Beauty pageants generate almost as much animosity and hot air as politics in this country, and the recent Ms Guyana/Universe contest was no exception. At the bottom of it all, of course, is the problem that there is no universally accepted standard of beauty and nor could there ever be. Phenotypically speaking groups have different norms, and who is to say whether an Eskimo queen, for example, is more or less beautiful than a Senegalese one.

Recent research demonstrates apparently, that the one beauty feature which our brains are actually wired to appreciate is symmetry. Whatever the race or nationality concerned, everyone, apparently, responds to that. However, within that framework there are a range of variations to be found in the human form.

Temperature, humidity, altitude, vegetation and other environmental factors have over time produced superficial genetic adaptations which have given the human race its non-uniform appearance. Notions of beauty within any given population, therefore, are derived in the first instance from the somatic and other physical norms of the group concerned. A large-boned people, for example, are not likely to adopt small bones as a beauty feature; they will adopt something which is the median for their own population.

Overlaid on that are the effects of culture. Cultural preferences can change over time, and in the case of Europe can be seen to have done so. The Rubensian female with her rolls of marshmallow flesh represented the apogee of feminine pulchritude in the seventeenth century, whereas nowadays she would be regarded as plain obese. Had she lived in 2002, rather than 1622, Peter Paul Rubens’ favourite model might be sitting in front of the cameras on the Oprah show, detailing for the benefit of millions the metaphysical dimensions of her struggle with weight.

Finally, of course, there is the issue of personal taste, which is probably influenced in the first instance by the norms of one’s own group, and then, perhaps, by childhood impressions and other things.

In a situation where there can be no single ideal of beauty which encompasses the entire human race, the international beauty pageants have homed in on certain features which they have made standard. Former Ms Universe’s, Ms Mpule Kwelagobe and Ms Wendy Fitzwilliam, who were on the panel for the Guyana pageant made reference to a “look” which judges at such contests favour. One of the requirements nowadays, for example, is height - although that has not always been so. This doesn’t mean, of course, that short women can’t be beautiful, simply that at present they don’t stand much chance in the Ms Universe or Ms World contests.

A second requirement is a slender frame - Ms Fitzwilliam probably representing the ideal in that regard. Over the years the ‘look’ for the pageants has got slimmer and slimmer, apparently following the pattern set by the models on the Paris catwalks.

As far as facial features are concerned, the Venezuelans are the ones who think they have homed in on the requirements in that department, and they even send some of their contestants for minor plastic surgery to ensure that they conform to the ‘look.’ Judging by their success in both the Ms World and Ms Universe contests, they must have hit on something.

Most of all nowadays, of course, what is needed is a girl who has confidence, can project herself, is intelligent, a bit extrovert, and a very fluent talker. If she is either a little shy, or diffident or self effacing, she will not be noticed no matter how intelligent she may be.

A week last Saturday, Ms Mia Rahaman was selected to attend the Ms Universe pageant. The judges’ choice was not universally popular, but then no choice would have been universally popular. The point is, the judges made their decision in good faith, and crowned the person they thought came nearest to the ‘look’ demanded for pageants of this kind. And they were much better qualified than the audience - which was understandably partisan, and had its own favourites - to decide what international judges would be looking for. That does not mean that the audience favourites were necessarily less beautiful than anyone else; simply that everything taken into consideration, they did not represent Guyana’s best chance for a place in the Ms Universe finals.

The Guyana leg of the contest was marred, as it has been so often before, by bad manners on the part of sections of the audience. Since most of the girls had their supporters in the auditorium, somebody in the audience had to be disappointed. But disappointment is no excuse for vulgar behaviour, and that behaviour reflected badly on the candidates the ungracious supporters favoured. Similarly those who ran down the winner in a crude way, did more damage to themselves and their own favourite, than they did to Ms Rahaman.

In the end there is really no need for all of this hostility; these pageants have to be seen for what they are - a bit of light entertainment, not the final arbiters of female beauty.