Why 1:1 jaw to cheekbones is shit, people here overestimate how wide jaws are

Show me where it says that people with high prenatal T have longer noses, I only saw nose width of being mentioned in that study.
Look at the chart where it shows high prenatal T faces vs low. High prenatal T face has a longer, wider nose, lower prenatal T has a shorter, narrower one.
 
If there are any images in that article, they are not showing for me.
It doesn’t have images. It talks about traits found in women with high estrogen levels, a short nose being one of them.
 
The length of the philtrum is not greater than the original.
It definitely looks longer, plus you also changed the gonions in the morph.

I’m getting the sense you don’t know what nose to philtrum is. If the ratio is the same, the philtrum is the same length
If the nose to philtrum ratio is still the same after making his nose longer, that means that his philtrum got lengthened too :feelsuhh::feelsuhh:
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 3573
Look at the chart where it shows high prenatal T faces vs low. High prenatal T face has a longer, wider nose, lower prenatal T has a shorter, narrower one.
The lengths of the noses look the same to me, but feel free to prove me wrong.
Rspb20151351f02
 
It definitely looks longer, plus you also changed the gonions in the morph.


If the nose to philtrum ratio is still the same after making his nose longer, that means that his philtrum got lengthened too :feelsuhh::feelsuhh:
“It definitely looks longer, plus you also changed the gonions in the morph”

Didn’t touch the gonions, wouldn’t be possible with the app I was using.

The philtrum was lengthened in proportion to the lengthening of the nose, meaning the philtrum length (nose base to bottom of lips or center of lips) remains the same, as it is lengthened in proportion to the nose.

Even if the philtrum were longer, that wouldn’t change anything. People with longer noses tend to have longer philtrums than people with short noses. Not including that would be foolish.
 
It talks about traits found in women with high estrogen levels, a short nose being one of them.
Stkxhbu.gif


This is the only mention to nose in the whole article:
The higher a woman’s levels of oestrogen the less the bones on her face grow (as well as her chin and nose).

It literally says NOTHING about nose length, that's your interpretation of it, it could be perfectly referring to the prominence or width of the nasal bridge.
 
The lengths of the noses look the same to me, but feel free to prove me wrong.
View attachment 933974
I can’t disprove your perception, but in terms of actual measurement, the nose farthest on the left is longer than the one farthest on the right, by about five-eight pixels. Same with the chin and philtrum.
 
Stkxhbu.gif


This is the only mention to nose in the whole article:


It literally says NOTHING about nose length, that's your interpretation of it, it could be perfectly referring to the prominence or width of the nasal bridge.
I take “prevents growth of the nose” to refer to growth in all dimensions: width, length, protrusion, etc. unless specified otherwise. However, that article is not my main support, so if you interpret it differently, that’s fine.
 
Didn’t touch the gonions, wouldn’t be possible with the app I was using.
Ezgifcom gif maker


The philtrum was lengthened in proportion to the lengthening of the nose, meaning the philtrum length (nose base to bottom of lips or center of lips) remains the same, as it is lengthened in proportion to the nose.
Wait, did you just say that philtrum length is measured from the base of the nose to the center of the lips (stomion)? If so, you are wrong, philtrum length is measured from the base of the nose (subnasale) to the top of the upper lip (labiale superius).

Even if the philtrum were longer, that wouldn’t change anything. People with longer noses tend to have longer philtrums than people with short noses. Not including that would be foolish.
I will quote myself:
Dude, dont you realize that even if you preserve his nose to philtrum ratio is philtrum length is still greater in the morphs? The increase of philtrum length in your morphs renders them invalid, since you can attribute the fact that the morphed pics look (arguably) more masculine than the original to the increased length of the philtrum and not to the increased length of the nose.
 
I take “prevents growth of the nose” to refer to growth in all dimensions: width, length, protrusion, etc. unless specified otherwise. However, that article is not my main support, so if you interpret it differently, that’s fine.
For example, this article refers to male noses being “larger” than female noses, and shows x-ray images as an example. The male nose is longer than the female, before and after puberty:

 
View attachment 933993


Wait, did you just say that philtrum length is measured from the base of the nose to the center of the lips (stomion)? If so, you are wrong, philtrum length is measured from the base of the nose (subnasale) to the top of the upper lip (labiale superius).


I will quote myself:

The gonions may have widened a bit then. You can narrow them back to the original if you think it disproves the point of more facial height looking masculine.

In the golden ratio proportion, its eyes to nostril top divided by nostril top to stomion, so I included both. Whichever you want to go by, the same length was maintained.

I’ve already addressed that quote. Philtrum being lengthened in proportion to lengthening of the nose means philtrum remains the same length.

But, even if it didn’t, that wouldn’t change anything. People with longer noses tend to have longer philtrums. Not including that would be foolish.
 
This was SO FUCKING OBVIOUS unless you're low iq
 
  • +1
Reactions: Hightwolf
This was SO FUCKING OBVIOUS unless you're low iq
way more people say this than you would expect. A lot of people assume that a lot of guys with square jaws have 1:1 ratios when 1:1 looks insane irl, and most have closer to 90% ratios.
A lot of guys with narrow bigonials have like 75% or even low 80s jaw width.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Deleted member 3573
way more people say this than you would expect. A lot of people assume that a lot of guys with square jaws have 1:1 ratios when 1:1 looks insane irl, and most have closer to 90% ratios.
A lot of guys with narrow bigonials have like 75% or even low 80s jaw width.
Yeah I can't understand why. Pretty much all good looking men have wider cheekbones than jaw.
 
  • +1
Reactions: Hightwolf
It definitely looks longer, plus you also changed the gonions in the morph.


If the nose to philtrum ratio is still the same after making his nose longer, that means that his philtrum got lengthened too :feelsuhh::feelsuhh:
Yes you can see this from the photos. But this also means there is likely an nose to philtrum length ratio which is probably around 2-2.5
 
I can’t disprove your perception, but in terms of actual measurement, the nose farthest on the left is longer than the one farthest on the right, by about five-eight pixels.


It seems to me that women have lower alae and nasions than men, but higher nasal tips.
Honestly, the nose on the right seems to be as long as the one on the left, if not shorter.

For example, this article refers to male noses being “larger” than female noses, and shows x-ray images as an example. The male nose is longer than the female, before and after puberty:

I checked the paper referenced in that article and although it mentions the anterior nasal height, there is no graph or table showing the values of it, but instead there is some weird formula that accounts for all the variables.

Here is it if you want to see it:
 


It seems to me that women have lower alae and nasions than men, but higher nasal tips.
Honestly, the nose on the right seems to be as long as the one on the left, if not shorter.


I checked the paper referenced in that article and although it mentions the anterior nasal height, there is no graph or table showing the values of it, but instead there is some weird formula that accounts for all the variables.

Here is it if you want to see it:

“Nose on the right seems to be as long as the one on the left, if not shorter”

Correct that it’s shorter. Same with the chin and philtrum.

You don’t even need to read the paper to see the image the article is referencing. In the x-ray image they use as an example of male dimorphic nose vs female, the male nose is significantly longer (by about 30 pixels).

They also reference how modern humans’ noses are much “smaller” than neanderthals. Neanderthals had very long noses.

Trying to exclude length from references to size is foolish.
 
Last edited:
“Nose on the right seems to be as long as the one on the left, if not shorter”

Correct that it’s shorter. Same with the chin and philtrum.

You don’t even need to read the paper to see the image it’s referencing. In the x-ray image they use as an example of male dimorphic nose vs female, the male nose is significantly longer (by about 30 pixels).

They also reference how modern humans’ noses are much “smaller” than neanderthals. Neanderthals had very long noses.

Trying to exclude length from references to size is foolish.
Also you should compare the one all the way on the left (highest prenatal T) to the one all the way on the right (lowest).
 
“Nose on the right seems to be as long as the one on the left, if not shorter”

Correct that it’s shorter. Same with the chin and philtrum.

You don’t even need to read the paper to see the image it’s referencing. In the x-ray image they use as an example of male dimorphic nose vs female, the male nose is significantly longer (by about 30 pixels).

They also reference how modern humans’ noses are much “smaller” than neanderthals. Neanderthals had very long noses.

Trying to exclude length from references to size is foolish.
For example, this article mentions the dimorphic difference in nose “size”, mentioning how females have shorter noses, on average:

“Another difference is the size. A woman’s nose can be shorter than a man.”

 
Another mention of dimorphic difference of length in reference to nose “size”:

“The average length of an adult male’s nose is 2.2 inches long, while a woman’s is 2 inches long. Ideally, the nose is balanced with the rest of a person’s facial features, fitting inside of its appropriate section when the face is divided into imaginary horizontal thirds or vertical fifths. When a nose exceeds these boundaries or is longer than 2.2 inches long for a man or 2 inches for a woman, it is usually considered oversized or large for a person’s face.”


Also references this paper which mentions males having an increased height in “nasal region”:

 
Don’t want to spam, but even this article that references the study on prenatal testosterone says that the higher prenatal T face has a longer nose:

“Masculine features included, for example, a wider brow, a longer nose, and a wider distance between the eyes.”

 
Correct that it’s shorter. Same with the chin and philtrum.
I actually meant the opposite, the masculine nose doesn't look longer to me.

Also you should compare the one all the way on the left (highest prenatal T) to the one all the way on the right (lowest).
That's literally what I did, look at the green lines.

Don’t want to spam, but even this article that references the study on prenatal testosterone says that the higher prenatal T face has a longer nose:

“Masculine features included, for example, a wider brow, a longer nose, and a wider distance between the eyes.”

This is what the study actually says:
GEFS selected five linear (forehead width, nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, upper lip height and nose width) and seven geodesic (intercanthal width, forehead width, outer canthal width, nasal bridge length, nasal tip protrusion, upper lip height and nose width) distances as the most discriminating features between the two sexes.

I tried to check the dataset of that study but it is not available:
 
Another mention of dimorphic difference of length in reference to nose “size”:

“The average length of an adult male’s nose is 2.2 inches long, while a woman’s is 2 inches long. Ideally, the nose is balanced with the rest of a person’s facial features, fitting inside of its appropriate section when the face is divided into imaginary horizontal thirds or vertical fifths. When a nose exceeds these boundaries or is longer than 2.2 inches long for a man or 2 inches for a woman, it is usually considered oversized or large for a person’s face.”

I would like to know the source of these average length claims.

Also references this paper which mentions males having an increased height in “nasal region”:

Only when sitting height increases:
The results of our analysis indicate that with the exception of possible early developmental differences in the subnasal region, nonallometric patterns of morphological variation in the nasal region are largely similar in males and females in our sample. In spite of this similarity however, there are differences in nasal region development associated with ontogenetic changes in sitting height. As sitting height increases, the male nasal cavity experiences a disproportionate increase in vertical dimensions that is not present in females.
While we are unable to establish a direct link between nasal development and energetically relevant variables in our longitudinal dataset (and therefore cannot rule out factors, e.g.,hormonal influences), our results nevertheless indicate that nasal development in males and females tracks sexual dimorphism in body composition and energetic requirements during ontogeny.
 
Last edited:
Indeed
Wide cheekbones narrow jaw ideal
Lion waiting in Namibia
lionmaxxing
 
I actually meant the opposite, the masculine nose doesn't look longer to me.


That's literally what I did, look at the green lines.


This is what the study actually says:


I tried to check the dataset of that study but it is not available:
Several problems with your measuring. You measured from top of the eyelid to nostril bottom. In the low testosterone face, the upper eyelid is much higher due to bigger eye sockets. That will make the distance longer than the high testosterone face. You also measured down to the nostril bottom or nasal tip, not the nose base. This will make the low testosterone face nose look longer as the nasal tip is higher in relation to nose base.

Even then, the high testosterone face nose still looks longer, which matches my measurement as well.

Just because the study didn’t mention nose length doesn’t mean it wasn’t found to be a dimorphic characteristic among high vs low testosterone races. In the graph of the high testosterone face, lips were made smaller, eyes smaller, eyebrows lower and thicker/denser, chin longer, skin darker, etc. lots of those weren’t mentioned in that quote but are still included in the chart.
 
Last edited:
I would like to know the source of these average length claims.


Only when sitting height increases:
“Only when sitting height increases”

I don’t understand why you think that overrides the point of that paper. Males are taller than females, on average, especially after puberty. That further corroborates the point that they have longer noses, on average, especially after puberty.
 
Several problems with your measuring. You measured from top of the eyelid to nostril bottom. In the low testosterone face, the upper eyelid is much higher due to bigger eye sockets. That will make the distance longer than the high testosterone face. You also measured down to the nostril bottom or nasal tip, not the nose base. This will make the low testosterone face nose look longer as the nasal tip is higher in relation to nose base.
I traced two horizontal lines from the nasion and subnasale of the masculine face and you can see how the subnasale is positioned lower in the feminine faces, now you could try to say that their nasions are lower as well, but honestly I don't see a significant difference between the position of their nasions.

I agree with what you said about the nasal tip tho, women have higher nasal base inclinations than men, so the feminine faces probably have shorter nasal bridge lengths (nasion to pronasale), but I highly doubt they have shorter nasal heights (nasion to subnasale).

Just because the study didn’t mention nose length doesn’t mean it wasn’t found to be a dimorphic characteristic among high vs low testosterone races.
What? It literally says that nasal bridge length is a discriminating feature between the two genders, but it doesn't specify which gender has longer nasal bridges (it is probably the masculine gender tbh).

Anyway, that study doesn't mention nasal height.

In the graph of the high testosterone face, lips were made smaller, eyes smaller, eyebrows lower and thicker/denser, chin longer, skin darker, etc. lots of those weren’t mentioned in that quote but are still included in the chart.
The intercanthal and outer canthal widths account for the PFL, upper lip height was mentioned and skin tone wasn't mentioned because they only took into account facial landmarks and the distances between them to create the algorithm to distinguish between male and female faces.
 
