This Is Why We Can’t Have Nice Things, America

But would it be so hard to get some intelligent, educated women in the mix?

Speaking as an educated (and I hope at least somewhat intelligent) woman, yes, it would be. You see, women (and men) who enjoy knowledge tend to have first been girls who enjoyed knowledge. These girls will have probably spent a tad bit more time in the library than in the beauty salon. Pageants are a full time job for many girls. Many are coming out of the horrifically sick child-pageant world or at the very least teen-beauty contests. This is a universe that selects exclusively for physical beauty and the ability to giggle cloyingly. It’s no wonder it attracts airheads. Now to be fair high intelligence is not easy to come by and neither is extraordinary beauty, so the combination of both in a beauty contest is highly unlikely. There are stunningly beautiful incredibly smart women, but they become authors, professors, scientists etc. They go where their intellect is valued and their beauty is merely a plus.

Though I’m guessing that if the interview portion of this tedious little contest where as significant as, say, the swimsuit event, you’d suddenly find these smiling girls a hell of a lot more knowledgable on academic subjects. Being really smart and well-read is simply not very important to a beauty queen, so you don’t see very many smart and well-read ones

My teeth hurt by the 2:30 mark. This is horrifying. I’m embarrassed for them.

Sad…so sad…American scientific ignorance will be a major factor in the decline of the nation. Tragic…

Claudia is spot on.

“I accidentally caught five minutes last night just in time to hear the “history geek” back up that claim by saying “I watch The Tudors and Game of Thrones”.

Oh, that’s classic… I mean, The Tudors is atleast historical fiction but Game of Thrones? Really?

I fully agree with Claudia. Women that are beautiful and highly intelligent would most likely NOT spend much time in pageants. I also agree with TikiCricket. SMH…

History geek? Psh. I’m an alternate history geek.

Jokes aside, it’s not worth listening to these people talk. They’re undeniably hot, but they’re also often unintelligent. It’s probably because their looks mean they don’t have an incentive to work hard academically, since they can get rich without having to. Of course there are attractive intellectuals and I am part of that number (just kidding), but the sad fact is that it’s often the case that there aren’t enough beautiful AND smart people to go around.

Adam Says:
June 20th, 2011 at 12:57 pm

You know, at least she realizes those are loosely based on history. I’m sure half of American thinks it’s some Lord of the Rings fantasy story.

Do you mean that Game of Thrones is loosely based on history? I thought it was set in some other universe or some other planet or something… (I’ve never read or seen it yet, I do have plans to watch it, though).

Robert L, I deny that they are hot.

I watched the whole thing… oh god… why did I watch it???? OF COURSE it has to be taught in schools!… I don’t know what to say… -_- It’s just… ughhh. I give up on humans…

Nathan, yes, you are crazy. We should teach ID alongside evolution the same as we should teach the history of faery alongside human history, same as we should teach sociology of the Ood alongside human psychology, same as we should teach …. you get my drift. We should not teach fairy tales as possible fact in school. We should teach what we KNOW is true. And we know evolution is true (it is the mechanics of it that are somewhat disputed). Period.

I do think the Catholic way is better than any of the others in that they do accept all the bits and pieces of evolution as scientific fact — they just add the little caveat that “god did it.” I say, fine, to that because at least the child who has been taught this way has a scientific foundation from which it can build (and also deconstruct the whole ‘hand of god’ bit). The child who is taught “either or” must instead completely deny all of what it’s been taught about creation/ID if that is what his teachers or parents believe. It’s a lot easier to get rid of one small thorn than it is to eradicate a whole forest of thorny trees.

And for crying out loud, can we please stop paying the tiniest bit of attention to these ridiculous pageants. Perhaps then they’ll go away? Yes?

I think I liked Miss Vermont’s answer best, but ugh. That was painful to watch.

Interesting clip, but the title leaves me cold. “This is why we can’t have nice things…” Seems to confuse a symptom with a cause. Surely the levels of ignorance and anti-rational orientation displayed in the videos are a result of a system, not the cause of our problems. And would the answers be that different from Members of Congress?

Why can’t we have “nice things?” How about a permanent war economy, massive income inequality, concentrated wealth, low taxes on the rich and corporations, low minimum wage, no real jobs program, crappy infrastructure, schools starved of funds and talent…

The list goes on, but which are causes and which are symptoms?

I didn’t even have to watch it to know how painful it was going to be.

And let’s not forget this tidbit: The Miss USA and Miss Universe pageants are both owned by – wait for it – Donald Trump!

Yet another reason why these “beauty” pageants should be tossed onto the scrap heap of history.

BTW, there’s been a discussion about kiddie beauty pageants over at Atheist Nexus if anyone’s interested…

But would it be so hard to get some intelligent, educated women in the mix?

