By Chathushika Wijeyesinghe
The recently concluded Miss World 2025 contest sparked a discussion in Sri Lanka, seemingly for two reasons.
The first reason was the pre-hyped publicity given by the organizers. This hype lasted up to eight months. The second reason is that, after many years, Sri Lanka had its hopes high for the Sri Lankan contestant, fueled by the hype on social media.
There was praise, criticism, and a variety of views dispersed across the web and throughout the contest, ranging on such themes as the contestant’s choice of clothing, the selection process within Sri Lanka, and the contestant’s religious views.
Henry Kissinger defined diplomacy as “a new world order” and modern diplomacy as amounting to “the balance of power between the forces of war and peace.”
Modern diplomacy has splintered into several categories[1]. Pageant diplomacy could be discussed under soft power diplomacy.
Soft power diplomacy and pageants
Soft power is the ability to influence other nations through persuasion and attraction rather than through force. This influence is rooted in culture, the arts, and science. In diplomacy, soft power is cultivated through education, science, public, and digital diplomacy.
In exercising soft power countries would attempt to promote cultural products, host exchange, and educational programs, and advocate for democratic values and human rights.
The Miss World contest is considered as one of the most prominent beauty pageants in the world. Its official website describes it as such:
“The Miss World competition began in 1951 in the UK as a beauty pageant and quickly became an annual international event. It grew in popularity through the 20th century despite facing criticism and controversies, particularly from feminist groups. In the late 20th century, it expanded globally and introduced the “Beauty with a Purpose” initiative to focus on contestants’ charity work. The modern era has seen efforts to rebrand Miss World as empowering for women, emphasizing personal achievements and social contributions over physical appearance. Today, Miss World is one of the most recognized beauty contests, promoting diverse representations of beauty and humanitarian causes.”
Miss Universe, another such pageant, states in their website that they aim to promote confidence, leadership, and philanthropy.
Going by the above definitions, beauty pageants definitively fall under soft diplomacy. The whole pageant exposure focusses on cultural exposure and bridging different cultures.
Women empowerment or exploitation?
Neither website – for Miss World or Miss Universe – actually states the criteria for winners or, description of mini-pageants. In general, the websites of these contests state that the contest is to empower women.
Perhaps information relating to the criteria is disclosed only to the contestants themselves. Yet there could be a reasonable question as to the transparency of these contests. Who or what interest groups actually decide these criteria? Developed countries or multi-national companies? The sustainability of these contests is another question that remains unanswered.
The website of the Miss Earth pageant, another mainstream beauty contest, states that the women should possess beauty of face and proportionate body structure. It further states that women should be “natural born female.”
To be fair, the pageants provide an international platform to women to bond with other countries and to obtain support for their charity work. But even here there are fundamental questions that could arise. Though speaking much about inclusion, these contests cannot be identified or described as inclusive. It is not clear whether a trans woman or a contestant with a disability could take part. Even if someone with a disability which does not limit their physical mobility does take part, they tend to be penalized.
Almost all the contestants are in effect standardized and essentialized. It is clear they do not welcome women who are trans. The reference to beautiful faces is subjective and misleading. Contemporary clothing market propaganda states that beauty comes in all shapes and sizes. When looking at these contests, it is evident as per the standards of the contests that beauty does NOT come in all shapes and sizes.
Moreover, recent incidents have revealed how the contest environment itself affected their mental health. For instance, Milla Magee, who represented England at the recently held Miss World Contest, alleged that Miss World organizers were vindictive and bitter. In her statement she noted that she felt exploited and used. Rachel Gupta, winner of Miss Grand International 2024, another mainstream beauty contest, resigned from her title stating that she was mistreated and had a toxic environment.
The bullying that happens on online platforms against the contestants is immense. Whilst these contestants represent their respective nations promoting culture and tourism, they struggle, sometimes for the entirety of the contest, on their own without aid from sponsors. Amidst it all, they are subject to bullying and online harassment.
Conclusion
Article 1 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights (UDHR) states that all human beings are born free and are equal in dignity and rights. When considering the structures and formats of these lavishly financed and much hyped beauty contests, a question sometimes arises as to whether they breach universal rights.
The world has seen wars and disasters. Events such as pageants are important in exchanging goodwill and promoting the culture, tourism, and infrastructure of countries.
For years, decades, and centuries, women have fought against patriarchy. Yet we see leftovers of patriarchic practices remaining in beauty contests. It is time to re-examine these patriarchal structures, where women seem to be empowered rather than tormented, and to promote transparent processes in the selection of winners.
Chathushika Wijeyesinghe is a Development Professional focusing on governance, elections, anti-corruption, and inclusion, with over 12 years of experience. She holds an LL.B. from the University of London, a Masters in Human Rights from the University of Colombo, a Postgraduate Diploma in International Relations from the Bandaranaike Center for International Studies, and a Postgraduate Diploma in Diplomacy and World Affairs from the Bandaranaike Diplomatic Training Institute. She is also a certified Brand Strategist, having qualified at the Sri Lanka Institute of Marketing.
Factum is an Asia Pacific-focused think tank on International Relations, Tech Cooperation, and Strategic Communications accessible via www.factum.lk.
The views expressed here are the author’s own and do not necessarily reflect the organization’s.
[1] These include Mediation diplomacy, Multilateral diplomacy, Dual diplomacy, Public diplomacy, Civil diplomacy, Summit diplomacy, Conference diplomacy, Parliamentary diplomacy, Shuttle diplomacy, Social diplomacy, Nuclear diplomacy, Preventive diplomacy, Soft power diplomacy, Open diplomacy.
