How crucial is sexual dimorphism really? [thread discussing the importance of facial masculinity]

[Deleted member 25667]

According to what is most likely the majority of members here, facial masculinity is said to be the pinnacle of male facial aesthetics, it is what makes a quintessential chad - that is the wide, robust and forward grown jaw, narrow hunter eyes with protruding orbital rims and a strong brow ridge, small forehead, squared off NW0 hairline, large protruding chin etc etc; essentially sexually dimorphic morphological characteristics.

However, contrastingly so, the science regarding the importance of male facial sexual dimorphism is extremely contradictory to this theory widely held by PSL and looksmax users.

Example 1.
This study shows that when perceived height is controlled, a males facial masculinity seems to be utterly unrelated to a males facial attractiveness. An explanation proposed by this finding could be that women who choose men with sexually dimorphic facial features as the most attractive in studies where other variables are not controlled for, are possibly using it as a cue or indicator of sorts for other supposed attractive traits such as height.

Example 2.
A meta analysis of the relationship between various forms of observable masculinity found no significant relationship between facial masculinity and sexual success or the number of children fathered in modern developed societies.

Example 3.
There have been studies where it has been shown that women show no partiality for facially masculine men and instead have displayed a preference for men who display a sense of facial femininity or to put into other words "prettiness". [1] [2]

Example 4.
The existence of pretty boys, who are in all regards males deemed facially attractive by many despite seemingly lacking in terms of craniofacial sexual dimorphism. If facial attractiveness is highly objective and therefore follows a quantifiable formula with dimorphism being a supposed key component, doesn't the extant of "pretty boys" who are essentially just men who lack dimorphic craniofacial aspects stand as an exception to an objective formula.

Spoiler: Examples of objectively attractive males who lack dimorphism

Example 5.
Human evolution. Throughout human history there has been a trend/trade off composing of increasing neurocranium size and thus decreasing the size of the jaw to create space and functionality for a larger brain, and the sexual selection against other "archaic" sexually dimorphic characteristics such as the brow ridge, larger nasal base (nose), total splanchnocranium size relative to the neurocranium. Essentially the human species is becoming more neotenous, vastly contrary to the proposed case of women selecting for high testosterone, sexually dimorphic chads with warrior skulls.

Ultimately, not even scientists with doctorate degrees have been able to draw a consensus on whether women prefer men who exhibit sexually dimorphic characteristics or not as shown by a multitude of other contradictory studies indicating that sometimes women do actually prefer facially masculine men? But what seems only when certain variables are at play such as the abundance of recourses and ecology the women inhabit. [1] [2] [3] - However example 1 may debunk these findings.

 

[Deleted member 22924]

you are back bro

 

[Sprinkles]

Masculinity = height

 

[slayerToBe]

Regardless whether a chad is masculine or prettyboy, they all have one thing in common, high T levels. The difference is unlike masculine Chad's prettyboys have high Estrogen levels. This is why Chad's all across the spectrum have certain things in common such as a defined jaw, defined cheekbones, and almond or hunter eyes.

 

[john2]

It is important, very important.

Here's a picture of a dimorphic male. Mogs all those prettyboys with low dimorphism you posted as your examples.

 

[User49]

interesting tbh

but just run the tinder experiments ngl

 

[Gandy]

Regardless whether a chad is masculine or prettyboy, they all have one thing in common, high T levels. The difference is unlike masculine Chad's prettyboys have high Estrogen levels. This is why Chad's all across the spectrum have certain things in common such as a defined jaw, defined cheekbones, and almond or hunter eyes.

This. They may have feminine soft features, but they all have high testosterone levels in common. Broad defined jaws, good shoulders, good muscle insertions and fat distribution.

'Chads', "prettyboys" etc. are high testosterone men whose soft facial features (like eyes, midface, cheeks, eyebrows) are neotenous and boyish but the rest of their body and their face is very masculine.

(Matthew Noszka is a prime example of this look)

I have never ever seen a 'prettyboy' go viral if they had a weak frame, weak jawline etc., women simply skip and ignore those guys even if they have youthful faces.

