Dehradun, April 12, 2026 — The grand finale of Mr & Miss Uttarakhand 2026 was held with great enthusiasm at Hotel Regenta, drawing participants and audiences from across the state. The event was presented by Maya Devi University and organised by Himalayan Buzz in association with Dharma Creation.

Tarushi Dobhal was crowned Miss Uttarakhand 2026, while Harsh Chaudhary secured the title of Mr Uttarakhand 2026, emerging as the top talent of the evening. Vanshita Kandpal and Lokpal Pokhriyal were honoured as Miss Uttarakhand Model of the Year and Mr Uttarakhand Model of the Year, respectively.

In the runners-up categories, Neha Mahara and Prakash Rana were declared 1st Runners-up, while Shivam Bhatt and Lata Koranga earned the titles of 2nd Runners-up.

The competition saw participation from across Uttarakhand, with 36 finalists selected through auditions conducted in Dehradun and Haldwani. Contestants underwent professional grooming sessions and took part in various sub-contests, showcasing their talent, confidence, and personality. Several subtitles and awards were also presented during the event.

The judging panel comprised notable personalities, including Kshitiz Doval (Founder of UNHU), Tushar Shahi (Mr Uttarakhand 2026), Rahul Gupta (Founder of Vastukar Associates), Seema Kashyap, and Lavanya Ahuja (Founders of The Frontrow Couture), along with restaurateur Aneesh Virmani and Aniruddha Raithwan (Founders of AAR Hotels).

During the event, Dr Tripti Juyal Semwal, Vice President of Maya Devi University, addressed the audience, highlighting the institution’s vision and its commitment to empowering youth through platforms like this.

This edition marked the 10th anniversary of Mr & Miss Uttarakhand by Himalayan Buzz, celebrating a decade of promoting talent, fashion, and youth empowerment across the region.

Also Read: Top Fashion Trends 2026 You’ll See Everywhere

Blue Origin’s all-female spaceflight was hailed as a feminist milestone but many saw it as a luxury spectacle masked as empowerment. It highlights how, numerous times in history, feminism has been co-opted to sell privilege rather than drive structural progress.

On April 14, 2025, Blue Origin’s New Shepard rocket launched its NS-31 mission, carrying an all-female crew into suborbital space for an 11-minute flight. Marketed as a historic milestone for gender representation as the first all-woman space crew since Valentina Tereshkova’s 1963 solo flight, the mission was celebrated by its organizers and crew as a feminist triumph. However, the mission’s commercial nature, high cost, and celebrity-heavy roster have ignited a firestorm of criticism, exposing how the word “feminist” has been used in a misleading way to cloak privilege and spectacle in the guise of progress. The crew was a high-profile mix: Media personality Lauren Sánchez,, led the charge, joined by pop star Katy Perry, CBS Mornings host Gayle King, former NASA scientist Aisha Bowe, civil rights activist Amanda Nguyen, and film producer Kerianne Flynn. The automated flight, which crossed the Kármán line at 62 miles above Earth, offered a few minutes of weightlessness and stunning views before safely landing in West Texas. Blue Origin touted the mission as a step toward inclusivity in space exploration, with crew members like Sánchez and Bowe emphasizing its potential to inspire women and minorities in STEM fields.

A Feminist Milestone or a Misstep?

At first glance, an all-female space crew seems like a clear win for feminism—a field historically dominated by men. Yet, the mission’s execution and framing have led many to question whether it really advanced the cause of women or simply co-opted the feminist label for publicity. The word “feminist” has been used in a misleading way here, slapped onto a venture that critics argue prioritized elite access over systemic change.

The mission’s high cost which reportedly requiring a $150,000 deposit per person reflects its exclusivity. Only those with significant wealth or connections could afford such an experience. This sparked accusations of elitism, with figures like Emily Ratajkowski, Olivia Wilde, and Amy Schumer slamming the flight as a tone-deaf display of privilege amid global crises like poverty and climate change. Ratajkowski called it “beyond parody,” arguing it failed to represent meaningful progress for women. NS-31’s crew, while diverse in some respects, leaned heavily on high-profile figures whose participation felt more performative than transformative. Tagging this as a feminist victory risks diluting the term, equating a brief, costly joyride with the hard-fought battles for gender equity in education, workplaces, or even NASA’s astronaut corps.

Blue Origin and the crew emphasized the mission’s scientific contributions, particularly Amanda Nguyen’s experiments testing NASA spacesuit fabric and an electric chip for breast cancer detection. These efforts, while commendable, were overshadowed by the flight’s broader framing as a celebrity spectacle. The inclusion of figures like Katy Perry, whose mid-flight performance of “What a Wonderful World” was widely mocked, further undermined the mission’s credibility.  

The mission’s environmental impact drew significant scrutiny. Private spaceflight, including Blue Origin’s New Shepard, contributes to carbon emissions and resource use at a time when climate change is a pressing global issue. Ethically, the mission raised questions about the commercialization of space and the “astronaut” title. By branding wealthy passengers as trailblazers, Blue Origin risks trivializing the rigorous training and contributions of professional astronauts who undertake months-long missions with tangible scientific goals. The NS-31 crew’s brief flight, by contrast, felt like a luxury experience, not a feminist or scientific breakthrough. 

Historical and Analogous Instances Where “Feminist” Was Used to Market Questionable Agendas

The misuse of feminist ideals to market products or agendas that don’t genuinely advance gender equity is not a new phenomenon. Historically, corporations and campaigns have co-opted the language of women’s liberation to sell products or ideas that, in hindsight, were harmful or exploitative. 

Tobacco Industry’s “Torches of Freedom” Campaign

In the 1920s, cigarette companies like Lucky Strike and Philip Morris sought to expand their market by targeting women, who faced social taboos against smoking. The American Tobacco Company, under the guidance of public relations pioneer Edward Bernays, launched a campaign that framed cigarette smoking as a feminist act of rebellion against patriarchal norms. In 1929, Bernays orchestrated the infamous “Torches of Freedom” stunt during New York City’s Easter Sunday Parade. He hired debutantes to march as suffragists, publicly lighting cigarettes as symbols of liberation, with the press primed to cover the event as a bold feminist statement.

The campaign was a masterclass in manipulation. The feminist label was exploited to equate smoking with women’s suffrage and autonomy, despite the known health risks of tobacco, which were already suspected by medical professionals at the time. By the 1930s, smoking rates among women soared particularly as tobacco companies continued targeting them with “slimmer” cigarette brands like Virginia Slims in the 1960s.

This campaign’s legacy is a reminder of how feminist ideals can be hijacked for profit. It didn’t advance women’s rights but instead addicted generations to a deadly product, all under the guise of empowerment. The “Torches of Freedom” remains a textbook case of feminism being co-opted to sell harm. 

Household Appliances as “Liberation” Tools 

Post-World War II, the rise of consumer culture saw appliance manufacturers like General Electric and Westinghouse market household goods—washing machines, vacuum cleaners, electric stoves—as feminist breakthroughs. Advertisements proclaimed these products would “free” women from the drudgery of housework, granting them time for personal fulfillment. In reality, these campaigns reinforced traditional gender roles. The “liberation” promised by appliances often trapped women in the domestic sphere, as societal expectations shifted to demand even higher standards of cleanliness and homemaking. Many argue that these technologies increased women’s workloads by raising expectations for perfect households, while men were rarely encouraged to share domestic labor. Moreover, the high cost of appliances meant only middle- and upper-class women could afford them, excluding working-class and minority women from this so-called feminist progress.

Labeling these products as feminist tools was a marketing ploy to boost sales, not a genuine effort to challenge systemic inequalities like unequal division of labor or women’s exclusion from the workforce. 

Marketing of Beauty Products in the mid-20th century

In the mid-20th century, cosmetics and beauty industries, led by brands like Revlon, Avon, and Clairol, capitalized on feminist rhetoric to sell products that promised to empower women through appearance. Advertisements framed makeup, hair dye, and skincare as tools for self-expression and confidence, aligning with the era’s emerging discussions of women’s agency. Clairol’s 1957 campaign for its “Does she… or doesn’t she?” hair dye, for example, suggested that coloring one’s hair was a bold, feminist choice to defy aging and societal judgment, with the tagline implying secrecy and personal power. However, these campaigns often reinforced restrictive beauty standards that pressured women to conform to idealized notions of femininity.

The “feminist” framing ignored how these products were sold as necessities to “fix” perceived flaws, adding to insecurity rather than empowerment. By branding beauty products as feminist, these companies profited from women’s insecurities while sidestepping the structural barriers—like workplace discrimination or lack of political representation—that true feminism sought to address. 

Alcohol Marketing as Women’s “Freedom” 

In the wake of second-wave feminism, alcohol companies began targeting women with campaigns that framed drinking as a feminist act of equality. Brands launched ads in the 1970s and 1980s showing women in professional settings—sipping cocktails at bars or hosting parties—suggesting that drinking was a way to claim the social freedoms traditionally reserved for men. 

These campaigns co-opted feminist language to normalize alcohol consumption among women, ignoring the health risks of increased drinking, including liver disease and addiction, which rose among women during this period. The “feminist” framing also glossed over how these ads often sexualized women, portraying them as liberated only when appealing to male gazes. Like the cigarette campaigns decades earlier, this misuse of feminism prioritized corporate profits over women’s well-being, using empowerment as a veneer for exploitation.

The Blue Origin NS-31 mission, with its “feminist” branding of an exclusive spaceflight, echoes a long history of exploiting feminist ideals for questionable ends. Feminism is often used as a shiny label to sell things that don’t really help women. Time and again, the idea of “empowerment” gets twisted to push products or experiences that only benefit a few, usually the wealthy. These moves look like progress but often just keep old problems in place. These historical missteps tell us about the need to scrutinize modern claims of feminism, ensuring the term isn’t reduced to a marketing ploy but remains a call for systemic change that uplifts all, not just those who can afford the spotlight.

Catch up on the must-know moments from this week in pop culture. Scroll down to see all the major highlights. 

This week in pop culture has been packed with exciting updates that have captured global attention. From history-making Oscar nominations to major milestones in the fashion industry, the spotlight has been on some truly groundbreaking moments. Whether you’re a fan of cinema, fashion, or both, there’s plenty to keep you buzzing. Catch up on the biggest highlights you don’t want to miss!

2025 Oscar Nominations Announced

The 97th Academy Awards nominations were announced on January 23, 2025, showcasing a diverse lineup of films and performances. The ceremony will take place on March 2, 2025. Leading the nominations is the Spanish-language film Emilia Pérez with 13 nods, marking a historic moment as it becomes the most-nominated non-English-language film. Among the nominations, Karla Sofía Gascón has made history as the first openly transgender performer to be nominated in an acting category.

Other notable films include The Brutalist and Wicked, each receiving 10 nominations, including Best Picture. The Substance, directed by Coralie Fargeat, has also garnered attention, with Fargeat being recognized in the Best Director category. Fernanda Torres, nominated for I’m Still Here, becomes the second Brazilian actress to receive a nomination in this category, following her mother, Fernanda Montenegro, in 1999.

International cinema has a strong presence this year, with Latvia’s Flow earning nominations for both Best Animated Feature and Best International Feature Film, a rare accomplishment. The nominations reflect a growing emphasis on global cinema and inclusivity in the awards. 

Sabyasachi Mukherjee Celebrates 25 Years in Fashion

Renowned Indian designer Sabyasachi Mukherjee marked the 25th anniversary of his brand with a star-studded fashion show in Mumbai. Bollywood actress Deepika Padukone opened the event, donning a monochromatic white ensemble that garnered significant attention. The celebration was attended by numerous celebrities, including Alia Bhatt, Sonam Kapoor, and Ananya Panday, highlighting Sabyasachi’s influential presence in the fashion industry.

Louvre to Host Louvre Couture 

The Louvre Museum in Paris is set to host an extraordinary exhibition, Louvre Couture, bringing together the worlds of high fashion and fine art. This exhibit, slated to open later this year, will showcase iconic fashion pieces inspired by or directly influenced by the museum’s rich art collection. Accompanying the exhibition is Le Grand Dîner, a high-profile gala that will blend the glamour of the fashion world with the cultural gravitas of the Louvre.

This event underscores a growing trend where fashion exhibitions have become a major draw for museums worldwide. Historically, institutions like New York’s Metropolitan Museum of Art, spearheaded by figures such as Vogue’s Diana Vreeland, pioneered the concept of fashion as a legitimate form of art to be displayed in museums. These exhibitions, including the Met Gala’s annual themed displays, have demonstrated how the synergy between art and fashion can captivate diverse audiences while being highly profitable.

Fashion exhibitions today are not only cultural phenomena but also lucrative ventures. Museums have increasingly embraced these showcases to attract younger, fashion-forward audiences and secure significant sponsorships from luxury brands. In turn, these brands gain prestige and visibility, aligning themselves with the cultural cachet of historic institutions. Events like Louvre Couture and the annual Met Gala prove that the intersection of fashion and art is a win-win for cultural enrichment and commercial success.

Coldplay’s Historic Return to India

Coldplay’s “Music of the Spheres” World Tour marked a triumphant return to India in January 2025, with the British rock band performing three sold-out concerts at Mumbai’s DY Patil Stadium on January 18, 19, and 21. 

The concerts featured a mix of Coldplay’s classic hits and newer tracks, accompanied by impressive light displays and interactive elements that enhanced the audience experience. The band’s commitment to sustainability was evident, as they continued their efforts to reduce the environmental impact of their performances. These concerts were part of Coldplay’s ongoing “Music of the Spheres” World Tour, which has been recognized as one of the most successful tours by a group. The success of Coldplay’s concerts in India underscores the growing enthusiasm for live music among young, affluent Indians, contributing significantly to the country’s live entertainment market.

Also Read: Meta Phases Out Fact-Checking and Adopts a Community-Driven Approach similar to X

Follow us for more @Discultured