Subscribe to Breaking News
Loading ...Calif. pageant may dump Prejean
05.06.2009 9:11am EDT
(San Francisco, California) The directors of the Miss California USA pageant are looking into whether title holder Carrie Prejean violated her contract by working with a national group opposed to same-sex marriage and by posing semi-nude when she was a teenage model.
Pageant spokesman Roger Neal said Tuesday it appears Prejean has run afoul of several sections of the 12-page contract that all prospective contestants were required to sign before competing in the November state contest.The detailed document prohibits the titular Miss California from making personal appearances, giving interviews or making commercials without permission from pageant officials. In the last 10 days, Prejean has made televised appearances at her San Diego church and on behalf of the National Organization for Marriage, a group opposed to same-sex marriage.
The contract also contains a clause asking participants to say whether they have conducted themselves “in accordance with the highest ethical and moral standards.” As an example, it asks if they have ever been photographed nude or partially nude.
“As you can see from the contract, she violated multiple items,” Neal said in an e-mail to The Associated Press.
A photo of Prejean wearing only pink panties with her back turned to the camera appeared Monday on the gossip blog theDirty.com. She issued a statement early Tuesday saying she posed for the shot when she was a 17-year-old model and objected to its release as an attempt to belittle her religious faith: “I am a Christian, and I am a model. Models pose for pictures, including lingerie and swimwear photos.”
Prejean spokeswoman Melany Ethridge said she could not comment on the contract because she was unfamiliar with its contents. Ethridge said she had not heard the pageant directors were reviewing it.
Prejean, a San Diego native who attends San Diego Christian College, was named the first runner-up to Miss North Carolina in the Miss USA pageant April 19. Her response to a question during the pageant that she opposed same-sex marriage made her a media sensation, darling of religious conservatives and the target of embarrassing disclosures.
Her post-pageant activities also have estranged her from the two directors of the state pageant, who under the terms of the contract have almost unlimited control over Miss California’s activities, including the right to revoke her crown for breaching its provisions.
On the day last week that Prejean was in Washington with National Organization for Marriage leaders to announce her support for a new advertisement the group created based on her pageant experience, Keith Lewis, co-director of the California contest, expressed concern.
“There is a contract that all participants sign that is very involved and very intricate and limits a lot of their activities,” said Lewis, a Los Angeles talent agent.
Meanwhile, the Miss Universe Organization, which also owns the Miss USA pageant, confirmed Tuesday that it had sent a letter demanding the National Organization for Marriage to remove the Prejean spot from the air and the group’s Web site. It includes footage from the April 19 pageant.
The Miss Universe Organization “neither sanctions nor disapproves of the viewpoints expressed in the advertisement but cannot allow its copyrighted material to be used without permission to support the National Organization for Marriage’s political agenda and fundraising efforts,” organization President Paula Shugart said.
NOM executive director Brian Brown said the group did not plan to comply with the pageant’s request.
“It is clearly fair use, and all they are attempting to do is silence us by using false legal claims,” Brown said. “But they have another thing coming if they think these ads are coming down. None of us are relenting, least of all Carrie.”
NOM President Maggie Gallagher also issued a statement Tuesday sympathizing with Prejean over the release of her modeling picture and saying it did not disqualify her as a traditional marriage advocate.
“Of course Carrie is not perfect,” Gallagher said. “On a personal note, as a former unwed mother, I want to say to Americans: You don’t have to be a perfect person to have the right to stand up for marriage.”
Well, Maggie, I never thought you were perfect. Not even close.
HOW do we get NOM listed as a hate group? WHY do we have to suffer attacks from these people under an air of legitimacy?
Interesting that it is taking the Miss California Pagent officials this long to dethrone Prejean.
Something is not kosher with this delayed responce and why hasn’t the Miss America Pagent removed her from the Miss Runner Up position.
I think these pagents (meat marketing devises for wealthy men), actually loathe gay men and use them to tart up the tits and ass, but when push comes to shove the girls win and the gay men behind the scenes are replaceable.
Actually all those involved in these events are replaceable….YEARLY.
NOM (National Organization of Morons) wouldn’t allow the fair use of their storm commercial. But now they say that it is fair use for them to use the pageant footage and are using it in their commercials. I say sue them in court for all their money. Send them to the poor house because that is the only thing that hate groups really understand.
It’s unfortunate that Ms. Prejean’s personal mistakes may lead to loss of her Miss California USA crown, but there is a certain karma in her comeuppance: what goes around, comes around.
More importantly: Maggie shows her ignorance in equating hetero-only marriage with protecting marriage. I’ve been wwaiting for years (and not holding my breath) while we wait for the anti-Gay side to explain how Gay-bashing at the ballot box protects marriage.
“It is clearly fair use” The hell it is… It’s copyrighted material to which Miss America Corp. owns.
They tried to have the “Gathering Storm” parodies removed from You Tube claiming that they owned the “idea” of the ad. YOU CAN’T HAVE IT BOTH WAYS YOU RELIGIOUS BIGOTS!!!