 

[Deleted member 25667]

in common such as a defined jaw

This isn't necessarily dimorphic nor is it determined solely via testosterone levels. Otherwise all women would have a recessed maxilla and mandible, when they do not.

almond or hunter eyes

Almond eyes are also not a sexually dimorphic trait. Women actually tend have a higher degree of canthal tilt whereas men have a neutral - slightly positive with a down turned medial canthus.

 

[Xangsane]

This. They may have feminine soft features, but they all have high testosterone levels in common. Broad defined jaws, good shoulders, good muscle insertions and fat distribution.

'Chads', "prettyboys" etc. are high testosterone men whose soft facial features (like eyes, midface, cheeks, eyebrows) are neotenous and boyish but the rest of their body and their face is very masculine.

(Matthew Noszka is a prime example of this look)

I have never ever seen a 'prettyboy' go viral if they had a weak frame, weak jawline etc., women simply skip and ignore those guys even if they have youthful faces.

The niggas foids complain about on these Are We Dating The Same Guy groups tend to have very masc appearances, hardly any prettyboys. I managed to infiltrate using my mum's account but we left.

MY MUM MANAGED TO GET IN AN "ARE WE DATING THE SAME GUY" GROUP. We had a look at the content posted on these groups, as a family. Here's what we saw.

So I guess that's who they actually wanted but they know those men won't even look at them so they cope and claim they don't swipe right on them, but in their hearts they want to. Or alternatively they swipe, but don't match, but if they claim that it'll bruise their egos. Beauty is...

looksmax.org

 

[Orc]

my ogre features are so pronounced I need to actively make myself appear more feminine to seem approachable.

 

[slayerToBe]

This isn't necessarily dimorphic nor is it determined solely via testosterone levels. Otherwise all women would have a recessed maxilla and mandible, when they do not.

Almond eyes are also not a sexually dimorphic trait. Women actually tend have a higher degree of canthal tilt whereas men have a neutral - slightly positive with a down turned medial canthus.

by defined jaw I mean a strong jaw. Men tend to have broad and more angular (more defined/strong), whereas women tend to have narrower jaws that curve rather than being angular. Furthermore, almond eyes may not be as dimorphic, but hunter eyes def are. Men tend to have more vertically and deepset narrow eyes, which tends to result in hunter eyes/semi hunter Eyes, whereas women have rounder and larger eyes

 

[Deleted member 25667]

but they all have high testosterone levels in common. Broad defined jaws

You're making the common mistake that most PSL users do in which defining a forward grown, "defined" jaw as a typical dimorphic trait and thus the result of levels of high testosterone. An angular, non recessed and/or weak maxilla and mandible is a sign of healthy human development in both genders.

The angularity of a jaw isn't generally a sexually dimorphic trait nor are sexually dimorphic male jaws (low gonial angle, flared gonions, extreme anteface/forward growth) deemed the most attractive by women.

 

[Deleted member 25667]

by defined jaw I mean a strong jaw. Men tend to have broad and more angular (more defined/strong), whereas women tend to have narrower jaws that curve rather than being angular. Furthermore, almond eyes may not be as dimorphic, but hunter eyes def are. Men tend to have more vertically and deepset narrow eyes, which tends to result in hunter eyes/semi hunter Eyes, whereas women have rounder and larger eyes

So you theorise that some dimorphic traits are attractive whereas others are perhaps not? Any plausible explanation as for why.

Where do other sexually dimorphic testosterone induced features fit in such as the brow ridge (virtually none existent in the pretty boy examples i used)?

 

[Deleted member 25667]

you are back bro

Only for this thread tbh, just wanted to see what users had to say. Will be taking an extended break after this though, gotta grind for these surgeries

 

[slayerToBe]

I

So you theorise that some dimorphic traits are attractive whereas others are perhaps not? Any plausible explanation as for why.

Where do other sexually dimorphic testosterone induced features fit in such as the brow ridge (virtually none existent in the pretty boy examples i used)?

I dont know what you mean by that I just said that features common in chads across the spectrum are dimorphic. Chad's even have a defined brow ridge. By defined brow ridge I merely mean a noticeable one, not that Neanderthal/Caveman looking type that mma fighters have.


