The Slut Shaming of Carrie Prejean

Leftatalbuquerque wrote:

I've always wondered about sexual labelling, as sexual activity tends to involve other people! How can a girl be chaste while a guy is experienced? Who is he "being experienced" with?

Judged:

2

2

2

Rick Ramos wrote:

Who should really be shamed is Womanist Musings for writing this dribble.

Rick Ramos wrote:

Had she not been so “biblical” in her views, the sex tape revelation would have been met with a yawn. This is why she is being shamed.

Judged:

4

3

3

Sei wrote:

Carrie Prejean is an example of the "do as I say, not as I do" mentality of so many people. It is wrong for others to be in love and have relationships, but it is alright for her to make a sex tape.
I do not condemn her for being a woman, having sexual needs, or for any of the actions she has partaken of except that they conflict with her decisions to push other people into a belief system that she, herself, will not abide by.

Judged:

3

3

2

Windy City Player wrote:

Carrie is an awesome American and the attacks on her just prove that the GLBT community is full of hate and intolerance of others views. All she said was her opinion that marriage should be between a man and woman, and she was attacked by the gay Hilton.

Judged:

4

4

4

Sei wrote:

<quoted text>
It has been pointed out that David Letterman had no negative fall out from his affair because he has never pretended to be overly moral.

Judged:

3

3

3

Windy City Player wrote:

<quoted text>
A sex tape according to the far left media, I haven't seen this tape or even any pictures of stills from it. Does it even exist? And how does this make her a hypocrite? She is straight and unless she was with another girl I don't think it devalues her statement of marriage should be man/woman...

Judged:

3

3

3

Craig in OKC wrote:

<quoted text> And had the been the end of it, she probably would have come away relatively unscathed. Many gay sites and blogs condemned Perez. I personally condemned him.
BUT, she then decided to make herself the moral spokesperson. She went to rallies condemning gays. She joined forces with those who were trying to take away gay rights. That's when she really opened herself up. Oh, and she did all of this whil ignoring her legal obligations to the pageant committee. That's why she was sued, remember.
And that's why she's being condemned for this sex tape. You can't set yourself up as morally superior and not expect to be vilified if you fall from grace.
However, as is quite apparent from this - all one has to do is spout anti-gay views and they will be canonized by the religous right. It matters not what else they do. This is apparent with how the right has defended Larry Craig, Ted Haggard and many others. It doesn't matter what your personal activity it, as long as you continue to vilify the gays.

Windy City Player wrote:

<quoted text>
I thought she was the spokesperson for marriage, not morals. You're right she attacked gays like she was attacked by a gay, but I didn't see her attacking all people who say.. had sex before marriage....That would be wrong. We all know she was a target because of her views, that's where it stated, and that's wrong. You have views on life I'm sure, would you like to be attacked and life ripped apart because a group doesn't agree with you? What's going on with this issue is plain wrong on both sides.

Judged:

2

2

2

Windy City Player wrote:

<quoted text>
A sex tape according to the far left media, I haven't seen this tape or even any pictures of stills from it. Does it even exist? And how does this make her a hypocrite? She is straight and unless she was with another girl I don't think it devalues her statement of marriage should be man/woman...

Judged:

3

3

2

Windy City Player wrote:

<quoted text>
Wasn't this the scummbag who was making fun of Palin's daughter and her sexual habits? I love how liberals get caught is sex scandals and it's O.K because they don't have values, but if a conservative person gets caught they are hypocrites because they do. Maybe we should all have no morals or values and then we can do whatever we want!

Judged:

3

3

2

Windy City Player wrote:

<quoted text>
I thought she was the spokesperson for marriage, not morals. You're right she attacked gays like she was attacked by a gay, but I didn't see her attacking all people who say.. had sex before marriage....That would be wrong. We all know she was a target because of her views, that's where it stated, and that's wrong. You have views on life I'm sure, would you like to be attacked and life ripped apart because a group doesn't agree with you? What's going on with this issue is plain wrong on both sides.