By John Q. Hosedrinker 
Miss England 2024, Milla Magee, unexpectedly withdrew from the Miss World 2025 competition in Hyderabad, citing exploitative conditions. Magee described feeling objectified, forced to entertain wealthy sponsors, and pressured to conform to outdated beauty standards, contradicting the pageant’s “beauty with a purpose” motto. Her actions highlight allegations of a disconnect between the competition’s public image and the contestants’ experiences. Miss Liverpool replaced Magee as England’s representative.
Read the original article here
Miss England’s shocking resignation from the Miss World 2025 competition, exposing what she describes as a “dark side” to the pageant, has ignited a firestorm of debate. It’s hardly surprising that a contest primarily focused on physical appearance isn’t run by paragons of virtue; the very premise raises ethical concerns. The fact that contestants are allegedly paraded before wealthy sponsors, expected to be constantly “on” and available for entertainment, reveals a disturbing power dynamic. This isn’t simply about outdated practices; it suggests a systemic issue that exploits contestants for the benefit of those in power.
The argument that this sort of exploitation is commonplace within the beauty pageant world is undeniable. The notion that contestants must be “willing” to appease judges and sponsors to win is a cynical but sadly realistic portrayal of the system. While some might find this unsurprising, the sheer audacity of treating women like commodities in the 21st century is shocking. This highlights a deeper societal problem; a need to re-evaluate the inherent objectification at the heart of such competitions.
The description of the experience as dehumanizing, with contestants feeling like “performing monkeys” or “prostitutes,” underscores the profound psychological toll of such treatment. The pressure to conform to unrealistic beauty standards, to constantly maintain a flawless appearance and be perpetually available for the entertainment of sponsors, is emotionally draining. It’s understandable why Miss England felt the need to speak out, breaking the silence that often surrounds such experiences. Her brave decision deserves praise, even if some might criticize her naivete in initially entering the competition.
Her claim that the pageant’s emphasis shifted from promoting good causes to mere entertainment raises critical questions about the integrity of the competition. While some contestants might genuinely use their platform for positive change, Miss England’s experience suggests the system inherently prioritizes appearances over genuine altruism. It’s a harsh critique of the whole enterprise, challenging the narrative of empowerment and philanthropy often associated with beauty pageants.
Interestingly, her claim of feeling like a “plus-size” model prompts discussion around body image and the standards imposed by the industry. While her actual size might be debated, the broader issue of unrealistic beauty standards and the pressure to conform remains relevant. It shines a light on how even participants who might not fit the stereotypical “ideal” are still subject to the exploitative dynamics of the pageant system.
Moreover, the historical context adds another layer of complexity. The association with figures like Donald Trump, who owned Miss Universe for years, further emphasizes the problematic nature of the industry. It underscores that the problems aren’t merely isolated incidents but indicative of a system rife with issues of power and control. It’s a stark reminder that the entertainment industry, even seemingly glamorous competitions, isn’t always a fair or ethical playing field.
The response to Miss England’s allegations has been a mixed bag, ranging from outrage to apathy. Some applaud her bravery, while others question her judgment in entering such a contest in the first place. This divergence of opinion illustrates the complex dynamics involved. While the inherent objectification is undeniable, the level of personal responsibility remains a subject of debate.
Ultimately, Miss England’s actions serve as a powerful reminder of the potential downsides of an industry that prizes appearance over substance. While beauty pageants might continue to exist, her courageous decision to speak out against the system’s flaws could encourage much-needed reform or, perhaps, even lead to the eventual dismantling of such inherently problematic competitions. The call for transparency and accountability within the pageant world has become significantly louder, thanks to this unexpected disruption.
It’s important to remember that this isn’t just about one woman’s experience. It’s a reflection of broader societal issues around objectification, exploitation, and the power dynamics within the entertainment industry. Miss England’s departure, though perhaps predictable to many, is a significant moment that highlights the need for a more critical examination of the entire beauty pageant system. The question remains: can such competitions truly coexist with genuine efforts towards female empowerment? The answer, based on this incident, seems increasingly clear.