Create a New Forum Admin Login Member Login Contribute to Voyager Search VoyForums Help Desk VoyForums Exchange VoyForums Directory/Categories VoyForums Homepage VoyForums News FAQ - Frequently Asked Questions

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, [3], 4 ]

Subject: SOME OF THE PRETTY ONES R TOO YOUNG! Author: jenny [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ] Date Posted: 19:27:22 11/08/02 Fri i think 5 might really be the winner too! because 1 and 3 r pretty, except they r only 17!!! i think 20-22 is a good age to compete for Miss chinese international 2003! [ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Subject: you must be dreaming! if the statistics listed about the miss van delegates are correct, #5 and 6 have no chance at all. i'm sorry, but short delegates have a better chance at thirds. Author: haha [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 06:12:03 11/09/02 Sat [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Re: you must be dreaming! if the statistics listed about the miss van delegates are correct, #5 and 6 have no chance at all. i'm sorry, but short delegates have a better chance at thirds. Author: karen [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 11:41:06 11/09/02 Sat ya they r not that pretty, if they send another short one to MCI, i'm scared if the result would be even worse than last year! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: KAREN: Short delegates are not that pretty? or this year's Miss Van '02 delegates are not that pretty? which are u talking about? Author: Alicia [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 01:34:53 11/11/02 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Sorry, but it's not all about Height... Author: Teresa [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 01:16:33 11/11/02 Mon Winning is not all about height... its also about how composed you are, how well you answer questions, body composition, academic/community commitments and contributions, facial features, etc. To all the airheads out there: Height is just a small component [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: of ocurse its all about height. you think someone wh's 5'0 will actually win first? check out all the MU, MW, MI winers and you will see they are all 5'7 and up. miss van winners have also been very tall recently. Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 04:48:00 11/11/02 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> Subject: ops...sorry! i forgot to add....i know its unfair but i've noticed that they're really into this height thing recently..:( 5'4 girls still have a shot...but if you're under, you're screwed! its pretty sad. Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:19:33 11/11/02 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> Subject: Then how do you explain Christie Bartram: 5'3" ? Author: Teresa [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 20:19:29 11/11/02 Mon [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Re: Then how do you explain Christie Bartram: 5'3" ? Author: steph [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 21:50:42 11/11/02 Mon teresa, i think she won because she's mixed and that last years miss tornoto wasn't that attractive! and she won 2nd place for mci is also cuz the contestents r not that attractive! and they also liked mixed girls! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: easy! MIXED. she wasn't all that either and looked very top heavy during the finals of mci. Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:15:21 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: also...christie was listed as 5'4 during the miss toronto pageant. who knows what her real height is. this yr's miss van's height has been altered too. either a bit taller or a bit shorter. i'm guessing shorter since some delegates are listed as 5'3 . i mean why on earth would u compete if you're 5'2? Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 07:20:44 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: I understand the tendency towards taller girls, particularly at int'l and Chinese "beauty" pageants, but discouraging people from entering because they're short or petite is ridiculous. I'm 5'1" and that was the last thing on my mind...I was the shortest girl in the pageants I entered, but won titles in both. Yes, height is definitely an advantage, but to openly discourage people from entering is ludicrous. It's your life, make the decisions you want and have fun in the process. You can't control genetics. (And, I will add that height is NOT a factor in the Miss America system.) Author: Anna [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:18:53 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Well you can take it as a discouragement, but I was stating the fact that its sadly about height for most competitions. This is my opinion you don't have to take me seriously. If ONLY we could change genetics Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 09:15:32 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: Yes, the height factor is unfortunately emphasized (although for modeling, standard minimum height for runway work is 5'7", and even that is considered short -- less fair, I'd say!); however, I would refrain from asking the question "why on earth" would you enter a pageant if you are 5'2". The wording of that question clearly implies a discouragement. Author: Anna [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 11:26:06 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Subject: My apologies! It was one of those spur of the moment things. I'd actually wanted to say...'what's the pt if they only want tall winners' . Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 13:10:07 11/12/02 Tue [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: SOME OF THE PRETTY ONES R TOO YOUNG! Author: puccagirl [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 15:47:58 11/09/02 Sat I totally agree. Number 5 is very pretty but too young to represent Toronto in an INternationl pageant. I hope #5 would win! >i think 5 might really be the winner too! because 1 >and 3 r pretty, except they r only 17!!! i think 20-22 >is a good age to compete for Miss chinese >international 2003! [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: Christie Bartram was just 17 when she won the Toronto pageant, and look how well she did at MCI! Who knows what will happen.... Author: JS [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 22:17:17 11/09/02 Sat [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: you've gota admit though...if she wasn't bi-racial she prob. wouldn't have placed unless she was like michelle reis....mixed ppl are truly more beautiful than pure chinese and i think that goes w/ other races too. but that isn't always the case. Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 23:59:04 11/09/02 Sat [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> [> Subject: I think Michele Reis was an exception too. She was so exceptionally gorgeous back in the late 80's. She is still very beautiful at 32. Author: Kelly [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 08:37:17 11/10/02 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> Subject: Re: ya! mixed r usually better than full chinese ones! do u think toronto is trying to find mci winner this year because they never won before and that christie did so well but wasn't well enough to get the first place? Author: kim [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:04:09 11/10/02 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: actually....toronto Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:19:39 11/10/02 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> Subject: actually....toronto's won 2 times already since 1988! :) once in 1992 Rosemary and another in 1997 Monica Lo Sok-Yee! perhaps its a every 5 yrs thing :) jk. Author: hk missologist [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 10:20:44 11/10/02 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ]

[> [> [> Subject: Re: oops! okay then maybe it's just a luck thing or something! but ya, i think toronto and vancouver are trying to get a mci winner again! :) Author: kim [ Edit | View ] Date Posted: 11:11:49 11/10/02 Sun [ Post a Reply to This Message ]