Thursday, May 07, 2009
I stand in naked solidarity with Carrie Prejean
I don't happen to agree with Carrie Prejean's views on gay marriage, but I certainly think that she should be able to express her views without being subject to a constant barrage of ad hominem attacks, the latest of which appears in the infotainment site TMZ.com, and are really beyond the pale.
Carrie Prejean believes that state-sanctioned marriage should be limited to the relationship between a man and a woman, and not between two people of the same sex. This belief is shared by a small majority of her fellow Californians, as indicated by the Prop. 8 vote in November, and also shared by the sitting President of the United States, who handily carried the State of California in November. Because she stated her opinion in response to a question asked during a beauty pageant -- a beauty pageant! -- she is being ripped into little pieces by those who do not want to maintain a civil discourse on this important social topic.
My views closely parallel those of TigerHawk, who would "support the legalization of gay marriage by the enactment of state statutes, but oppose it by judicial fiat." Process matters when it comes to resolving divisive social issues. I would also agree to a certain extent with Laura, a self-described Christian conservative over at Hot Air's Green Room:
"If you put something out with the trash, the police can search it without a warrant. Anyone walking by can take it. Although it’s still on your property, it’s not really yours anymore; you’ve relinquished your claim to it. And that’s exactly what we’ve done with marriage. We might as well let gays have it. We’re not using it."Laura goes on to recite a list of statistics about divorce rates and the like, and her point is made -- if you are going to base your argument against gay marriage at least partly on Biblical doctrine, it would help if society hadn't already largely rejected a strict interpretation of that doctrine. Can homosexuals really do any worse with the institution of marriage than heterosexuals have done with it over the past generation or so?
That is the kind of discourse that furthers our understanding of differing positions. But, as Bluto from Animal House would say, "Nooooooooooooo," certain elements of the media have to dig and uncover and expose irrelevant things about someone who expresses a view that is not consistent with their own. Well, as the Otter character from the same movie would say, "This situation absolutely requires a really futile and stupid gesture be done on somebody's part," and for better or worse, I am just the guy to do it.
So here it is: in an effort to advance the concept of civil discourse, and to protest the lack of it in this case, I will post a naked, but tasteful picture of myself. Ironic, huh? I stand in naked solidarity with you, Carrie Prejean, so that you can express your views without being attacked personally, even if I disagree with you -- especially if I disagree with you.
I am not going all Code Pink here, since I have no intent to disrupt any kind of official public proceeding with shouting and nakedness.
Yes, I understand the argument that she is now in the public eye and therefore has a target on her back, or front, or whatever, and is fair game, and yes, I understand that she will do fine financially as a result of her new-found fame. But honestly, can you even remember the name of any other runner-up to any other beauty contest? It was her answer to Hilton's question that put her in the limelight, and she answered it straightforwardly and almost apologetically, then stands behind her response, and for that she receives a media colonoscopy.
The backstory of the photo I am posting is that it was taken during a ski trip to Sun Valley, Idaho about a dozen years ago. Alcohol was involved -- tequila, if memory serves, and frankly, it really doesn't, in this instance. After a great day of skiing, and making long, high speed GS turns, and short, quick bump turns, a soak in the outdoor whirlpool tub was quite relaxing. The wonderful and invigorating Nordic tradition of rolling in the snow (sometimes done by Finns near their saunas) came to mind, so I exited the tub, walked down a set of stairs, rolled front and back, and was climbing up the stairs to the deck to get back into the tub when a buddy snapped the shot with his waterproof camera. The angle of the shot (and the snow frozen to my body) makes it only mildly NSFW, certainly no worse than the "scandalous" picture of Carrie Prejean. The picture may lack the compositional integrity of the Speedo shot of The Other McCain, but it is no more or less offensive, and perhaps leaves more to the imagination, at least in the frontal sense.
I realize that it will only be a matter of time before Cassandra and her crew at Villainous Company will be clicking over here and sharing their approval or disapproval, and probing me with their eyes, but I can handle that -- I am making a stand for civil discourse, and I stand firm and tall! At least I have the good taste not to post the photo on the front page of this blog, but instead provide a link. If you think you might be offended, please don't click through.
Anyway, the picture is here (again, mildly NSFW).
