Sarah Dzafce Loses Miss Finland Title Following Offensive Social Media Post

The 2025 Miss Universe pageant faced an unexpected controversy when Sarah Dzafce, the Finnish representative, came under scrutiny for sharing content that many deemed culturally insensitive. The incident led to the swift revocation of her Miss Finland crown, marking a significant moment in the international beauty pageant’s handling of controversial behavior by its representatives.

The Photo That Changed Everything

Sarah Dzafce shared an image of herself on social media with eyes noticeably squinted, accompanied by a Finnish phrase that made reference to dining with Chinese individuals. While she later defended her actions by claiming she was merely rubbing her temples due to a headache, the post sparked immediate backlash. Critics argued that the image perpetuated harmful stereotypes and demonstrated a lack of cultural awareness from someone representing her country on an international stage.

The decision to strip Sarah Dzafce of her title reflected the pageant organization’s stance on what constitutes acceptable behavior for its contestants. The move signaled that representatives must uphold certain standards of respect and sensitivity, particularly when their actions are broadcast on public platforms to audiences worldwide.

When Politicians Join the Controversy

The incident didn’t conclude with Sarah Dzafce’s removal. Finnish MP Juho Eerola, who is affiliated with the Finns Party—a nationalist political movement sometimes compared to similar right-wing movements internationally—subsequently posted comparable images featuring squinted eyes. Eerola claimed he was simply participating in lighthearted fun, attempting to normalize the behavior that had just cost Sarah Dzafce her position.

This follow-up action raised questions about political accountability and the responsibility of elected officials to model appropriate conduct. The contrast between the beauty pageant’s swift action against Sarah Dzafce and the continued freedom of a sitting MP to engage in similar behavior highlighted broader societal tensions around who faces consequences for offensive imagery and the different standards applied across institutions.

The episode served as a reminder of how social media posts, intended or otherwise, can rapidly escalate into international incidents with real consequences—though those consequences appear inconsistently applied depending on one’s position and platform.