Rhetorically Speaking: The Prejean / Hilton Fiasco, Lesson 2

Irony, Hypocrisy and Honesty: A Cautionary Tale

As a teacher of rhetoric and composition, I discuss rhetoric with my students during almost every class. I point out how we've heard the word "rhetoric" bantered about during every election and in every debate imaginable. But what is rhetoric and how do we present ourselves using it?

The problem with rhetoric is that it is a very tricky thing. It is relative, both "good" and "bad" (words which are themselves relative to a situation and a person). To better understand the wholeness of rhetoric, all that it entails, I encourage my students, friends and people in general to look at the actual rhetoric (the words and actions of a person, group or situation and what is said by the totality of such). To illustrate what we, as Americans and as a world need to more clearly understand the overarching power of rhetoric and how it can define us is to examine somethig before jumping on a bandwagon (mor on that in later lessons).

For now, let's look briefly and rhetorically, at the rhetoric of Miss California 2009—Carrie Prejean—who not so long ago answered a question posed by the insufferable Perez Hilton. That question and answer, as we all recall, was as follows:

Hilton: "Vermont recently became the fourth state to legalize same-sex marriage. Do you think every state should follow suit? Why or why not?"

Prejean: "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."