I told you it was a futile and stupid gesture, but there is a principle at stake here.
MORE: Cassandra will take a pass, and not be "entrapped" and not click through. I admire her self-restraint, principled stand, and commitment to civil discourse. I also think that her respect for the the foundational concepts of contract law is important (that Carrie Prejean signed a deal with the pageant and represented that no bad photos existed); and, that the world would be an even better place if Donald Trump, who controls the entity that was party to Carrie Prejean's agreement, had exhibited a perfect history of similar respect for his contracts, and not have broken them in and out of bankruptcy. Besides, this isn't the naked male photo Cassandra is looking for.
25 Comments:
By 
, at
Fri May 08, 05:08:00 AM:
Brrrr! I just experienced major "Shrinkage" just looking at that picture!
By 
TigerHawk, at
Fri May 08, 05:55:00 AM:
You'll forgive me, I hope, if I do not click that link.
By Escort81, at
Fri May 08, 09:14:00 AM:
No problem, TigerHawk, you're forgiven. I always knew you'd be able to quit me.
By The Conservative Wahoo, at
Fri May 08, 09:56:00 AM:
I just threw up a little in my mouth.
By Georg Felis, at
Fri May 08, 10:01:00 AM:
Um. TH. I don't think this is as much of a blog traffic driver as pics of Carrie. (although I am awaiting CC's response)
By Dan Kauffman, at
Fri May 08, 10:44:00 AM:
I was wondering exactly what was meant by
"I stand in naked solidarity with Carrie Prejean"
You wish ;-)
By , at
Fri May 08, 12:55:00 PM:
Hey Escort ... thought I'd see a pic of you in pink panties ... lol
Read Cassandra's post and the back and forth with TH in the comments. Look ... is this is a 'nude' photo of Prejean, then what is the average skimpy gown worn the Academy Awards or the outfit on a runway at a 'fashion show'?
The point of this isn't whether she was photographed in lingerie, or even if there are more immodest photos out there yet to come out. This is 100% about some catty gay man who didn't like her answer, and is jealous that she's hotter than he is.
She is still in the majority of voters in her state, who voted against gay marriage. You don't have to agree with her, but a suggestive photo doesn't remove her right to an opinion, religion-based, or otherwise.
BTW ... past pageant contestants have done quite well after being 'disgraced' by 'scandals' that made them household names ... This publicity is all good for Prejean. And try as I may, I still can't recall who actually won, or why a gay man was judging a female beauty contest.
By Cassandra, at
Fri May 08, 03:01:00 PM:
Dang! If this is all it takes to get my fellow male bloggers to pose in the buff ... maybe I should do more scandal blogging :p
*running away*
By Cassandra, at
Fri May 08, 06:28:00 PM:
Note to self:
Never post a comment on a 45 second work break.
By Nice Deb, at
Fri May 08, 08:48:00 PM:
I clicked.....You shameless ho!
By , at
Sat May 09, 09:49:00 AM:
Dude, you look like a Margarita glass. Thanks for sharing, nawwt.
By , at
Sat May 09, 09:55:00 AM:
I cannot believe that Glenn Reynolds just linked this post. Way to drive traffic to Tigerhawk, Escort 81! A naked Instalanche?
Must be a slow news day ...
By , at
Sat May 09, 11:31:00 AM:
FROM CAROL HERMAN
Tell me that you didn't know the Miss America contest had gone CAMP.
Most Americans can't name winners.
And, if Miss Prejean is very lucky? The exposure will lead beyond publicity and recognition, to JOBS. Of course, the magazines are dying. The avenues through which she'd find work, are themselves finding themselves losing jobs. But it makes queers so bitchy.
Meanwhile, go ahead. Run a contest. Name the last 10 years worth of winners? And, then? How soon will you forget Carrie Prejean's name?
CAMP, it's not just for children, anymore. If Donald Trump wanted to please middle-America (who used to be the crux of the audience), he wouldn't be appealing to CAMP.
By , at
Sat May 09, 11:45:00 AM:
I thought you Princeton folk always cavorted around like that in your eating clubs!! :-))
By , at
Sat May 09, 11:49:00 AM:
"[C]an you even remember the name of any other runner-up in any other beauty contest?"
Yes. Sarah Palin.
