Miss California controversy update


ADoyle90815
 Share

Recommended Posts

Talk about a cop-out! The Miss California people want to appease the outspoken homosexuals and friends crowd, and they want to keep the no gay-marriage crowd. I find that even more pathetic than Mr. Hilton's question that started it all.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

As far as I can conclude, there was not a single photo taken of Miss California that could not be proudly displayed on the magazine cover at the grocery store checkout line. Was she and idiot for having those pictures taken? Yes she was. Is it pornographic? Yes, in my opinion it is. So is a lot of what you see on the covers of those magazines. I think I spotted on the other day that showed a fully nude woman with some cloth item barely covering the "essential" bits.

If you're going to take action against Miss California for those photos, then shouldn't somebody do something about the smut that is being left wide open for the whole word to see? I think we're seeing an example of true hypocrisy here. It's using a double-standard to target and condemn one person for doing something that you didn't like. Miss California would not have ever been in any danger of being stripped of crown if she had not spoken out against Gay Marriage. She would also be Miss USA, and think everyone knows that very well.

Who knew there were still witch-hunts in the 21st Century? All you have to do is exercise your freedom of speech in a way that violates Political Correctness, and they'll find a way to ruin your life.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

True. From what I've seen (and I haven't gone looking for it; I've just seen what FoxNews--motto: No instinct too base to marketed to--had blaring on its front page), it doesn't look any worse than those pics Hannah Montana did last year.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Miss California officials bypass no-show title holder | L.A. Now | Los Angeles Times

I think the Miss California USA organization is doing the right thing because she did violate her contract, mostly by not disclosing those photos.

The are other Miss USA that had similar pictures disclosed after the fact and they did not lose their crown. This is nothing but a political witch hunt. She stated her opinion on a very polarized subject and it was not politically correct so now "she has to pay for it." If she would have said something like "I don't care" nothing would have happen and she would have moved on with the rest of the Miss beauty pageant viewing public. It is after all a meaningless event but a money making opportunity.

The rest is just the consequences of her past choices.

Edited by Islander
Link to comment
Share on other sites

Ironic that an event that has woman prancing around in very revealing clothing and bikinis has a moral objection if a participant was photoed "semi-nude." They were semi-nude the entire time they were on stage in a bikini weren't they? Or are they saying that the Miss USA competition gets first dibs?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Loading...
 Share