California | Carrie Prejean | Gay Marriage | Keith Olbermann | News | Pageants

Carrie Prejean's Nude Photos and the Miss California Crown: Update

Miss California Carrie Prejean's disqualification is being discussed by California pageant officials over semi-nude photos Prejean says she took when she was 17.

Prejeannude2 Prejean told TMZ yesterday in a written note : "The photo in question was taken when I was a minor, several months before the 2005 pageant. The photo was not meant for disclosure to the general public."

CNN reports: "Her fate was being discussed in 'closed-door meetings' Tuesday among California pageant officials, lawyers and representatives of Donald Trump, who owns the international competition, said Miss California USA spokesman Roger Neal. 'They are going over the legalities and clearly she breached her contract,' Neal said. 'When you compete for Miss California, you're supposed to disclose whether you posed for nude or semi-nude photos because it's grounds for disqualification.' The spokesman for Miss California USA provided CNN with a copy of the pageant contract Prejean signed last year agreeing that the discovery of semi-nude photos could mean disqualification."

In related news, TMZ reports: "The Miss Universe Organization just told us they've fired off a cease and desist letter to the National Organization for Marriage -- after NOM used footage from the Miss USA 2009 pageant in an anti-gay marriage commercial. The commercial -- which is currently still playing on NOM's website -- uses Carrie Prejean's pageant response to the gay marriage question as a selling point for the ad. This doesn't mean the MUO is taking sides on the issue -- just saying NOM can't use the copyrighted material to promote their agenda."

Meanwhile, NOM's Maggie Gallagher released a statement yesterday calling the treatment of Prejean "character assassination":

"“Because Carrie honestly said what she believed in answer to a question--marriage is the union of a man and a woman-- she is now the subject of ongoing character assassination. The level of hatred directed at her is astonishing. Even more astonishing is her personal courage and strength of character in the midst of these attacks. Of course Carrie is not perfect. 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. Nothing gay marriage advocates can do can change the fact—we all saw it on national TV—that Carrie is a young woman who surrendered all the glitter Hollywood has to offer, because she would not become the kind of person afraid to say the truth. Through Carrie, we are also learning, the lengths some people will go to hurt and harass those who speak up for marriage.”

Keith Olbermann takes on the Miss California photo debate, and touches on 'Joe the Plumber''s recent remarks as well, AFTER THE JUMP...

Feed This post's comment feed


  1. Hmmmm. On the one hand, she's a homophobic "Christian" bigot.

    On the other hand, she's clearly in violation of the terms of the contract she signed.

    The conservatards' heads must be on the verge of exploding. Which is more sacred to the political smegma of American society - bigotry or contracts?

    Tough call for the Talibaptists.

    Posted by: JACKNASTY | May 6, 2009 7:33:45 AM

  2. Such photo's taken at age 17 constitute child pornography don't they? If this was a 17 year old male, nude, with say a cutoff tank top and his hands covering his genitals, wouldn't there be some sort of charges sought?

    In any event, posing in sexually provocative photos does not indicate a high moral standard by Ms. Prejean. I would suggest, like so many evangelical "Christian" loons, her morality is highly selective.

    Posted by: Bob R | May 6, 2009 8:06:58 AM

  3. She brought all this attention on herself. She could have turned down all the interviews, etc. by saying her words at the pageant spoke her beliefs, however, she has been on every morning news show, the “700 Club”, working with NOM, and has been praised and paraded around churches (at least in the San Diego area) as almost the second coming of the virgin Mary, a pure Christian girl who was in a beauty pageant. These pictures show almost the hypocricy of it all. To top all that, as far as I know, California pageant officials haven’t been able to get ahold of her since the Miss USA pageant. She put herself in this position, milking it just like any other so-called 15 minute ‘celeb’. It will eventually go away, but her reputation has been tarnished. She is not pure as snow as the theocrats wanted us to believe. Right or wrong, she planted the seed, now she’ll have to take it’s growth.

    She has stated that "We have to be strong and true to our faith and our beliefs", so my question is, why is she cherry-picking the Bible? Why do they all cherry-pick the Bible? In a theocracy, women would have no rights, they couldn't hold office, they would be completely covered from head to toe with a single type of material, if adultery was committed, it would be a death sentence for both the male and female, they wouldn't eat shellfish - this is all in the Bible. It is hypocritical for these so-called religious zealots (male and female) to state that the Bible says that being gay is a sin, or that gay marriage is wrong because it states it in the Bible, when everyday they are not following the Bible as written. In some ways I feel sorry for Carrie Prejean, especially her ignorance, but as I stated above, I feel she brought this on herself. Yes, Perez Hilton spouted off on his blog, but it would have died out, instead, she paraded herself around, literally, as a devote, pure Christian woman who follows the Bible. Those who use the Bible for bigotry and hate are all hypocrits.