Uh, yes. That’s not really the sort of thing an intelligent, educated woman is interested in doing.

Why can’t I ever pass up a dare??? You owe me 14 minutes and 48 seconds!

I wish they would have put the contestant’s university majors up when they were speaking… I shudder to think that any of these women are education majors. I was simply floored that ALL of them had no idea that evolution is in every set of state science standards (at least I hope it is… I need to check this), and that it is illegal, thankfully, in most states to teach faith-based explanations like intelligent design in the science classroom.

Nathan, yes, you are crazy. We should teach ID alongside evolution the same as we should teach the history of faery alongside human history, same as we should teach sociology of the Ood alongside human psychology, same as we should teach …. you get my drift.

A Dr. Who reference!! Brings out the scifi geek in me 🙂

Miss Washington: Facts but not those “little” theories :gah!!!! Almost 15 minutes and 50 states worth of stupid; I think my head is going to explode now

Yes @Steve. Most of them answered ‘yes’ with the obvious assumption that it would only be fair to teach the other side. The ‘other’ side being evolution. AL was the only one I saw in a spot check that flat out said ‘no’ to teaching evolution.

That ‘teach the controversy’ thing has obviously been a huge win for the IDiots.

That was almost a 14 minute facepalm.

Highlights:

“I think evolution should be taught in schools. We have creationi..tism and a lot of other ideas and opinions that are taught to the children. I think everybody should be able to have their opinion taught, however I think it’s the parents and the family who should be able to be there for the children to guide them in what their beliefs are as a family and as individuals.” – Angela Byrd (23) of Hawaii

Everyone should have their opinion taught!? FACEPALM.

“I think it’s great to get both sides of the story. I’m, personally, a Christian so I believe the Bible’s version, but you can’t push opinions or beliefs on children, so they need to know every side that’s out there. So, yes, I do believe that should be taught, but so should the other side of the story.” – Brittany York (21) North Carolina

Tell that to your preacher and your parents, Miss York.

Claudia is right. Primping and prepping to enhance one’s sex appeal takes time, and doing it to the level that these women have takes a lot of time. Likewise, studying and thinking to enhance one’s mental base also takes time, and for a woman who’s a scientist or a mathematician or non-beauty-professional, it takes a lot of time. You might have beauty pageant contestants who could be learned if they took the time, and scientists who could be extremely beautiful if they took the time, but if a woman tries to be both every single day, she’s not going to have a hell of a lot of time for anything else. Like, say, kids, or camping, or reading for pleasure, or playing with her dog, or any other ‘free time’ pursuits.

It only took 1 minute before I started bleeding from my ears. Damn you Hemant! They’re good looking but when they speak I can’t see them through the stupid.

I don’t know about other provinces in Canada (or other Albertan cities/towns for that matter) but our school taught evolution as early as grade 6. Possibly earlier but certainly grade 6 and that was almost thirty years ago. I couldn’t forget that because, as the Pentecostal pastor’s son, I was one of only two or three students who had a note allowing me to miss that class disallowing me from learning about evolution.

It seems like they were all given the same script, or the same outline of a script, and were told to put it in their own words. They all said almost exactly the same thing, even down to choice of words. Most of mentioned some variation of “choose their own beliefs”, “teach both sides of the story”, “important to get both perspectives”, and other such phrases that I’m unwilling to go back and watch in order to remember.

As an aside, I liked Miss Nevada’s answer, out of pure hilarity. She obviously had no idea what was meant by “evolution”, but she still managed to talk about the evolution of a community. I also liked Miss Connecticut’s answer of “Yes, evolution should be taught in schools” with nothing else, although that could just me being biased in favor of my home state.

Miss New Mexico’s response was also pretty good (ignoring the grammatical mistakes).

I think evolution should be taught in schools because evolution is based off of science, and I think science is a huge thing that we need to continue to enrich our schools with.

Criticizing Miss America for being stupid is as pointless as criticizing Stephen Hawking for being ugly. That quality is irrelevant to her role as beauty queen.

Their answers were so similar – I wonder if they produce these delegates in some factory.

I got 10 minutes in until I facepalm’d and gave up. School isn’t about teaching opinions, school is about teaching the way it is.

Most of them are educated and aren’t of below average intelligence. Perhaps that’s the scary part.

@Tim as of 1984, my bio teacher (a JW) was able to get away with skipping evolution. Province wide standardized tests were being brought back the next year, so I’m assuming that’s no longer the case.

As it was, my History 12 substitute teacher forgot to teach us anything about the Viet Nam War, which hurt a few peoples’ grades if they didn’t know it otherwise.

That same teacher (History, not Biology) tried to explain that Animal Farm was about Facism in South Africa. And that ‘Sitzkrieg’ was just another pronunciation of Blitzkrieg.

