Posted
by Dan Savage
on Thu, Apr 30, 2009 at 2:44 PM
We'll never know if Miss California would be out there campaigning so hard against gay marriage if Perez Hilton hadn't have called her a bitch... but I'm thinking it didn't help.
99% of the time I find Perez Hilton a thoroughly loathsome person.
Then, for a brief shining moment, he raised above it all and asked the perfect question at the perfect opportunity.
Alas, it didn't last. In almost no time he returned to being his normal loathsome self. Perez is Perez.
Still, I'm glad he publicly exposed her as the vacuous bigot that she is. I just wish he'd have kept his yap shut afterward. He's undone half the good he did in exposing her in the first place.
Posted by
Reverse Polarity on April 30, 2009 at 3:19 PM
No offense, but DUH. I thought that was pretty apparent from the beginning, but whatever.
Before Perez Hilton called Miss California a stupid bitch, she was just some stupid bitch. But because he mouthed off like the gossip-hungry leotard he is, she is a martyr for the right. Way to be pragmatic, Perez.
The name calling neither helped nor hurt. It is a wash. What brought this all on was the question, and the utterly predictable reaction to her answer. She could have been asked that same question by Mrs Manners, who would have found some polite way afterward of expressing her disappointment in the answer, would have lost the contest because of the same abject gracelessness of her response, and become exactly the same celebrity martyr for the religious right that she is now. Calling her names had nothing to do with this. The personality of the one who asked the question had nothing to do with this. It was the question. That's what made the rest of it inevitable.
Posted by
Bruce Garrett on April 30, 2009 at 3:40 PM
My thoughts,
she didn't lose from the question, but Perez not liking her answer because he himself is gay... is pretty gay.
Seriously? So would he have taken as much offense had he asked a gender based question in which she answered something against men in general? I think not.
Weak sauce. But that's what he's about anyways. Way to go loser.
Posted by
Not jumping on that train on April 30, 2009 at 3:47 PM
Why would you expect anything different from Perez Hilton? He IS loathesome, and the strong and disturbing undercurrents of misogyny and homophobia on his site are part of the reason I don't read him any more, despite my (embarrassing) love of celebrity gossip.
He loves to call women sluts and whores, and uses nasty and demeaning language towards men who are gay or who he thinks are gay. It disgusts me to see him take up the banner of gay rights crusader when his own behavior is so reprehensible.
He should not have called Miss CA a bitch. He should have downgraded her answer for being incoherent and dishonest, instead of making a martyr out of her dumb, lying, incoherent ass.
Now she's cashing in and telling her fake sob story to every fundie group that'll have her. All thanks to Perez.
Posted by
Your name here on April 30, 2009 at 3:55 PM
I blame whoever chose him to judge the contest. Here's a hint for the future: only choose people who demonstrate some degree of class and professionalism. I don't remember any judges trashing Miss Teen South Carolina for her dumbshit answer.
Dan is not objecting to Perez's original question, and I don't think the commenters here are either. It was Perez's response to her response that was the problem (calling her a bitch).
The thing is, her answer was inaccurate and incoherent. There was plenty to criticize there on the merits, but Perez immediately took the low road and turned her into a martyr, rather than engaging in any serious advocacy.
As always, his actions contributed only to his own notoriety.
Posted by
Your name here on April 30, 2009 at 5:13 PM
Why are we obsessing about the remarks of some bubble-headed bimbo whose sole claim to fame is that she came in SECOND in the Miss USA pageant? Does anyone every take a beauty queen, or a cheerleader, or any other vacuous title these women aspire to seriously. Please! This woman, like so many of her tiara-wearing predecessors, has as much common sense, or intellectual curiosity as a bunch of okra. She's probably a lousy fuck also, so forget about her. She spouted some Christian shit about gay marriage. By giving her all of this attention, we're elevating her far above her normal position, which is either prone to take a man's dick up her non-virgin asshole, or a load of spunk down her throat. Move on!
Posted by
Chris Tharrington on April 30, 2009 at 7:02 PM
As my friend Tom pointed out to me, if Miss California hadn't (barely coherently) spoken out against gay marriage, then Miley Cyrus might never have tweeted in favor of it.
i do think perez went too far. her answer was not offensive, her inability to form complete, coherent, logical, correct statements was offensive. So in essence he really did attack her and she unfortunately is now a victim on a pedestal to be paraded around. i'm sad for america's education level. i feel like we are devolving into an idiot species.
He asked her a tough question, she gave a crappy, homophobic answer and was pissed off because he dared to ask her a legitimate but controversial question. I stopped reading Perez's site a long time ago, because he's NOT a good writer and a bit of a one-trick pony, but most of the people he calls out, DESERVE to be called out because they ARE acting like sluts, bitches, dicks, or hypocritical closet cases.
Worse than that, he missed the chance to applaud the "Choice is great!" part of her answer, which would have put the focus on choice, made that the part everybody remembers, and -- given her unformed and uninformed views on the subject -- created an opportunity to swing her into pro-equality prominence.
A less self-absorbed "No on 8" campaign would have won the day anyhow. P.H.'s antics were just icing on the shit-cake.
Comments (24) RSS