Regardless as to why I was tuned to that particular station, there I was. The host was talking about the recent li'l to-do over Miss California in the Miss USA pageant saying something stupid (What? Something stupid from a beauty pageant contestant? No way!). Apparently, Perez Hilton was one of the judges, and he got to ask Miss CA a question.
"Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?" Her answer? "I think it's great that Americans are able to choose one or the other. We live in a land that you can choose same-sex marriage or opposite marriage and, you know what, in my country and my family I think that I believe that a marriage should be between a man and a woman. No offense to anyone out there but that's how I was raised and that's how I think it should be between a man and a woman."
Now, let's ignore for the moment the fact that she thinks it's called "opposite marriage," and move right along.
The radio show host I was listening to played the clip and then went on for a few minutes about Perez Hilton's presence at the Miss USA pageant.
Apparently, having gay men there, looking at and judging women in gowns and bikinis is, according to the host (I didn't catch his name), perverted. In his day, he said, you would just have young sexy women on stage to be judged to see who the prettiest gal in the country was.
How is that not perverted? Personally, regardless of whether or not Miss California's answer was awesome, not-awesome, hateful, or idyllic, I think it's good that we've got Perez and other folks there not just to take mental pictures to "enjoy" later. Having homosexual males there [the host said he "totally would understand if we were talking about lesbians"] makes the whole thing seem, in a way, LESS disturbing. In a way, it sort of legitimizes the whole thing.
Anyway, the guy on the radio was a perv. That's my point.