I came to appreciate that being wrong isn’t so bad as refusing to accept that you might be wrong.

I want to know exactly how the question was phrased to each of them. Too many of the answers were too similar for it so simply have been “Do you believe evolution should be taught in schools?” and it sounds like they threw in something about teaching the controversy/both sides just to prime the pump, so to speak.

That could be my unwarranted optimism kicking in, though…

Thank you, Miss Connecticut.

No bullshit. No qualification with “well, because, y’know” crap. Just a straight-up answer: Yes.

Why didn’t she win?

It hurts. Literary. I have a clenching pain around my chest/heart-region. Why did you make me watch that? Why?! You’re evil, AS EVIL AS CAPS LOCK.

The thing is though, I thought they would be even more off. Most of them are actually for teaching evolution. They are for it for all the wrong reasons…

It made me think it possible… yes, I now fear the reason there are so many teen pregnancies in the world today is that people choose to believe the theory of stork reproduction. After all, shouldn’t people be allow to believe what they want?

Ok, made it…*deep breath*…Miss Nevada’s handlers clearly prepared her for this question; she looked so pleased with herself, “Nevada evolved…” Miss Indiana (my home state) wow…just wow. I was holding out for Miss Vermont, figured she would be sensible and she came through, more or less. Finally, I would have hoped that by the 21st century, we would have EVOLVED past myth and legend; guess not.

Miss Idaho on evolution –

“You should be knowledged about it.”

palm to my face

I tried to watch it, but had to give up midway… it was just plain torture. I didn’t know if I should laugh or cry – why not give a simple yes or no answer, and not try to act smart with crappy explanations!

I wish people would say that they “know” science related things, but nothing is wrong with them saying that they “believe” them or even that they believe in them. Anything that you think that you know, you also believe. “Believe” does sound a bit qualified, but it really doesn’t have any implication of faith. “Believe in” is a bit different, but it’s still fine to “believe in” a scientific theory. If I say “I believe in myself” or “I believe in the theory of evolution” it just means that I have confidence–faith, if you insist–in myself or the theory of evolution. Believing in science is having confidence in the scientific method.

It’s apparent that most of these women (just like the majority of people in America) have no clue what evolution is really about. I stopped watching at the halfway mark, but out of everyone I saw, I think Kansas had the best answer.

Miss Connecticut’s answer was the only one that impressed me. Simple and to the point: “I do think it should be taught in school.”

Does anybody here have a suggestion of a book similar in scope to The Selfish Gene which covers current understanding of evolution (while not going too far above the head of a well-read layman, such as myself)?

While it doesn’t go into modern genetics, “The Greatest Show on Earth” is an excellent book, also by Dawkins, that goes step by step through the core evidence for evolution. Obviously it can’t get into everything, but it covers quite a lot of ground. If you understood the Selfish Gene, this book will not be a problem.

I should note, as a biochemist, that the gene-driven (as opposed to individual driven) view of evolution is not without controversy within the scientific community. Though it is of course accepted that evolution is reflected in the varying frequency of gene alleles over time, many still argue in favor of the true “action” of selection happening at the level of the individual organism, which is the one that lives or dies, reproduces or not. I’m agnostic on the matter, having not read the literature, though I lean towards the Dawkins model.

One of them actually said the government should decide…What? She also seemed not to realize that it is already taught in school..WOW…Sad

@bloomc,

This is an atheist blog; we tend to focus on the attacks against teaching evolution by religious believers, among other issues. And those attacks are ongoing, believe me. Peruse the archives if you’re curious.

I’m glad you’re a theist who doesn’t see evolutionary theory as controversial, but unfortunately those like you are in short supply. Far more visible are the minority who DO find the theory of evolution an “attack” on their beliefs and do what they can to dilute or eliminate its being taught.

Bloomc, I was kind of with you until you said, re creationism:

(Although, some of you are a little confused about what we believe and teach.)

You have made the same fundamental mistake that most of the Miss USA candidates made: evolution is not a religious belief.

Atheists aren’t “confused” about what creationists believe and teach; you are confused if you think that there is a valid, evidence-based version of creationism. I have heard many different versions of creationism from many different people and traditions. My favourite creation story is about how the kangaroo got its pouch.

I have a great fondness for indigenous creation myths, which I believe should be taught in schools. But they are not any kind of competition to the scientific theories of gravity, geology and evolution. There is no “controversy”, only ignorance.

By the way, I interpret the Genesis ‘Adam and Eve in the garden’ story is not so much a creation myth, as a “how society became agricultural” myth. The creation of Adam and Eve is really just setting the scene: the story arc is all about the transition from nomadic life to agriculture.

The first genesis creation story really doesn’t say more than invoke a spirit who created everything. The fact that the details are directly contradicted in the next story tells you that even to the compilers of the Book of Genesis, the details are are not important.

