![[info]](http://l-stat.livejournal.com/img/userinfo.gif?v=92.1){kind=small}
They're pissed that carrie prejean posed "partially nude" when she was 17 I will admit that my first feeling was one of incredible schadenfreude. Of course the girl standing up for het-only marriage -- the same movement that talks about the risks to our children's innocent ears should gay marriage be legalized -- be herself a kid sexually exposing herself. Oh, the delicious new manifestation of the always present irony to these moral majority people. (Saving yourself for marriage by keeping to oral sex and anal another example of this.)
But another irony of all this is that the pageant requires people to actually pose partially nude -- isn't that what a bikini is? So why are some instances of it REQUIRED when others are prohibited?
May 7 2009, 16:15:38 UTC 3 years ago
May 7 2009, 18:24:33 UTC 3 years ago
I also don't get why she was asked that question in the first place, or why her answer, which albeit bigoted was rather gracious in its pseudo-neutrality, was treated with such disdain.
Anonymous
May 9 2009, 07:04:08 UTC 3 years ago
Strange
Funny how "semi nude" (bikini) is culturally totally different from semi-nude (lingere). There are many places were you could reasonably walk around in a bikini but would encounter hostility in underwear that is equally (or less) revealing. As to the hypocrisy, I guess the Miss America pagent is built on that bizarre premise, and allowing contestents to openly assert themselves as sexual (in underwear) would damage the wink-wink wholesomeness that allows the pagent to control their contestents' sexual images (in bikinis). Maybe weirdest of all, though, is that the only Miss America winners people remember are the ones associated with sex scandals. Paris Hilton didn't even need to compete.