Nawat Itsaragrisil and Fatima Bosch.
If the names don’t ring a bell, let me make it clearer: Executive Director of the Miss Universe Organization and Miss Mexico 2025. It probably makes more sense now, following the recent uproar in the news.
In a nutshell, during the Miss Universe 2025 event, Miss Mexico, Fatima Bosch, became the subject of controversy when Nawat Itsaragrisil, from Thailand and the Executive Director of the Miss Universe Organization, was caught on camera calling her a “dumbhead.”
The remark quickly went viral, sparking backlash over the clear disrespect shown. In response, Nawat later claimed he had actually said “damaged,” not “dumbhead,” urging the public to “listen again.”
Fair. Let’s put this under the microscope.
When a spoken word sparks controversy, as it did in this case, it is important to examine a few key factors before jumping to conclusions or taking sides.
Firstly, we look at phonetics, which is how the word sounds. Next, we look at context, which is what was said and in what tone. We basically analyze the situation – what preceded the remark, and how the overall tone and attitude came across.
If you’d watched the viral clips, you could easily sense the creepy, condescending, and highly abrasive attitude in his speech, body language, and demeanor.
And when analyzing such discrepancies, we also consider intonation, accent, and pronunciation patterns influenced by the speaker’s native language. For example, Thai speakers often soften or drop final consonants, so a word like “damaged” might sound more like “dama” or “damet.” Either way, it still doesn’t come close to “dumbhead” – not in tone, not in syllables, and certainly not in context.
And from a linguistic and structural point of view – why would even a non-native speaker say: “If you follow the order from your national director, you are “damaged”?
Which makes more sense in that context, “dumbhead” or “damaged”?
Considering the phonetic clues, sentence structure, and the condescending tone throughout, it is highly unlikely that “damaged” was the intended word.
This, is a classic example of how a regional accent can interfere with clarity. Accents can be worked on, and should be, especially in formal or professional settings, to avoid scandalous situations like this one, which went global. Pronunciation can and should be refined, particularly for speakers who live under the spotlight. No excuses.
And Mr. Nawat’s justification? Frankly, a hundred times worse than the offense itself – an insult to our ears and our intelligence.
I mean, really, Mr. Nawat? Wouldn’t it have been easier to just admit you said “dumbhead” rather than try to gaslight the world into hearing “damaged”? Please.
So, which side are you taking? The dumbhead or the damaged one? Honestly, both words are damaged in my dictionary and should not have been used. But in this case, I choose to be smart and honest – not dumb and a liar.