    If she loses her crown it will end up being everyone elses fault, not hers, and you know the far right and NOM will be all over that!

    Posted by: CB | May 6, 2009 8:11:27 AM

  4. Well she doesn't have the star quality of Vanessa Williams so her 15 minutes should come and go quickly. She breached her contract she should go!

    Posted by: RB | May 6, 2009 8:18:02 AM

  5. WHY is this NOT being prosecuted as child pornography. Please, some DA, please press charges.

    Posted by: galore | May 6, 2009 8:22:32 AM

  6. Bob R stated: Such photo's taken at age 17 constitute child pornography don't they? If this was a 17 year old male, nude, with say a cutoff tank top and his hands covering his genitals, wouldn't there be some sort of charges sought?


    Not necessarily...I don't understand all the legalities, but these would be considered artistic, like the Miley Cyrus photo where she was basically the same way. You have mainstream movies where you might see a young tush...that too is not considered child pornography. Pornography for the most part deals with a sexual act. Again I am not certain, but that is what I understand.

    Also, many people are led to believe that 18 is the age of consent for sex, but that depends on the state. California is one of the FEW states that 18 is the law.

    Most sites/TV stations won't post the full pic of her, because she stated she was 17 at the time and they fear retribution. If they can prove that she was older than 17 then the gloves will be off, because she will then be a liar as well (although she did lie on her Miss California contract).

    Everyone has become fearful (heck, look at the Coppertone girl now compared to the past...pitiful).

    Posted by: CB | May 6, 2009 8:30:32 AM

  7. So, telling the truth is "character assassination", but repeating the same tired lies about a group is "speaking honestly"?

    Posted by: RJAM | May 6, 2009 8:58:59 AM

  8. Honestly Andy? Stop posting about her. Let her 15 minutes end, for God's sake!

    Posted by: John | May 6, 2009 9:06:00 AM

  9. First she says models have to pose for pictures; now she says the pictures were not meant for disclosure to the general public.

    Dig yourself in a little deeper and thankfully you will be out of the general public viewing. WHO CARES ABOUT PAGENTS!

    Posted by: Mary from Iowa | May 6, 2009 9:17:22 AM

  10. Remember when Andy said he would stop talking about her a couple days after this story broke?


    Posted by: Ugh | May 6, 2009 9:53:42 AM

  11. What kind of professional model takes her own pictures in the bathroom? (Note the skin care products strewn about in the bottom left-hand corner.)

    Posted by: another matt | May 6, 2009 9:58:50 AM

  12. I regret standing by my word, even as a teen. Seems that was never required and I could have done/said whatever I want. If caught later, I could have tossed it off as a "youthful indiscretion." Maybe someone would have paid for cosmetic surgery for me.

    Posted by: Larry Scott | May 6, 2009 10:00:37 AM

  13. I am tired of hearing of her as well but I think the tie in to NOM makes it relevant here.

    Last week was the first time I heard someone refer to these pageants as reality shows, but that's what they are, nothing more. Treating these contestants, and the winners, as being special, should be offensive to the religious right but that would not serve their purpose. I find no value in watching these events, and find the Westminster dog show so much more interesting.

    Since these pageants are so focused on beauty, it's amazing how irrelevant natural beauty is. Her tits are fake, her hair is bleached, no doubt the teeth are capped. I propose she [and all other contestants] be muzzled.

    Posted by: Ted | May 6, 2009 10:35:48 AM

  14. The truth is that if this girl had been treated with basic human respect (you know -- that stuff we all want), she wasn't so far gone that she couldn't have been won over and served as an example of enlightened thinking for our side of the issue.

    But it's not really about winning hearts and minds over, is it?

    It's about a sick game of "war" where certain misogynistic gay men get an excuse to bash a beautiful young woman that they're probably jealous of.

    Oh, if only she were a Mormon, what fun could be had trying to destroy this girl!

    Good Karma for all of you.

    Posted by: paul c | May 6, 2009 11:07:21 AM

  15. RB

    I totally agree. This hypocrit doesn't have one ounce of actual talent like Vanessa Williams to fall back on. Her time is soon up for good.

    Posted by: jimmyboyo | May 6, 2009 11:27:07 AM

  16. Paul C said: "It's about a sick game of "war" where certain misogynistic gay men get an excuse to bash a beautiful young woman that they're probably jealous of."