Sean O'Pry (Maesthetic)

Vinnie Hacker (Prettyboy)

As you can see, despite being a prettyboy, he still has dimorphic features such as a defined browridge (it was hard to find images where it wasn't completely covered by his hair). So Chad's all across the spectrum have dimorphic features, however prettyboys tend to have other things that you would get from also having high estrogen.

 

[Deleted member 16357]

According to what is most likely the majority of members here, facial masculinity is said to be the pinnacle of male facial aesthetics, it is what makes a quintessential chad - that is the wide, robust and forward grown jaw, narrow hunter eyes with protruding orbital rims and a strong brow ridge, small forehead, squared off NW0 hairline, large protruding chin etc etc; essentially sexually dimorphic morphological characteristics.

View attachment 2127742


However, contrastingly so, the science regarding the importance of male facial sexual dimorphism is extremely contradictory to this theory widely held by PSL and looksmax users.

Example 1.
This study shows that when perceived height is controlled, a males facial masculinity seems to be utterly unrelated to a males facial attractiveness. An explanation proposed by this finding could be that women who choose men with sexually dimorphic facial features as the most attractive in studies where other variables are not controlled for, are possibly using it as a cue or indicator of sorts for other supposed attractive traits such as height.

Example 2.
A meta analysis of the relationship between various forms of observable masculinity found no significant relationship between facial masculinity and sexual success or the number of children fathered in modern developed societies.

Example 3.
There have been studies where it has been shown that women show no partiality for facially masculine men and instead have displayed a preference for men who display a sense of facial femininity or to put into other words "prettiness". [1] [2]

Example 4.
The existence of pretty boys, who are in all regards males deemed facially attractive by many despite seemingly lacking in terms of craniofacial sexual dimorphism. If facial attractiveness is highly objective and therefore follows a quantifiable formula with dimorphism being a supposed key component, doesn't the extant of "pretty boys" who are essentially just men who lack dimorphic craniofacial aspects stand as an exception to an objective formula.

Spoiler: Examples of objectively attractive males who lack dimorphism

View attachment 2127636View attachment 2127637View attachment 2127638View attachment 2127639View attachment 2127641

Example 5.
Human evolution. Throughout human history there has been a trend/trade off composing of increasing neurocranium size and thus decreasing the size of the jaw to create space and functionality for a larger brain, and the sexual selection against other "archaic" sexually dimorphic characteristics such as the brow ridge, larger nasal base (nose), total splanchnocranium size relative to the neurocranium. Essentially the human species is becoming more neotenous, vastly contrary to the proposed case of women selecting for high testosterone, sexually dimorphic chads with warrior skulls.


View attachment 2127666




Ultimately, not even scientists with doctorate degrees have been able to draw a consensus on whether women prefer men who exhibit sexually dimorphic characteristics or not as shown by a multitude of other contradictory studies indicating that sometimes women do actually prefer facially masculine men? But what seems only when certain variables are at play such as the abundance of recourses and ecology the women inhabit. [1] [2] [3] - However example 1 may debunk these findings.

Half of girls are bi so doesn't matter at all prob

 

[Deleted member 25667]

I

I dont know what you mean by that I just said that features common in chads across the spectrum are dimorphic. Chad's even have a defined brow ridge. By defined brow ridge I merely mean a noticeable one, not that Neanderthal/Caveman looking type that mma fighters have.


Sean O'Pry (Maesthetic)
View attachment 2127796
Vinnie Hacker (Prettyboy)

View attachment 2127797View attachment 2127799


As you can see, despite being a prettyboy, he still has dimorphic features such as a defined browridge (it was hard to find images where it wasn't completely covered by his hair). So Chad's all across the spectrum have dimorphic features, however prettyboys tend to have other things that you would get from also having high estrogen.

True, chads do generally display a sense of dimorphism. However, what I'm trying to decipher is how much of their dimorphism plays into their overall attractiveness compared to other aspects such as averageness, fluctuating asymmetry, health and youth indicators, geometric proportions, ideal ratios, phenotype, colouring and so on.

Two contrary examples being chico and bieber. Both have almost hyper feminine, non dimorphic side profiles; 404 non existent brow ridge, upturned nose, relatively high gonial angle, no full ante-face (forward growth of the jaw relative to the frontal cranium).