God I hate these things. Makes me claim to be from another country.

First of all, Hemant, I sat through the whole thing, and damn that was painful. IMHO Vermont was the best:
“I think evolution should be taught in schools, because not everybody necessarily has the same religious background and it’s important to have scientific facts about the world. And we do know that evolution exists even on a small scale like with people and with bacteria that are becoming resistant to drugs and what not. So, might as well learn about it.”
Granted she wasn’t perfect, but compared to some of the other women (who didn’t know anything about evolution, or what a theory is, or why evolution and creationism are not simply differing viewpoints of equal validity as evolution is science and creationism is religion) she was brilliant.

Ugh, my brain hurts from watching that video. I facepalmed so many times while watching (and I watched the whole thing). So many of those women don’t get it- when it comes to science there is no contoversy! Evolution has huge amounts of evidence that supports it, and creationism is simply unscientific bullshit.

I have to agree with Claudia’s first comment. Beauty pageants like this one aren’t so concerned with the intelligence of their contestants, so you end up getting a lot of airheads.

Oh, and Miss Louisiana was pretty cute about it.

The generous part of me wants to say they were just being political and trying to please everyone and get votes.

The rest of me is screaming in pain and terror.

It’s hard to take anyone serious when their responses are all “you know, like” and “it’s like that thing, you know.”

Well, that’s just, like… your opinion, man. 😉

If you understand it so thoroughly, on what grounds do you disagree with it?

“You think it’s just coincidence that green plants make our air?
The explanation’s obvious: the leprechauns were there!
Don’t talk of photosynthesis, one theory you might find.
Teach leprechauns in science class! Let kids make up their mind!”

Read full poem here.

bloomc,

I hope you enjoy the discussions and the intellectual stimulation of having conversations with people who view life differently than yourself. Enjoy your time here on Earth for if you are right about the afterlife, then you will spend eternity sequestered with like-minded saved people worshiping and praising the Lord. The conversations might be a little dull.

Meanwhile, if you are right, the rest of us will be lounging around the lake (of fire) swapping stories and telling off-color jokes while teasing the Harpies.

@Saltyestelle
In a sense, I couldn’t agree more. These days everybody has a sense of entitlement and they think their opinion should be shoved on others. So, consequently, many issues have arose about what should be taught to students. However, as far as I’m concerned, even here deep within the Bible belt, evolution is still the only thing teachers have ever taught at my school. Whenever ID, creationism, etc., is spoken of it’s when a student brings it up. Of course religion is mentioned by the students sometimes and we all have an agreement towards this matter that is typically left silent, but that is really just because the majority of people here believe the same thing and there isn’t much need to oppose evolution out loud. Then again, I’ve gone to school in the same place my entire life, so I’m ignorant to the way in which schools in other areas in the country handle certain issues. It is a shame, though, assuming what you say is true, that evolution isn’t taught to students everywhere. It’s a major part of science, and in the least should be considered a very major part of the political world, since it is so often discussed and argued over. Ignorant people drive me nuts.

@ACN
I wasn’t trying to call my self a scholar in the subject. I just simply mean that I understand what evolution teaches. The grounds on which I disagree with it is based upon my religious beliefs. My faith teaches me that we will be presented with information that appears to be much more logical and make more sense than that which we know is true, thus far. It’s strictly a Biblical point of view, something that could never make sense to anyone that doesn’t agree with it. So, I don’t feel the need to explain too much since I know I will never win this argument. I have almost lost my faith before due to searching more in depth in to science, but I know with my own experience that every time I doubt it, I will soon be proven wrong to do so, by myself. Maybe I’m right, maybe I’m wrong, maybe I’m just stubborn. Everyone could say the same for every other person on this earth that believes something that doesn’t coincide with their own beliefs. My personal grounds for the decisions I make will never make sense to you, just as yours don’t always make sense to me. We should probably just agree to disagree, and then we can all come to a better understanding of one another. I apologize if I sound arrogant.

@Jeff P
You are quick with your words. It’s cunning. We don’t agree, but I admire your ability with humor that I don’t possess. It was slightly offensive but it actually made me laugh. I guess I set myself up for what you said.

And she acknowledges microevolution (which even Creationists accept) without mentioning macroevolution.

So, where’s the clearly defined line where ‘microevolution’ becomes ‘macroevolution’? That’s the reason using these terms are a bad idea. They’ve been perverted into creationist terms — a way to accept the easily observable and reproducible research while still denying common descent.

I can’t believe I watched that entire video. I nearly cried from all the logic fail. Oh, all perspectives should be taught? Like, say, white supremacy and the Greek creation myth? THOSE perspectives?

Can we dress them in revealing clothes?? Huh, can we?