Was Prejean's answer wrong? No. Do I, or many other Americans, share her views? Absolutely not. But did she deserve the backlash that came afterwards, as well as losing the crown for it?
Freedom of speech is something that makes our country great. It allows all people, will all kinds of backgrounds, thoughts, and ideas to openly express themselves. Sure, there are always those types of people that try and push the limits within the boundaries of "freedom," and sometimes they can be downright rude and harmful. However, Prejean's answer was neither of those things. She answered the question in the best way she thought possible, while sticking to her faith and personal views. However, because of its level of sensitivity and the fact that so many people feel very strongly about it, speaking about sexuality and sexual orientation is a little more difficult.
Is it wrong to have different views on same-sex relations and marriage? Yes, I believe discriminating against a particular group is wrong, particularly same-sex rights, but if that's how you were brought up and raised, where is the issue? Prejean wasn't stating that she was a homophobe, or that those involved in same-sex relations should be persecuted, or harmed in anyway. She simply stated that she didn't believe in same-sex marriage. Furthermore, since our country (and the world, for that matter) has so many different religious beliefs, many different groups are going to have different perspectives on homosexuality and sexuality in general. Why is it wrong to lean one way or another when it comes to sexuality?
Jordan brings up several interesting points about sexuality in her discussion of the Miss America Pageant of 2009. What stood out to me most is the difficulty in our modern environment in talking about sexuality without being judgemental or hurtful. The United States allows freedom of speech to a huge extent, allowing persons to be helpful, harmful, or indifferent about any topic, so long as their free speech does not impinge upon the rights of others. I think that Jordan is completely correct in saying that Carrie Prejean’s answer about homosexual marriage was technically diplomatic, but for me it calls to mind memories of middle school and use of the phrase “no offense, but…”. This sort of premising of one’s statement seems to ensure that whatever comes next will be of some level of offense to someone out there somewhere. I do not feel that Prejean’s answer was sensitive to those involved in same-sex relationships- the answer was somewhat offensive to me, and to many I know who would identify themselves as homosexuals who yearn for the same rights as heterosexual couples are granted through marriage.
ReplyDeleteWhile I do see and understand that Prejean was obviously brought up in a very different way from myself, her statement exposes her ignorance about the subject of homosexuality and homosexual marriage, and even sexuality as a whole. She states that Americans are able to choose whether they would like to have a heterosexual or homosexual marriage, which is in fact only the case in a very small number of states, and even in those cases, homosexuals are only granted civil unions, while heterosexual couples are granted marriages. Prejean reveals that she doesn’t know much about homosexual marriage in this country, and though she is entitled to her own views and opinions, the fact that her defense of her opinions rests upon “in my country, in my family, I think…” belies that she does not have much education in sexuality or in sexual or gender theory in order to back up her opinion with more thorough reasoning than simply the way she has been raised.
The lack of sexual and gender education the world over leads to answers like Prejean’s in the 2009 Miss America Pageant. Thought Prejean was diplomatic, she still expressed that certain types of union aren’t really okay in her eyes, and therefore assumed the social status of being homophobic, whether warranted or not. The exclusion of gender and sexual studies from education leads to a lot of the difficulty we have in discussing sexuality today- what do terms mean? What is the most objective way to talk about sexuality? How do we relate sexuality and gender to social constructs like marriage? How do we create truly meaningful discourse on something so essential to human being without education and exposure to sexual and gender difference, when most of the population has little to no context for what the discussion is about?