Tuesday, April 21, 2009

Can't Hide the Heterosexism Behind that Fake Smile

Ms. America/USA, whatever... it's a VERY problematic thing. Children actually watch that stuff and learn the stereotypes and practice them.

54% of women are moms. 55% of moms are working and there are over 10 million single moms in the U.S. according to the U.S. Census Bureau. So why can't "Ms. America" have kids or be in a relationship? Wouldn't that be better "modeling"?

The swimsuit competition... Constructing impossible standards of "beauty" for little girls to look up to and suck in for is not "empowering" to anyone.

"It's about physical fitness..."

Then run a few laps on stage.

In heels if you must.

Robyn E. Blumner, a journalist for the St. Petersburg Times wrote,

"Instead of being judged solely on whether they're knockouts, contestants now are judged on whether they're knockouts who can contrive concern about world hunger or illiteracy. (I guess it's to see if they can act, too.)

Lately there have been a couple of disabled winners. Nicole Johnson, who is the reigning Miss America, has diabetes. Heather Whitestone, who was Miss America 1995, is deaf. This is supposed to show that physical perfection is not the pageant's focus and anyone can be Miss America.

No one's buying it. The Miss America Organization can trot out as many "disabled" Miss Americas as they want. Yet American women know that some of the most profound disabilities women face, being old, fat or ugly, will never be represented... diversity has its limits."

Recently, the latest Ms. America dabbled outside of the realm of sexism and into homophobia. What do you think? I'm especially curious to know about the term Ms. California has coined "opposite marriage."


  1. Man, why you gotta steal my story?

  2. i'm a fan of this video response if only because he dubs miss california the joe the plumber of anti-gay marriage. oh yeah. and he fits in a back to the future reference : )


  3. Your post is hilarious - run a few laps, in heels if you must. Awesome.

    Of course, Carrie Prejean's answer upsets me, and I wish that no one that spoke on a nation-wide television broadcast held those opinions and voiced them aloud, but, to be fair, there are obviously lots of people who agree with her. She's right, we do live in a country where we have choices. We live in a country where we can say on national television whether same-sex marriage should or should not be universal. We live in a country where people are allowed to have different opinions and not be thrown in prison or killed because of those differences (most of the time). We also live in a country where people who say things like "opposite marriage" get all of the beauty, glamour, power, wealth and voice they may not deserve.

    I don't want to say Carrie's answer is "wrong," because who am I to make sweeping moral statements. I will say, however, that I disagree with her answer, and it saddens me.