriage being a heterosexuals-only club, she's got a right to an opinion. But what I can't stand is how this beauty queen pretends that her latest role as spokesperson for the National Organization for Marriage has been her life's goal. Let's be honest--it's been a twist of fate and nothing more, thanks to Perez Hilton.
Another thing I can't stand? The two-faced Miss California USA organization. These people invested in Carrie's assets by purchasing her implants a few weeks before the Miss USA Pageant competition, presumably because a little more va-va-va-voom could help secure that sparkly crown. But now this organization is debating whether Carrie violated her Miss California contract, first by posing semi-nude as a teen model, and second by making personal appearances on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage without express permission from the California USA pageant committee.
I have no qualms with the latter violation--that's Carrie's own fault--but the former violation gets me riled up. For one thing, I don't think you can give a girl breast implants--a surgery that perpetuates a culture of highly sexualized, highly objectified female beauty--and then condemn her for having capitalized on her own sexuality years earlier. Can the Miss California USA organization really claim the moral high ground here? I don't think so.
No comments:
Post a Comment