• @krayj@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    English
    1211 months 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 The entire notion of beauty pageants is outdated and stupid if you ask me.

    • @dustyData@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      English
      1011 months 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.

    • Move to lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      English
      111 months 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
        6
        edit-2
        11 months 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.