The saga of Sarah Dzafce, the disgraced former Miss Finland, is far more significant than a mere beauty pageant controversy. It serves as a potent and painful contemporary lesson in global cultural ethics and the absolute necessity of racial respect. Her public career was instantly pulverized not by a lapse in judgement, but by a deliberate act of racial hostility, the flames of which swiftly encircled the globe.
The offensive action was simple, yet profoundly provocative: a 15-second video in which Dzafce performed the infamous “slanted eyes” gesture — a crude, historically loaded caricature of East Asian features used in Western contexts — captioned with an inflammatory reference to Chinese people.
In today’s world, a physical gesture steeped in colonial-era malice is neither a “joke,” a “misunderstanding” nor, as she called it, a “temple massage.” It is a cultural weapon. When Dzafce deployed it, she aimed a direct insult at the global Chinese diaspora and the wider Asian community.
Her response to the crisis was a textbook example of poor crisis management. Her initial defense — absurdly claiming she was trying to alleviate a headache by massaging her temples — followed by the classic “a friend posted it” excuse — did not signal remorse. Instead, it exposed a deep arrogance and a profound disregard for the severity of the offense.
Even more infuriating were her subsequent actions. The defiant social media post from a business class seat, which was widely interpreted as a mocking display of privilege, only deepened the public outrage.
This arrogance, distressingly, found supporters among some Finnish right-wing politicians, who openly defended her and even mimicked the discriminatory gesture, showing that the issue transcended mere personal misconduct to touch upon systemic societal biases.
However, the power of unified public opinion proved overwhelming. Her business contracts were canceled one after another, pageant organizers swiftly revoked her title and she was ultimately forced to deactivate her social media accounts, marking the complete termination of her public life.
The speed and thoroughness of her downfall underscore a critical development: Global public opinion, particularly driven by Asian communities and forces for justice, has an unyielding, zero tolerance line against racial discrimination. For public figures, discrimination is no longer just a risk of embarrassment, it is a guaranteed act of self-immolation.
The Dzafce incident is but the latest manifestation of a deeper, ongoing cultural struggle. As our readers are acutely aware, for generations, ethnic slurs have been used as a tool to diminish and dehumanize Asians. The “slanted eyes” gesture is the visual twin of verbal assaults such as “Chink” or “Ching-chong.”
My comprehensive study identifying more than 50 English anti-Chinese or anti-Asian slurs is a sobering reminder that this prejudice is not random; it is historically and linguistically codified.
Understanding this arsenal of bigotry — from anatomical insults such as slope-head to cultural slurs such as banana (implying the person is “yellow on the outside, white on the inside”) — is crucial. This awareness is not about dwelling on offense, but about strategic empowerment. We must know the tools of our detractors to effectively counter them.
The beauty of global digital connectivity is that it ensures these gestures and slurs could no longer fester unchecked in local corners. When prejudice emerges, it is instantly illuminated by a global spotlight.
Miss Finland’s story is ultimately a victory for dignity. It confirms that the power to demand respect now firmly resides with the people. By acting in a unified condemnation, we send an unmistakable signal: Every act of prejudice, visual or verbal, would be met with an immediate and decisive reckoning.
The cost Sarah Dzafce paid was heavy, but it serves as a crystal-clear warning to anyone contemplating a racist “joke”: The world is watching, and your career is not worth the price of disrespecting billions.
Hugo Tseng has a doctorate in linguistics, and is a lexicographer and former chair of the Soochow University English Department.
China’s recent aggressive military posture around Taiwan simply reflects the truth that China is a millennium behind, as Kobe City Councilor Norihiro Uehata has commented. While democratic countries work for peace, prosperity and progress, authoritarian countries such as Russia and China only care about territorial expansion, superpower status and world dominance, while their people suffer. Two millennia ago, the ancient Chinese philosopher Mencius (孟子) would have advised Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) that “people are the most important, state is lesser, and the ruler is the least important.” In fact, the reverse order is causing the great depression in China right now,
We are used to hearing that whenever something happens, it means Taiwan is about to fall to China. Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) cannot change the color of his socks without China experts claiming it means an invasion is imminent. So, it is no surprise that what happened in Venezuela over the weekend triggered the knee-jerk reaction of saying that Taiwan is next. That is not an opinion on whether US President Donald Trump was right to remove Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro the way he did or if it is good for Venezuela and the world. There are other, more qualified
This should be the year in which the democracies, especially those in East Asia, lose their fear of the Chinese Communist Party’s (CCP) “one China principle” plus its nuclear “Cognitive Warfare” coercion strategies, all designed to achieve hegemony without fighting. For 2025, stoking regional and global fear was a major goal for the CCP and its People’s Liberation Army (PLA), following on Mao Zedong’s (毛澤東) Little Red Book admonition, “We must be ruthless to our enemies; we must overpower and annihilate them.” But on Dec. 17, 2025, the Trump Administration demonstrated direct defiance of CCP terror with its record US$11.1 billion arms
The immediate response in Taiwan to the extraction of Venezuelan President Nicolas Maduro by the US over the weekend was to say that it was an example of violence by a major power against a smaller nation and that, as such, it gave Chinese President Xi Jinping (習近平) carte blanche to invade Taiwan. That assessment is vastly oversimplistic and, on more sober reflection, likely incorrect. Generally speaking, there are three basic interpretations from commentators in Taiwan. The first is that the US is no longer interested in what is happening beyond its own backyard, and no longer preoccupied with regions in other
RSS