• krayj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    I think it would have been fair to have a rule saying “no surgical modifications”… because doing things like facelift, nose-job, breast/buttox implants, cheek lifts, wrinkle removal, etc, are obviously unfair advantages (in a beauty contest) for those who have the money pay for it; and having a generic blanket rule like that would have accomplished the same thing they were trying to accomplish without being so blatantly transphobic… so a rule like what they have only proves that they are both despicable AND dumb. The entire notion of beauty pageants is outdated and stupid if you ask me.

    • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think it would have been fair to have a rule saying “no surgical modifications”…

      How are you intending to prove that that? Only the bad surgery makes itself obvious.

      • krayj@lemmy.world
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        0
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Like any kind of contest, finding rules violations is hard and not foolproof. It’s like sports that forbid using steroids - competitors do regularly take those substances while training, then quit taking them for competition and go uncaught. Competitors who are discovered later to have been violating rules are stripped of titles.

        That said, I don’t think it’s a very controversial concept that a beauty pageant shouldn’t be a contest about who could afford the best surgeons. Well - as I said earlier I think beauty pageants are absurd to begin with, but if they have to exist I don’t think it should be a contest between surgeons.

        • Deuces@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          Though I would watch one that was a contest between surgeons. I imagine it’d start pretty tame, but the first time a girl with cat ears wins, were only like 5 years from the really crazy shit

        • Move to lemm.ee@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          ·
          1 year ago

          They are absurd and it’ll probably be a good thing when we’ve got past their existence. But the problem here is that proving surgery is essentially impossible. It’s quite unlike drugs that you can test for. Maybe implants you could test for but that’s just one thing, and I’m not sure that beauty pageants even have the kind of budget required for advanced tests.

          • Syrc@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            English
            arrow-up
            0
            ·
            edit-2
            1 year ago

            One of the contest’s rules says you can’t participate if you willingly had a nude photo took in your lifetime. Good luck proving that (not even considering how it’s a honeypot for revenge porn to surface)

    • dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      1 year ago

      Lol, you implement that and basically all beauty pageants stop existing. Which would be a good thing, mind you. But I’ve never met a pageant contestant in my life that isn’t … let’s say … heavily enhanced by medical procedures.

    • Flying Squid@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      0
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      On the one hand, that might work. On the other hand, who gives a fuck about the rules in a contest with arbitrary standards?