In case you’ve not followed the story:

• During recent Miss USA pageant, Miss California USA was asked whether or not she believed in gay marriage. She said she believed marriage was between a man and a woman.
• Media coverage claimed that her rejection of gay marriage likely cost her the Miss USA crown. The question was posed by a gay rights activist judge.
• Later, suggestive photographs were released revealing Miss California had posed in bikini bottoms with an open top which showed bare breasts in some of the photos.
• Upon review by pageant officials and its owner, Donald Trump, it has been determined that Miss CA would be entitled to retain her crown and continue her duties.

Much speculation regarding Miss CA’s opinions has revolved around the falsehoods associated with the semi-nude photos. It is believed that her opponents, those supporting marriage rights for gay couples are exploiting her opinions by using not one set of provocative photos, but now two.

More likely than not, the real challenge here is not the expression of her beliefs but the fact that she lied about the photographs. Many a beauty queen has been exploited or exposed prior to and since becoming a crowned champion of a pageant. Within the Miss Universe beauty pageant system, contestants are required to agree with and sign a 12 page contract which amongst other tenets asks them directly if they have posed for nude photographs. For any reason.

This years Miss California flatly said, “NO”. By signing those documents, she indicated she had not posed for any potentially infringing photographs. Of course, once they were released, the press conferences ensued, where the beauty pageant winner explains that she was unaware that the photos were actually being taken.

What is unclear is how this might be true. If, like Mr. Trump, one “carefully studies” the photographs, it is rather clear the model was, well, modeling for the camera. Her response to this then became that she never intended those images to be “public”.

Which is perfectly acceptable, disregarding her shift in the explanation. The next challenge comes when a second set of nude photos surface. This time Miss CA indicates that the images were “photoshopped” and that she never posed nude in them.

Ironically, even with the rules in place to theoretically prevent these types of situations from occurring, occur they did. In what is sure to be seen as the bottom line challenge for this and similar competitions is the fact that the stated rules were allowed to be waived by the people who stand to gain the most.

Are we placing too much emphasis on beauty and then countermanding it when other various standards may be considered to be compromised? Obviously, your answer to this question will depend upon whether you believe “institutions” like beauty pageants are legitimate competitions that prove some intrinsic value to the participants and the competitions observers.

Many are unfamiliar with the organizations behind the beauty pageant industry. Yes, it is indeed an industry. This recent hoopla has to do with the “Miss Universe” organization, which in the United States manifests itself as the Miss USA competition. State level competitive winners are referred to as Miss (State name) USA.

The reasoning behind this nomenclature is to distinguish the participants from the “Miss America” competition. In this highly competitive business of beauty pageants, the Miss America competition is unfortunately losing market share. Why? Mostly due to the reason that once a contestant wins the top title, she has nowhere left to go. With the Miss Universe organization, Miss USA is able to go on and compete against winners of other countries.

Another likely reason has to do with talent. Or rather lack thereof. Miss America pageants require contestants to actually have some verifiable and competitive talents. Miss USA only requires external beauty and some ability to communicate relatively intelligently.

Given that the talentless competition is winning out, are we placing too much emphasis on external beauty and not enough on what really matters?