It is somewhat possible that a halo effect may be going on here, where we attribute some attractive features on men as "masculine" ones where that may not be the case. As we see when measured in a completely objective sense, a lot of the men deemed extremely attractive aren't actually that sexually dimorphic overall.

 

[Gandy]

You're making the common mistake that most PSL users do in which defining a forward grown, "defined" jaw as a typical dimorphic trait and thus the result of levels of high testosterone. An angular, non recessed and/or weak maxilla and mandible is a sign of healthy human development in both genders.

The angularity of a jaw isn't generally a sexually dimorphic trait nor are sexually dimorphic male jaws (low gonial angle, flared gonions, extreme anteface/forward growth) deemed the most attractive by women.

A recessed jaw looks horrible on women as well, that I can't refute. Good forward growth is necessary in both genders to look good.

 

[slayerToBe]

True, chads do generally display a sense of dimorphism. However, what I'm trying to decipher is how much of their dimorphism plays into their overall attractiveness compared to other aspects such as averageness, fluctuating asymmetry, health and youth indicators, geometric proportions, ideal ratios, phenotype, colouring and so on.

Two contrary examples being chico and bieber. Both have almost hyper feminine, non dimorphic side profiles; 404 non existent brow ridge, upturned nose, relatively high gonial angle, no full ante-face (forward growth of the jaw relative to the frontal cranium).
View attachment 2127824View attachment 2127825

It is somewhat possible that a halo effect may be going on here, where we attribute some attractive features on men as "masculine" ones where that may not be the case. As we see when measured in a completely objective sense, a lot of the men deemed extremely attractive aren't actually that sexually dimorphic overall.

In my opinion, dimorphism is important, however it is not everything. In the case of chico who has less dimorphism compared to other Chads, still has SOME dimorphic features such as straight lowset eyebrows, deepset hunter eyes, and he does have a noticeable browridge to an extent, as seen in the photo below with better angles.

The reason that chico mogs so hard however, is not attributed to his levels of dimorphism, rather his overall facial harmony, which makes him extremely aesthetic and pleasant to look at.

As for Justin Bieber, the only girls that crushed on him were teen girls no older than 16. This is because he was still a kid and he had low dimorphism at the time, so girls attracted to him were also... kids.

In short, dimorphism is important, however it is not everything.

 

[Deleted member 25667]

is not attributed to his levels of dimorphism, rather his overall facial harmony

I mostly agree with what you said but people on this forum throw the word "harmony" around pretty nonsensically. What exactly is harmony, is it even quantifiable, can we measure it - is it simply ratios?

 

[grooxx]

According to what is most likely the majority of members here, facial masculinity is said to be the pinnacle of male facial aesthetics, it is what makes a quintessential chad - that is the wide, robust and forward grown jaw, narrow hunter eyes with protruding orbital rims and a strong brow ridge, small forehead, squared off NW0 hairline, large protruding chin etc etc; essentially sexually dimorphic morphological characteristics.

View attachment 2127742


However, contrastingly so, the science regarding the importance of male facial sexual dimorphism is extremely contradictory to this theory widely held by PSL and looksmax users.

Example 1.
This study shows that when perceived height is controlled, a males facial masculinity seems to be utterly unrelated to a males facial attractiveness. An explanation proposed by this finding could be that women who choose men with sexually dimorphic facial features as the most attractive in studies where other variables are not controlled for, are possibly using it as a cue or indicator of sorts for other supposed attractive traits such as height.

Example 2.
A meta analysis of the relationship between various forms of observable masculinity found no significant relationship between facial masculinity and sexual success or the number of children fathered in modern developed societies.

Example 3.
There have been studies where it has been shown that women show no partiality for facially masculine men and instead have displayed a preference for men who display a sense of facial femininity or to put into other words "prettiness". [1] [2]

Example 4.
The existence of pretty boys, who are in all regards males deemed facially attractive by many despite seemingly lacking in terms of craniofacial sexual dimorphism. If facial attractiveness is highly objective and therefore follows a quantifiable formula with dimorphism being a supposed key component, doesn't the extant of "pretty boys" who are essentially just men who lack dimorphic craniofacial aspects stand as an exception to an objective formula.

