A_Wanderer
ONE love, blood, life
linkFeminine beauty, the subject of philosophical and artistic musings for millennia, can be predicted by something as basic as hormones – in women, but not men. Researchers at the University of St Andrews in Fife, UK, have found that women’s facial attractiveness is directly related to their oestrogen levels.
Miriam Law Smith and colleagues photographed 59 women, aged between 18 and 25, every week for six weeks. On each occasion, they provided a urine sample for hormone analysis and gave information on where they were in their menstrual cycle. None of the women wore make-up, nor were they taking the contraceptive pill.
The researchers then selected the photograph of each woman that had been taken at the time of her highest urine-oestrogen level. As expected, this correlated to the point of ovulation in the women’s menstrual cycles. These photographs were rated by 14 men and 15 women, also aged 18 to 25, for attractiveness, health and femininity.
The group also rated two composite face images. One composite was an amalgamation of the 10 women with the lowest peak-oestrogen levels, while the other image was a combination of the 10 women with the highest levels (see image).
Alright and the composite image of the top 10 lowest and highest oestrogen level pictures is here
Now it is interesting that if I look closely I notice that skin tone and complexion, jawline, nose (interestingly not as much a fan of left nose on that count ~ left nose looks like it has a wider bridge).
Now right composite has a more pale complexion but also has a thinner jaw and apparently higher cheekbones, now it is interesting if you start to look at pictures of supermodels and the attributes you see there (while varied) can show features closer to right composite and then there the whole height thing. Also thinking along the lines of Sigourney Weaver, Glen Close as examples that don't match the LHS results.
Also interesting how makeup removed any statisticly significant correlations, makeup can obviously be a good thing ~ and in the case of composites it would have been in overall complexion.
I am reminded by that quote David S. Cohen quoted but couldn't remember who said it that *"there is no greater beauty than a face of imperfection". There may be an element of truth at play in perceptions of beauty, which are obviously tempered by cultural biases.
But then again the Greeks had formulas for beauty that looked at the geometry of it. I think that there are certain proportions that are aesthetically pleasing for instance Anita Ekberg, Sophia Loren and Monica Belluci.
From an evolutionary perspective the benefits of higher oestrogen are linked to fertility so natural selection favours higher oestrogen in females. But that is offset by other factors, I wonder what genetic components control femininity and what behavioural effects come into play into it.
*Found the quote, Francis Bacon ~ "There is no excellent beauty which hath not some strangeness in the proportion".
Last edited: