Transcription
Human beings have long been attracted to female beauty. In particular, beauty has often been linked to a woman's potential to bear children and her ability to be chosen as a mate. So, in this video, we're going to use the terms "reproductive value" a lot to describe our frameworks of beauty. That's because a lot of physical attractiveness, for both men and women, at a biological level boils down to our ability to produce offspring.
But, as always, before we can get into beauty standards, we need to consider the importance of why physical attractiveness even matters. Social theories, such as Devandra Singh's in his paper "Mating strategies of young women: the role of physical attractiveness," have shown that attractive people are seen as possessing many positive qualities and are more likely to be popular with the opposite sex. Or, they have better social skills and experience less loneliness and social anxiety than those who are less attractive. Singh's study also showed that healthy and attractive were the most correlated attributes with desirability for long-term relationships among many various attributes, including kindness, intelligence, and a sense of humor, regardless of the participant's background. So, while it is true that personality does play a role, it seems that attractiveness also does matter. It may even be that personality and physical attractiveness are highly interwoven, and being more physically attractive does make your personality be perceived as more positive—a very unfortunate side effect of looks. The continuing role of physical attractiveness in marriage suggests that husbands are less likely to cheat on and be happier with attractive partners. And so many, many more facts of beauty that we don't normally think about until it affects us. And so, can anything realistically be done about this?
Well, one such paper from the University of Texas showed that even infants, as young as a few months old, tend to gaze longer at faces that adults consider attractive, suggesting that the idea of beauty may actually be innate. If there is a biological component to beauty, then biology can be changed or even faked, and people can be made more beautiful. If it is purely subjective, then there is nothing that you could do to be more beautiful; you just have to hope you find the right person.
In order to understand beauty, it's important to address the concept of sexual dimorphism. Prominent researcher Gillian Rhodes links sexual dimorphism back to looking healthy, and if you remember, beauty essentially are indicators of physical health. At puberty, men and women begin to defer due to hormonal influences. Testosterone stimulates the growth of masculine facial features, such as the jaw, the brow ridge, and facial hair in males, while in females, estrogen inhibits the development of these traits and promotes the growth of feminine features like full lips, softer contours, and bodily curvaceousness. Sexual dimorphism becomes more pronounced at puberty. And so, when we say that a face is sexually dimorphic or has these traits, these are the facial features that separate men from women, girls from boys. It is often said that femininity is seen as attractive in a woman's face, and various studies, such as "The idea of facial beauty: a review" by Miriam Horn, or "Symmetry, averageness, and feature size in the facial attractiveness of women" by Guy Tyng, have shown that features that contribute to female facial attractiveness, including large eyes, a small nose, prominent and high cheekbones, a small chin, thin eyebrows, and full lips, are considered to be feminine. These are sexually dimorphic traits that separate male faces from female faces. These are not the kind of features you would typically find on a man, which is why we consider them to be feminine features.
But a quick note on male and female features: a man with more feminine features can be androgynous; a woman with more masculine features can also be androgynous. They're not exclusive to one specific sex, and they can create, in itself, a mix of unique looks. Other research suggests that an attractive feminine face should also have a combination of childlike and mature features. We call these neotenous and ontogenous traits. These juvenile features may include large eyes, a high forehead, a small nose, and fuller lips, tying back to estrogen levels and this biological idea of femininity, which researchers suggest may make them seem more nurturing or caring partners. Does seem to be supported by other research. Obviously, attractive female faces are not all about juvenile features; otherwise, most grown men would be attracted to the most juvenile of faces, which are literally children, and that's not the case. Instead, ontogenous or matured features indicate sexual maturity, and they are just as important as it is to look young.
Moving on, most people are aware of facial symmetry, which comes in two forms in biology: fluctuating and directional asymmetry. A large percentage of the population is right-handed (me included), and that's called directional asymmetry. Because why, on the left-handed, this face is slightly wonky. That's called fluctuating asymmetry, and that's the one we care about for looks. To answer the question, perfect symmetry is not the beauty standard, and it's also not physically possible. However, an increasing level of symmetry is associated with greater physical attractiveness, up to a point. A wildly asymmetric face is theorized to be tied to disease, genetic malformation, or poor development, and so, as humans, we find it off-putting because beauty is health. For instance, Rhodes et al. have changed the images of the subjects included in their studies in order to make them perfectly symmetrical with respect to their vertical axes and found that symmetrical faces were those judged most attractive. They also found that perfectly symmetric faces, made by blending each face with its mirror image, are more attractive than the original faces, and that the attractiveness of individual faces can be altered by manipulating their level of symmetry. Significant correlations between facial symmetry and attractiveness have also been reported in several other studies, including Grammar and Thornhill, Johnson, Hill, or some ethnic groups, and it's seen to be pretty consistent across most people worldwide. However, even if symmetry still represents an indicator of facial attractiveness, it would not be the main determinant factor. These studies were looking at symmetry and averageness as an attractiveness criteria by itself, and so we can therefore assume that the face with better symmetry will be more attractive, but that the overall attractiveness of a face depends mostly on other features. Let me give you the example that a mismatch but symmetric face is, in theory, not more attractive than a handsome but asymmetric one.
Similar to facial symmetry, averageness, or how closely a face resembles the majority of faces within a population, is thought to be an important factor in female facial attractiveness. In the past, it was widely believed that averageness was the primary factor that made a face attractive, and this view has been supported by more recent research using digital technology. The same study from Gillian Rhodes, Alex Sumich, and Graham created faces, each one being mathematically averaged of 24 same-sex faces, to see what impact averageness has on facial attractiveness. Subjects were asked to rate the attractiveness of male and female average composites and low, normal, and high average versions of the 48 faces. They found that attractiveness increased with manipulated averageness. In fact, the average female face was more attractive than all but one other female face, and interestingly, female faces showed a bigger drop in attractiveness than male faces when distorted away from the average when the hair was visible in Rhodes, Sumich, and Graham's study. Overall, averageness, symmetry, and expression accounted for 71% of the variance in the attractiveness ratings, which is similar to going from average to above average when it comes to your own personal beauty. This seems to indicate that the closer a face is to the average, the more attractive it is perceived to be. But what is the average? The average of a population or race is obviously different, and so one way to measure that is through anthropometry, or the study of human measurements. If the average for, say, Black African Americans is 30 millimeters here, a new measure to be 29 millimeters, then safe to say you're within an acceptable range because we're comparing apples to apples. These group-specific measurements help doctors and dentists decide when it's worth treating a person's face for cosmetic reasons or for trauma reasons. Oftentimes, the most attractive facial features are the ones that you're closest to average for in a group. From an evolutionary perspective, averageness is associated with good physical condition or heterozygosity and may indicate reproductive value in terms of increased disease resistance or developmental stability. Therefore, an average, symmetrical face may serve as a subconscious health indicator. A face with a tumor or malformation is not only asymmetric but is also not typical of the average population, and that's why these two features are so important for beauty.
But before we move on, there is something you should know: as shown by newer studies by De Bruyne and colleagues, average faces are not always average; they are actually above average in their features—a bit more extreme-looking, a bit crazier, a bit sharper, a bit wider. So, if this concept interests you, we've actually covered all of that on the podcast from our deep-dive episodes.
Moving on to the body, the waist-to-hip ratio (calculated by dividing the waist circumference by the hip circumference) also keeps showing up when it comes to attractiveness, much like the shoulder-to-hip ratio for men. Many scientific papers, including "The shape of beauty: determinants of female physical attractiveness" by Marion Fisher and Martin Voracek, show that the waist-to-hip ratio is considered to be a key factor in female physical attractiveness. It is thought to serve as a filter for selecting women who are healthy and have a high reproductive capacity. Research has shown that both men and women tend to find figures with a low waist-to-hip ratio—particularly a value of 0.7—to be the most attractive, healthy, and reproductively viable, regardless of their weight or body size. And this was shown to be true across different cultures as well and still holds true regardless of the subject's body mass index (BMI) or body fat. Devandra Singh, in his paper "Mating strategies of young women," created images with three different types of bodies: underweight, normal, and overweight. The results showed that, again and again, a lower waist-to-hip ratio was more desirable, regardless of body weight or body fat. And I suppose you can't really talk about waist-to-hip ratio without mentioning the body mass index, which is used as a measure of body fat distribution and is considered normal when it falls between 18 to 24 kilograms per meter squared. This has also been shown to be linked with attractiveness. M.J. Toby and colleagues have graphed this, with the peak being closest to the 20 kilograms per meter squared range. While BMI is a complex indicator for beauty, facial adiposity (aka fat levels) is much more heavily studied in the scientific literature. "Facial adiposity, attractiveness, and health: a review" suggests that facial fat is most important for aesthetics because it is used ultimately to judge your body mass. Have too much facial fat, then we assume that you have a higher body mass, even if you can't really see what's underneath. And if that body mass goes beyond the BMI that was given as the attractive range, then facial fat does have a link to your bodily fat. There is a relationship between the waist-to-hip ratio and the body mass index because higher body fat means more curvaceousness, but compared to the waist-to-hip ratio, the body mass index is actually associated with more variation in attractiveness judgments, meaning it's actually more important. There are also cultural differences in how BMI affects attractiveness evaluations, with women from higher levels of body fat being seen as more attractive in countries with lower levels of socioeconomic status, and the reverse being true in wealthy countries. This was mentioned in Judith L. Anderson and colleagues' paper, "Was the Duchess of Windsor right? A cross-cultural review of the socio-ecology of ideas of female body shape." For example, force-feeding camps in Mauritania have a different view of female body size than compared to modeling standards in the West. However, attractiveness tends to be maximal within the normal range of BMI in different cultural contexts, and women with extreme BMI values (greater than 25 or less than 18) are generally perceived as less attractive. The reason for this is simple: extremes of body fat, both high and low, go beyond the expected average for the population, and if you remember, averageness is a desirable trait. And averageness doesn't just mean in the statistical sense, but actually in the prototypical sense. What I mean by this: an example—Americans typically are a bit larger because of the obesity epidemic, meaning that the average body fat level is raised, but as a whole, compared to all other humans, the human body fat level is still pretty prototypical; it hasn't changed throughout civilization, and that's what we're comparing ourselves to, not rather by the average of the body fat levels in your local area.
Let's talk about hair. Well, hair also plays a significant role in a woman's appearance and can indicate various aspects of health and reproductive potential. According to Edgar (1999) in his research, "Made in survival," healthy, shiny, and strong hair is perceived as a sign of good overall physical health, while damaged hair may indicate illness. Hinds et al. (2001) also found that men are attracted to women with well-groomed, attractive hair, which may signal youth and fertility. In their study, they discovered a negative correlation between hair length and age and a positive correlation between hair quality and health. These findings suggest that both hair length and quality can indicate reproductive potential. In another study by Fink and colleagues, the attractiveness of different hair colors and their densities were also examined. Participants rated the attractiveness of renders with varying hair colors and densities, and the results show that the density had a significant impact on attractiveness. Their original density of 100% was rated as most attractive, while 40% density was rated as least attractive. So, having very thin hair can also be a detriment. There was also no significant difference in attractiveness between straight and wavy hair, and blonde hair was rated as less attractive than medium, copper, and brown hair for women. Swami and Furnham (2007) also found that blondes were perceived as less physically attractive and more promiscuous than brunettes in their study, and these results were replicated in two follow-up studies by Swami in 2008. Finally, Frost (2006) proposed the concept of a rare hair color advantage in relation to female hair, suggesting that those with a hair color of lower incidence in the population (meaning, like, essentially a rare hair color) may be perceived as more attractive than those with a more common hair color. By this theory, blue hair should be more advantageous than brunette, but there's not a lot of support for this, so we'll leave that one there. However, it is worth noting that more research is needed to determine which hair color is generally considered more attractive, as this can vary greatly depending on factors such as the other features of the face, the age of the participant, and the cultural context. As we've always said, it's not actually the hair that makes the face, but the face that makes the hairstyle work. Attractive faces can wear a style of any shape and color.
When it comes to the skin, many variables impact the appearance of someone's skin. Skin tone and skin quality both have an impact on a woman's perceived attractiveness, undeniably. In a study by Dion, Peases, and Paula Fernandez on Hispanic women's perception of skin color, it was found that a tan skin tone was preferred, while pale skin was viewed as plain and unostentatious. The preference for a tan skin tone was linked to increased desirability among peers, a higher value in dating contexts, and increased sexual appeal to men. Another study by Cynthia M. Frisbee, entitled "Shades of beauty: examining the relationship of skin color to physical attractiveness," looked at 79 subjects evaluated with images of women of varying skin tones, and the results showed that light brown skin was perceived as more credible and attractive by both Caucasian and African-American subjects compared to very pale or dark-skinned models. However, skin colors and preferences do change from region to region because we're looking at this from a very Western-centric perspective here. What is more important and universal across most humans is something called skin homogeneity: how smooth is the complexion, how even is your skin tone? We've covered this in depth over here, but the short answer is that there are attractive faces of all skin colors, but each one has perfectly glass-even skin tone. But other aspects of skin tone, such as the firmness, show a clear negative link between wrinkling and decreasing physical attractiveness. But, on the plus side, Deffenbacher's study suggests wrinkles make a face more distinct and more unique. As you may predict, an increase in skin blemishes, such as acne, also negatively impacts physical attractiveness, and we'll cover the specifics in this video, so we're not going to go over it again here. But it's not all doom and gloom. "Beauty in later life," by Laura Clark, proposes that older women (say, 61 to 92) are aware of these beauty standards we covered in this video and even agree with some of them, such as youthfulness and thinness, but disagree with the level of extreme modern beauty standards—I've taken this to be ultra-thin or ultra-juvenile and wrinkle-free. Some of the older women see the wrinkles as negatives, while others see it as a badge of honor. This suggests that you can accept beauty standards as being true and existing instead of saying that they don't exist at all, but you can also care less and less with age, as it realistically matters to you less and less. Perhaps after 50 years of being in a stable marriage, achieving your lifelong goals, or being emotionally fulfilled, you don't really care about beauty standards anymore. But that's not to say that somebody younger, who is just beginning their professional life, shouldn't care about beauty standards; they're just two different points of a very real goal. So, the way I see beauty standards for both men and women: to not care about looking your best while you still have the opportunity to do so is like a rich retiree telling a young man that money doesn't matter. Sure, it might not matter when you're 70, but you realistically still need to pay your bills now.
