I thought nude pictures were a requirement to be a "Miss ______"...

Alright, so ignoring the entire question controversy, this seems like odd timing to me. If it was an attack by homosexual supporters, wouldn't it have come up earlier? It seems like a long wait to me.

The bottom line is, you piss off Perez Hilton and ANY skeleton you may have in your closet will be out. Fair? Hell no. But it is the reality of a bizarre sector of society who loves to bring down famous people with vicious gossip.

I have heard some theories that the reason she was asked the question and is being crucified like this is because of what happened with Proposition 8 out in California. I would not be surprised if that indeed turned out to be true. I haven't done any other research, but my understanding is that she was the only one who was asked this question and if that is true, I don't think it was a coincidence that SHE was the one asked.

As far as those who feel she didn't answer the question directly, I guess I don't see why people feel that way. I thought the question was how she felt about gay marriage or whether she supported it and she basically said no.

That's not bad, I always confuse Miss USA and Miss America. I couldn't tell you the difference.

The thing is, Perez Hilton had NOTHING to do with the pictures surfacing. The pictures were sent to thedirty.com. He posted them up on his site, but that's what he does - he "reports" on famous/infamous people.


The people in this thread were talking about her choosing to take nude/semi-nude pictures until you brought up the whole "they are really trying to tear her down b/c of what she said" stuff.

I believe the pictures would have come up either way, because there are plenty of Miss Whatevers who have taken these sorts of pictures and got bit in the ass later because of it.

She could have avoided all of this entirely if she kept her clothes on but she had a lapse in judgement.

Her answer is a completely different story and she's using the 'oh woe is me! I'm a victim b/c of my strong Christian beliefs" crap.

And for what it's worth, being photographed nude/semi-nude is not the only contract breaching she's being accused of. Apparently there is another clause in there about not going out and doing interviews/appearances without the consent of the Miss California organization, and guess what she's been doing recently :rolleyes:

ETA: CNN article

Well, to be fair there wasn't much of a discussion since I was only the third post. I agree that this would have been news no matter what, but I do think that her comments are affecting the reaction to the news (which is what Kevin and a couple of others in the thread have also said).

There are a lot of people who don't agree with what she had to say, but it just doesn't make sense that people are blaming those who oppose what she said for the pictures and for what may happen to her title.

She agreed to take those pictures. No one else made her. And just like every other girl before her, she needs to own up and hold herself accountable for her actions.

Yea, this is probably a little bit more on the radar than it has been with past beauty queens, but if anything, she sort of did that to herself. She could have said once "yea, I said that. Those are my beliefs" and been done with it - gone back to her Miss Cali duties and it would have blown over in a few weeks, but she chose to catapult herself into the spotlight and went on every interview/appearance that she could.

I'd even go as far as to say that whoever had those photographs probably got a HUGE sum of money b/c she chose to make such a huge media spectacle of herself.

I don't give a rats about her answer or her pictures. I just want to know why the hell Perez Hilton was a judge.

Why is anyone ever a pageant judge? They get people who are celebrity-esque and available.

I see nothing wrong with those pictures. I see no nudity, nothing that couldn't be shown on TV or that you don't see in a clothing catalogue. As demonstrated, there is no more skin than in the swimsuit competition. I don't think anybody bothers to come up with dirt on the first runner up. Nobody ever cares about the first runner up. The winner, sure! Look at Vanessa Williams, but not the first runner up. The whole thing is silly.

Yep - and it's an easy way to stay relevant and get on TV. It makes sense for all involved.

If this is all there is, I don't see the uproar. Vanessa Williams's pictures were far, far more scandalous.

Plenty of people are against gay marriage, but don't consider themselves "conservative" or "traditional." I'm not sure how hypocritical that is, but I think a lot of people on the left equate being against gay marriage with being generally conservative--even personally conservative, when that's not the case.

I agree. The average Victoria's Secret catalog shows about the same amount of skin, yet nobody blasts a woman for shopping there.

Well, you don't see those Victoria's Secret girls handing out any christian pamphlets either...