Spoiler: Examples of objectively attractive males who lack dimorphism

View attachment 2127636View attachment 2127637View attachment 2127638View attachment 2127639View attachment 2127641

Example 5.
Human evolution. Throughout human history there has been a trend/trade off composing of increasing neurocranium size and thus decreasing the size of the jaw to create space and functionality for a larger brain, and the sexual selection against other "archaic" sexually dimorphic characteristics such as the brow ridge, larger nasal base (nose), total splanchnocranium size relative to the neurocranium. Essentially the human species is becoming more neotenous, vastly contrary to the proposed case of women selecting for high testosterone, sexually dimorphic chads with warrior skulls.


View attachment 2127666




Ultimately, not even scientists with doctorate degrees have been able to draw a consensus on whether women prefer men who exhibit sexually dimorphic characteristics or not as shown by a multitude of other contradictory studies indicating that sometimes women do actually prefer facially masculine men? But what seems only when certain variables are at play such as the abundance of recourses and ecology the women inhabit. [1] [2] [3] - However example 1 may debunk these findings.

Childs fathered is a stoopid parameter to consider. Fathering children is literally a beta thing.

Then when it comes to dimorphism. Too much dimorphism means danger. For real. Ladies desire enough dimorphism for them to have no doubt about your sexuality, but they also want you to be trustable, which féminin traits are for. Basic male dimorphism is browridge, zygos, jaw big ENOUGH for people not taking you for a women. When everything is clear that you are strong enough, and trustable enough, they want harmony which means good development and health (provided anyway you have good maxilla).

 

[grooxx]

Childs fathered is a stoopid parameter to consider. Fathering children is literally a beta thing.

Then when it comes to dimorphism. Too much dimorphism means danger. For real. Ladies desire enough dimorphism for them to have no doubt about your sexuality, but they also want you to be trustable, which féminin traits are for. Basic male dimorphism is browridge, zygos, jaw big ENOUGH for people not taking you for a women. When everything is clear that you are strong enough, and trustable enough, they want harmony which means good development and health (provided anyway you have good maxilla).

Basically explain what is "ogre" opposed to manlet. Manlet doesn't have no choice else than people trusting him while ogre have trouble for people to trust them because people are literally fuckin scared of them.

 

[Deleted member 25667]

Childs fathered is a stoopid parameter to consider. Fathering children is literally a beta thing.

Sexual success however is not a stupid parameter to consider

 

[grooxx]

That's why pretty boy theory is not stupid at all and not a gay thing.
Guys AND girls will love you.

 

[slayerToBe]

I mostly agree with what you said but people on this forum throw the word "harmony" around pretty nonsensically. What exactly is harmony, is it even quantifiable, can we measure it - is it simply ratios?

To be honest, there doesn't appear to be a true universal quantifiable definition of harmony. I suppose that harmony is heavily involved with ratios, as if one or more ratios are off, then it screws up harmony. Really, its just how well features go together and how aesthetic it looks. People with high facial harmony are obvious and it is somewhat pleasant to look at them due to having high harmony, such as Chico.

 

[grooxx]

Sexual success however is not a stupid parameter to consider

Yeah of course, provided it is accounted the right way. And for this kind of stuff, how can you assess it for real?
You can't listen to what people say as ego and society standards are too much of a thing.
You can't observe them 24/7.
You can't have lab rats judging them as a position of power would be given to attendant, therefore creating a bias. (On top of ego and society standards).

Even though it is a true and needed parameter, it is not one I would trust in a study. I haven't looked at the study though, so maybe they have done it in a right way?

 

[grooxx]

I mostly agree with what you said but people on this forum throw the word "harmony" around pretty nonsensically. What exactly is harmony, is it even quantifiable, can we measure it - is it simply ratios?

Harmony is first of all symmetry. And then it is being failoless on each individual features of the face. This last thing implies naturally that some ratios are respected. I would call them healthy ratios, ratios that would not make you a monster nor an outlet

 

[Deleted member 21531]

Who gives a fuck male gaze mogs