So Perez Hilton, the celebrity blogger, asked a question to Carrie Prejean (Miss California) pertaining to California's same sex marriage law and followed up with, ""Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?". Not only did he say that her answer (born from her values and spoken with authenticity) cost her the title, he then vilified her by calling her a "dumb *%$@#""If you can't say anything good..."
Let me start by saying that I think the structure of Mr. Hilton's question was solid. Great setup, good application, and then a qualifying wrap. My appreciation for his interview skills and as a reputable blogger and especially a beauty pageant judge pretty much ends there.
"Just because you can doesn't mean you should."
So it seems that just about anyone can be a judge at a beauty pageant. I mean after all, I could be one. I blog. I'm a guy. I'm a pretty good judge of beauty (you reading this Michelle?). I am a student of popular culture and have been told I have some mad relationship skills. I haven't even gotten to my signature square glasses and my ever evolving "doo". My question is, "When do I get my phone call to get that gig?"
The answer will be, "Never". Mostly because I'm happily married and Michelle would slap me into next year. Another stellar reason is that just because I have the same qualifications as Mr. Hilton doesn't mean that I should take the gig. In fact, even though I have one more qualification than Mr. Hilton I shouldn't take the gig. You see, I'm not gay and he is. I have one more qualification than Mr. Hilton does in this instance.
Out of sheer curiosity I ask the question; Why would a beauty pageant ask an openly gay man to be a judge for a clearly heterosexual event? That's like inviting a livestock judge go to the Westminster Dog Show. It just doesn't make sense. Don't get me wrong, I'm far from homophobic. Quite the contrary. I have gay friends. It just seems stupid to have a gay man judge a beauty pageant.
What's worse is to have an inconsiderate, under-qualified judge at a competition that's clearly lost any relevance that it could possibly have ever possessed.
Oh yeah, the whole just because you can doesn't mean that you should thing comes from an ancient spiritual text that says something like "everything is permissible, but not everything is beneficial." Smoke some of that.
As a side note, I'm positive that if someone called Mr. Hilton a "@#&^%$# whatever" for responding with his clearly biased opinion of Ms. Prejean's answer, he would use his media leverage to smear someone else.