A question for the gay community,,, aren’t we yelling for tolerance of our sexual idenity??? But we dont’ show any tolerance for those who do not agree with us???? The best way to show everyone that we shouldn’t be excluded from being able to marry, is to debate and convince, not shove it down their throats at the end of a gun. Done the right way, we can have gay marriage in every state, but the more we bash someone who’s only crime was honestly answering a question put to her by a gay whore is not the way to get it. BTW, i heard that perez hilton used to be a woman who was too ugly to get a man so she became a man who claims to be gay.
Bruce, I find it even more interesting that we even care about beauty pageants anymore. After all the work women have done to stop being seen as nothing more than sexual objects, here they are, still parading themselves to be objectified by men in the hopes of winning a little crown made of cheap metal and ugly stones, so that, perhaps, they can some day become a trophy wife for some rich guy.
Yes, the feminist movement really paid off, all right. In the mean time, I’m surprised that we even care about Carrie’s opinions or that people are shocked to find out that she’s just as twisted and crooked as the rest of us. People who so publicly wear signs advertising their faith are almost always the most faithless. They’re just hoping their sign is wide enough to hide their trail of wickedness from onlookers. Prejean’s no different.
She’s going to lose her crown, since the people who run California’s pageant seem hell-bent on taking it. They’re just looking for an ironclad way to do it without the threat of lawsuits. She’s also had to endure a hell of a lot more press than she ever would’ve had she actually won the national pageant without controversy.
As it is, she lost (yes, that makes her, technically, a loser), and she’s been completely smeared all over the place. I say it’s time we drop the whole thing, because we’re looking like a bunch of rabid jackals right now. Let’s not give those who’ve declared themselves our enemies any more ammo than they already have to hurt us any more broadly than they already have.
@ L. J. As long as men like Donald Trump have their say with all their dollars, women will be paraded as sex objects. To them women are still possessions to be shown off, the younger and sexier the better — like divorcing the old and marrying the younger.
If I remember correctly, before she said at the pageant that she believed marriage should be between a man and a woman, she said something about how great it is in America that we let people choose gay marriage. I think our best tactic would be to remind America that she clearly doesn’t let her personal beliefs influence what she thinks public policy should be, and she celebrates an America in which gay people can get married. Instead of making her the enemy, we need to point out that her words actually make her our friend. That’s the perfect way to turn the tables on NOM.
She violated her contract multiple times it appears from what this articles says.
So that should be sufficient grounds irrespective of her ill-advised answer to the questioner’s ill-advised question
for informing her of her termination.
True she was both bigoted and baited in her reply. The questioner baited her with this type of question and she fell for it. She could have simply played to the “dumb blond” stereotype and simply said that “Sorry, I am unfortunately ill-informed on that issue and not qualified to elaborate on it.” Which is truthful, dumb and artfully evasive all at the same time.
People might be lulled into thinking “she is maybe not the brightest bulb on the block” and “maybe been “living under a rock” in her own hairdo and clothing obsessed world” but harmless. And, unless they dug some more into her “activities away from and prior to the pageant” some of the “shadier” of those activities might possible have gone under the radar and undetected as long as she kept her mouth shut in public.
But her answer brings a sour reputation to the nomination of a Miss California that will linger for a long time.
But her multiple violations of her contract is of course the perfect chance for this committee to dump her without needlessly drawing more attention to her remarks than already exists.
And if her supporters scream that her free speech rights were violated, all the committee has to say is we have a contract that everyone must follow to the letter and she was let go because she did not adhere to the contract as required of all who enter our contest.
End of matter, discussion closed and no comment from then on out once the critics of her possible departure have been answered. And they need to be answered only once and never again.
robi, is if not a contradiction to criticise gay people for having an opinion about some hypocracy calling hateful and less than cheritable and they spew hate filled comments at Paris Hilton. While he doesn’t speak for me, he’s entitled to his opinion. His choice of words were what I would have made. but Robi you seem to try to speak for us and then show your true roots and attack like someone from the far right.
I really hope they strip her from her crown. as I read on CNN she feels attack for the fact on her stand on marriage and that we need to respect her beliefs. Thats all fine and dandy. She is entitled to her beliefs. However, she isn’t entitled of telling me who I can marry. Why go on a 1.5 million ad campaign to protect marriage and try to enforce her opinions on others. No one should have a right to tell us who to marry.. They can sure take our TAX PAYING $ but can’t give us equal rights. I respect her opinion but I dont respect her trying to enforce her beliefs. It is not fair that Politicians have that priviledge putting their religion or faith on us. DECROWN I Say ! DECROWN !
Miss Gallagher:
So You can be a total whore with no morals and still be for “traditional marriage”. Which really means you do not want gays to have the same rights as str8ts.
As a gay man I am all for traditional marriage for heteros. But we need marriage eqaulity for our minority just like you need left handed tools for some people.
Tom in Long Beach
So, she’s defending the marriage contract, but doesn’t have a clue about the Miss California contract?
NOM wants to protect the marriage contract, but they will not abide by the terms of her Miss California contract?
Can you say self-serving HYPOCRITS?