So what can you do about it? Well, there's a lot you can do, but it's all very specific to each person's face. Some general trends (and this is going to be quite surface-level advice here because, like I said, it has to be specific to the face): having a normal body weight and body fat seems to be one of the most important factors of bodily and facial attractiveness, as excess body fat can drastically change facial and bodily proportions. But if that is so important because it affects so many other beauty standards, such as having too much facial fat throwing off the distribution of your nose and eyes or the proportion of the mid-face, these are simple factors that we covered in this video with visual analysis to explain how different your face looks when you're fat. This is probably the biggest and most important change to follow because most people do have shapely proportions, but it is just simply hidden under fat. If you still have baby fat even after being at a lean point, then no amount of leanness will change that for you until you reach your womanly face around 23 to 25. It's best to focus elsewhere to that point. We have an upcoming video on buckle fat, which explains exactly what I mean by this. From the studies, it would seem that accentuating feminine facial features, such as round eyes, thin eyebrows, full lips, a smaller nose, skin smoothness, projected features, to increase female facial attractiveness when looking at it through the heteronormative male gaze, which is not surprising to most women. This is because you're increasing the sexual dimorphism of the face, making the female face more feminine. And in doing so, if you remember that attractive faces are actually not the most average, they're a bit more than average; they're a bit crazier-looking, a bit more extreme in their facial features. A lot of biology can also just be faked with makeup; for example, rounder eyes or blush, as we covered in this video, do stimulate the redness of skin and blood. Women also get hair transplants to achieve a desirable hairline that complements their face shape, as we covered in this video, and even get cosmetic injectables, such as fillers, to mimic the appearance of the average face. But the exact specifics and step-by-step guide will need probably another 10 videos to go over it because it really matters on the individual's face. Hopefully, by watching perhaps the defining beauty series or learning about the frameworks of beauty—why the theory exists—you can help yourself and make more educated choices rather than general, surface-level advice. That being said, the most integral piece of advice that you could be following right now is active sun protection. UV damage from the sun is the make-or-break between aging attractively or not, for both men and women. We'll put out a full video on sun protection soon, but for now, choose physical sunscreens over chemical ones, even if they're more uncomfortable, and reapply every 4 hours in repeated intervals, even while indoors.
To summarize this very long video, various physical characteristics, including facial features, skin, hair, waist-to-hip ratio, body mass index, do all seem to influence female physical attractiveness. However, the relative importance of each individual feature and the interactions between them are not fully understood and do require further study. Symmetry and averageness are important in determining facial beauty, but specific traits, such as…
Full lab, small nose, high cheekbones, which are a sign of youthfulness and fertility, can also make a face more attractive and feminine. Additionally, many other features that are not mentioned in this video due to complexity also play an important role in facial attractiveness. So think of this like a 101 class, but you know there's other features as well, more important things that people don't really know about, which is like a 401 class, you know, fourth-year university class.
But in the past, it was thought that beauty standards varied across different cultures. However, some papers, like "Cross-cultural within-racial judgments of attractiveness" by researchers at the University of Texas, have rejected this theory, suggesting that attractiveness is judged according to common standards that are shared across multiple cultures. While each culture may have their differences in how they interpret this beauty standard, we all seem to have a human-level understanding of beauty amongst each other.