    Did you honestly type that with a straight face? Does stupid come naturally to you, or do you take pills for it??????

    Posted by: troschne | May 6, 2009 11:48:49 AM

  17. I usually don't waste my time commenting on this media garbage gone wild but this one has me bewildered. In this day and age where everyone pushes you to be true to yourself and others here is a prime example where someone did but not to the acceptance of the individual asking the question. Now it's like an all out man hunt of negativity towards miss California. Why must her right to freely choose her answer be replaced by angry cohersive strong arming. Now as if no one would have expected racy photos show up out of the blue. Can you seriously make a compareative difference between that 17 year olds photo and the near naked swimsuits these woman are made to wear in these pagents.. P.S we re all just making her famous.

    Posted by: Ernesto | May 6, 2009 11:53:10 AM

  18. Just when you think Paul C can't get more of the stick up his ass .......

    Posted by: Tralfaz | May 6, 2009 11:55:37 AM

  19. @Troschne - actually, no, I typed that with my fingers, not my gay face.

    So you don't think this Prejean bashing is like lions playing with their prey? This is a young, not particularly bright girl, who is being eviscerated by a million bitchy gay men.

    Do you think this helps our cause? It sets it back.

    Would you care to assign a legitimate motivation to the reaction this girl gets as opposed to oh, I don't know....a man who says the same thing and then gets elected president courtesy of millions of gay people's votes?

    Posted by: paul c | May 6, 2009 11:57:21 AM

  20. That was a great interview. Can we get Melissa Harris-Lacewell to be our spoke person?

    As for Joe the plumber, I say let him keep on speaking, the more he does, the more middle America sees what a douche he is.

    As for Miss CA. LOL Karma is a bitch.

    I recall when Vanessa Williams lost her crown, I thought it was bull shit, as did many of my gay and straight friends. The ones who were calling for her head were these right wing religious freaks.

    I can't wait to see what the spin is when it's one of their own. Do you think posing like that is a good role model for their little girls? Oh yea, it's only bad when it's Madonna or Britney.

    Posted by: patrick nyc | May 6, 2009 11:58:06 AM

  21. @Tralfaz - yes, I have a stick up my ass about hypocrisy, bullying and misogyny. Sorry I suck as a human being. Go back to spreading your hate now.

    Posted by: paul c | May 6, 2009 11:59:29 AM

  22. As far as Andy posting things about this bimbo--I was sort of under the impression that after her initial pageant statement and guest shots he would stop posting about her, because it was all redundant and she didn't need any more publicity. HOWEVER, this is news and not publicity for her. This new information is about the dark side (which we all suspected) and legal actions and hypocrisy. She's a bought-for, failed beauty queen whose beauty is all on the outside and nothing on the inside. She's a better packaged fish wife -- kinda like Sarah Palin: Shrill and obnoxious, not graceful and intelligent.

    Oh, and Miss Saggy Maggie Gallagher. A skunk smells it own hole first. Get your head out of your ass. You started the character assassination--you don't want a fight then stay out of it, cow.

    Posted by: woodroad34 | May 6, 2009 12:09:32 PM

  23. you know what Paul? You go right ahead and defend the poor defenseless twit. But just remember: she chose to dive right into the melee and extend the news cycle spouting her bigotry and lies about "preserving marriage". The fact remains that her religious-based bigotry is a choice while my homosexuality is not; and since I'm to be deprived of civil rights I have more than enough cause to speak out against her hypocrisy, ignorance and hate-mongering any chance I can get. If insults get hurled along the way don't be surprised: many in our community have had ENOUGH.

    Posted by: ZnSD | May 6, 2009 12:27:16 PM

  24. Yes, Paul C. Everyone else is a horrible misogynistic, bitchy queen and you are perfect and infallible. You like looking down your nose? This woman (she is NOT a girl) is not beautiful. SHE chose to continue with her 'platform' after the pageant and violate her contract. Honestly I don't think these photos are worth her loosing her crown. The fact that she has abandoned the Special Olympics for 'Opposite marriage,' and has been doing a media tour without the consent of Miss California org (as stipulated in her contract) is exactly why she should loose her crown.
    And I think it is only doing us good that this is staying in the national conversation. The more this is heard and talked about the more 'normalized' this whole issue becomes and the more likely marriage equality will happen in our lifetime.

    Posted by: Mr. E | May 6, 2009 12:42:24 PM

  25. @ Paul - Honey you just keep spreading that manure dear. You do such a good job at it.

    Posted by: Tralfaz | May 6, 2009 12:43:09 PM

  26. 1 2 3 »

Post a comment


« «Attitude Gets Naked« «