Miss America Nina Davuluri Is Not a Symbol of Progress

Miss America Nina Davuluri Is Not a Symbol of Progress

Miss America Nina Davuluri Is Not a Symbol of Progress

The racist reaction to a South Asian Miss America is a disgrace, but so is the Miss America pageant.

Copy Link
Facebook
X (Twitter)
Bluesky
Pocket
Email


Miss America Nina Davuluri poses for photographers following her crowning in Atlantic City, New Jersey. (AP Photo/Mel Evans)

During my Tuesday morning subway commute, I encountered a man who felt the need to stare at me while I walked by. As I passed him, he whispered, “Miss America” at me. I kept walking, slightly confused at this unusual catcall. And then I remembered: as of Sunday night, Miss America was, like me, an American-born desi. Nina Davuluri, from Syracuse, New York—both conventionally gorgeous and medical school–bound—had won the title. Between this new form of catcalling and the inevitable comparisons to her by my nosy aunties, it was clear: she was put on this planet to make my life miserable.

Of course, this historic achievement wasn’t all roses for Davuluri either. Upon her crowning, Twitter overflowed with angry, post-9/11 racial hatred. “Miss New York is an Indian. With all due respect, this is America” chimed one tweeter. Another angrily writes, “How the fuck does a foreigner win miss America? She is a Arab! #idiots.” Actually, no she’s not an “Arab,” she’s an American-born Hindu of South Asian descent.

Here’s what I think those racist commenters are trying to say: We (brown people) did it again; we managed to take another seat that had, for the most part, been occupied for nearly a century by a white face. Miss America, like the president himself, is an important (if illusory) signifier of who’s in charge around here. All of a sudden “we” brown people were two for two in Obama’s America.

Understandably, most liberals’ reaction to the outpouring of racism inspired by Davuluri’s crowning glory has been to defend her. After all, she is actually an American. And there isn’t a South Asian–American that can’t relate to the frustration of being questioned about your nationality. Or the aggravation caused by flippant racists who can’t get even their racism right—calling a Hindu-identified South Asian–American woman a Muslim terrorist, for example, because obviously we all look the same. But for all intents and purposes, in this historical moment brown people are all the same, in that we’re all subject to the same ridicule and attacks thanks to state sanctioned surveillance and the cultural implications of the “war on terror.” It’s publicly acceptable to be racist against people who are assumed to be Muslim.

We can’t let this nasty display of racism back us into a corner. As tempting as it might be, to suggest that Davuluri’s win signifies progress for South Asians in America is to defend the Miss America pageant itself. And there isn’t really much about Miss America that could be considered progress for anyone (except maybe the steady decline in ratings over the last forty years, that might be a sign of progress). Miss America’s role in the public imagination has always been the product of objectification. It’s a beauty pageant after all, and the winner embodies the ideal American woman—prized as an object of beauty.

Miss America has always been a spectacle. The competition started in 1921 as a gimmick to get people to hang out in Atlantic City after Labor Day—at the time it was charmingly called “The Most Beautiful Bathing Girl in America.” By the 1950s it became conflated with everything that America stood for. Miss America is meant to represent the values Americans are supposed to hold dear—a female face and body to project onto the hopes and dreams of the nation. And throughout the pageant’s history, that female body has typically been thin, conventionally attractive—and almost always white.

Ideas about what kind of woman could adequately represent America have evolved over time. Originally, non-white women were not allowed to participate in the contest. It wasn’t until 1970 that a black woman competed. Since 1983, eight African-American women have worn the Miss America crown. And in 2001 the title went to Hawaii-born Filipino Angela Perez Baraquio.

It makes sense that some might consider the increasing racial diversity in the pageant to be a sign of progress. And for South Asians, being integrated into an existing cultural practice might seem like an important step toward cultural acceptance and assimilation. But I would argue it’s not really progress when the role of Miss America is so deeply limited in possibility and scope.

To be sure, optics matter. The minor net good is that little South Asian girls may feel better about themselves when they see a beauty queen that they can relate to. But Miss America still sends a message to girls and women that what you look like determines what you are worth. While it’s tempting to frame Nina Davuluri’s win as a victory for equality, let’s not get confused— the Miss America pageant is fundamentally about objectifying women and limiting their possibility to what they look like in a bikini.

I’m sure my catcaller thought he was being flattering by acknowledging that I wasn’t just any woman to be objectified, but a South Asian one—now open to my own brand of objectification too. But that’s not the kind of “progress” I’m going to rally behind.

Support independent journalism that does not fall in line

Even before February 28, the reasons for Donald Trump’s imploding approval rating were abundantly clear: untrammeled corruption and personal enrichment to the tune of billions of dollars during an affordability crisis, a foreign policy guided only by his own derelict sense of morality, and the deployment of a murderous campaign of occupation, detention, and deportation on American streets. 

Now an undeclared, unauthorized, unpopular, and unconstitutional war of aggression against Iran has spread like wildfire through the region and into Europe. A new “forever war”—with an ever-increasing likelihood of American troops on the ground—may very well be upon us.  

As we’ve seen over and over, this administration uses lies, misdirection, and attempts to flood the zone to justify its abuses of power at home and abroad. Just as Trump, Marco Rubio, and Pete Hegseth offer erratic and contradictory rationales for the attacks on Iran, the administration is also spreading the lie that the upcoming midterm elections are under threat from noncitizens on voter rolls. When these lies go unchecked, they become the basis for further authoritarian encroachment and war. 

In these dark times, independent journalism is uniquely able to uncover the falsehoods that threaten our republic—and civilians around the world—and shine a bright light on the truth. 

The Nation’s experienced team of writers, editors, and fact-checkers understands the scale of what we’re up against and the urgency with which we have to act. That’s why we’re publishing critical reporting and analysis of the war on Iran, ICE violence at home, new forms of voter suppression emerging in the courts, and much more. 

But this journalism is possible only with your support.

This March, The Nation needs to raise $50,000 to ensure that we have the resources for reporting and analysis that sets the record straight and empowers people of conscience to organize. Will you donate today?

Ad Policy
x