By M. Simon, at
Sat May 09, 12:45:00 PM:
The Google ad is covering a bunch of text.
By Moneyrunner, at
Sat May 09, 04:56:00 PM:
For reasons that are easy to understand (we are, really a Judeo-Christian society and view everything though that lens), people who favor gay marriage believe that the opposition to it is based on Christianity. Well, yes; just as opposition to murder or theft or adultery is based on Christianity … and just about every other religion or religion-less social structure throughout history.
With the exception of polygamy, human society has centered the adult portion of the family unit on two people of the opposite sex. I emphasize that the primary exception to this arrangement has been societies that allowed polygamy.
So while you may favor same-sex marriage, try to get a bit of perspective and realize that this view is shared by a very small subset of people mainly in the West, who demand that the rest of the world accept their views of “normal” and “acceptable.” A bit of humility may be in order.
By Escort81, at
Sat May 09, 06:28:00 PM:
This comment has been removed by the author.
By Escort81, at
Sat May 09, 10:27:00 PM:
Moneyrunner -
Re: "humility" - that is precisely why I believe the proper way for a change to be made is through the ballot or the enactment of state statutes (presumably reflecting the will of the people), and not by judicial fiat, which might only represent the opinions of a small minority of people and a handful of judges. I think that is why TigerHawk takes the same position, in terms of process.
I would also distinguish between muder and theft, on the one hand, and adultery. Murder and theft are still crimes, and should remain so, but I don't beleive that adultery is a crime anywhere in this country (though it certainly can be a cause for a civil action of divorce). Adultery is notable in terms of its Scriptural background, because under the strict interpretation of the Old Testament (Levitcus 20:10), both people involved in the act of adultery would be put to death. That rule is only three verses before the verse that sets forth the same penalty for homosexuality (Lev. 20:13). Neither outcome is desirable, in my view. So, things have changed in the last few thousand years.
By , at
Sun May 10, 05:31:00 PM:
Hey, Escort isn't a bad looking guy. And I say that as a straight male! Though, I guess that means that means I'm not as much of an authority.
By Cassandra, at
Mon May 11, 08:21:00 AM:
I don't beleive that adultery is a crime anywhere in this countryDepends upon what one means by "anywhere". Under Article 134 of the UCMJ, adultery is a punishable offense. The elements are as follows;
(1) The accused wrongfully had sexual intercourse;
(2) At the time of the offense, the accused or the other party was married to someone else; and
(3) The adultery was deleterious to good order and discipline in the armed forces or was of a nature to bring discredit upon the armed forces.
FWIW, fornication is also a punishable offense :p
By Naked for Freedom of Speech, at
Mon May 11, 03:10:00 PM:
Carrie Prejean, You, ME and everyone else are God's Images.
Genesis 1:27God created man in His own image, in the image of God He created him; male and female He created them.
http://media.photobucket.com/image/nude%20ugly%20fat%20old%20man/Bradthxforn/fat/NudeFatGuy.jpg
The Body is Holy:
http://www.theologyofthebody.net/
By Escort81, at
Mon May 11, 06:06:00 PM:
Of course you are correct, Cassandra, about the UCMJ -- the military is always held to a higher standard of personal conduct than the civilian world. I hear fraternization isn't such a good thing, either.
Think about what would have happened to President Clinton in the Lewinsky matter had he been a member of the Joint Chiefs and not POTUS.
By Cassandra, at
Mon May 11, 07:30:00 PM:
I would wager that this part of the UCMJ won't last much longer. I just think it's kind of interesting that the military is a relic of older state laws that everyone views as passe.
Of course, in the military adultery can really mess things up - entire commands. I've seen it happen. But it's a bit of a different situation, I guess.
By , at
Thu May 14, 11:56:00 PM:
It's so hypocritical that those who claim to be on the side of tolerance are the most intolerant when it comes to those with differing opinions! If Ms Prajean had said she was in favor of gay marriage do you think there would have been this firestorm of attacks on her? Would conservative commentators gotten away with calling her a "Stupid bitch"? Where are the feminists when it comes to defending Ms Prajean? I guess it's okay to trash women if they're conservative. (it's sad that Barack Obama is the only person Hollywood won't trash for saying essentially the same thing!)