Last edited:
“Only when sitting height increases”

I don’t understand why you think that overrides the point of that paper. Males are taller than females, on average, especially after puberty. That further corroborates the point that they have longer noses, on average, especially after puberty.
Hmm, fair enough, but keep in mind that sitting height doesn't take into account leg length, idk if that changes anything tbh.
 
I traced two horizontal lines from the nasion and subnasale of the masculine face and you can see how the subnasale is positioned lower in the feminine faces, now you could try to say that their nasions are lower as well, but honestly I don't see a significant difference between the position of their nasions.
I agree with what you said about the nasal tip tho, women have higher nasal base inclinations than men, so the feminine faces probably have shorter nasal bridge lengths (nasion to pronasale), but I highly doubt they have shorter nasal heights (nasion to subnasale).


What? It literally says that nasal bridge length is a discriminating feature between the two genders, but it doesn't specify which gender has longer nasal bridges (it is probably the masculine gender tbh).

Anyway, that study doesn't mention nasal height.


The intercanthal and outer canthal widths account for the PFL, upper lip height was mentioned and skin tone wasn't mentioned because they only took into account facial landmarks and the distances between them to create the algorithm to distinguish between male and female faces.
Female nasion is lower, that was actually mentioned in the study (lower nasal bridges).

The women do have shorter nasal heights. I measured again (went to nose base, not nostril bottom like you did) and found the same results.

Again, just because the study didn’t talk about nasal length doesn’t mean it’s not reflected in the graph. I already mentioned several masculine characteristics that were shown in the high testosterone face that were not specifically mentioned (darker skin, smaller eyes, thicker eyebrows, etc.).
 
Last edited:
Hmm, fair enough, but keep in mind that sitting height doesn't take into account leg length, idk if that changes anything tbh.
It doesn’t. Males with longer legs tend to have longer torsoes and bigger bodies as a whole.
 
I

Female nasion is lower, that was actually mentioned in the study (lower nasal bridges).

The women do have shorter nasal heights. I measured again (went to nose base, not nostril bottom like you did) and found the same results.

Again, just because the study didn’t talk about nasal length doesn’t mean it’s not reflected in the graph. I already mentioned several masculine characteristics that were shown in the high testosterone face thy were not specifically mentioned (darker skin, smaller eyes, thicker eyebrows, etc.).
Smaller eyes is not referring to PFL, it’s referring to the vertical size of the eyes. The high testosterone face has very narrow eyes, low testosterone face has very large eyes.
 
Smaller eyes is not referring to PFL, it’s referring to the vertical size of the eyes. The high testosterone face has very narrow eyes, low testosterone face has very large eyes.
Would you say wide pfl is feminine or masculine trait?
 
Smaller eyes is not referring to PFL, it’s referring to the vertical size of the eyes. The high testosterone face has very narrow eyes, low testosterone face has very large eyes.
Yes, but the feminine face also has a longer PFL than the masculine face.
 
Yes, but the feminine face also has a longer PFL than the masculine face.
Maybe, but that’s not what I was referring to when I said small eyes. One among many masculine traits that was reflected on the graph but not mentioned in the study.
 
Would you say wide pfl is feminine or masculine trait?
It’s the opposite of neotony (babies have small eyes horizontally) but with what I know I wouldn’t say it’s a dimorphic trait.

Took PFL measurements of the chart and there was no difference in eyeball width.

Greater intercanthal and outercanthal width found in the study was due to wide nasal bridge (male dimorphic trait), not PFL.
 
Could you measure the ratio for the dom guy?
1 s20 S1090513805000188 gr1 1

@Hightwolf
 
Last edited:
it shouldn't even be a question. Jaw wider than zygos is not even natural it could be sign of a genetic deformity or just obesity.
My oneitis has her jaw wider than her zygos, just slightly but still and it looks good. It's one of the main reasons why I find her attractive, she overcompensates something that I lack yet
 
Intro
I see this mentioned every once in a while, how a jaw as wide as cheekbones is ideal or very masculine or something. In reality however, 1:1 bigonial to bizygomatic is almost always shit for aesthetics.
I believe a big part of the problem is how people over estimate how wide a jaw is. This is why I will post some examples and the measurements I took so people can get a better understanding and visualize it better.

Examples
Face 1:
View attachment 933253
Now look at this guy. I am pretty sure no one on this forum would say this guy has has too narrow of a jaw. Before I tell you his ratio, try to estimate it yourself what you think it is.
View attachment 933258 525/588 = 0.893

Now let's try with another example.
Face 2: View attachment 933260
Sean Opry doesn't have the same cheekbones as the first guy, the first guy's cheekbones sort of protrude out which make his ratio lower. I think it's pretty common for people to say O'Pry's jaw is too narrow. Again try to estimate the ratio.
View attachment 933262 146/166 = 0.879

Now I will do it again with Brad Pitt:
View attachment 933274
View attachment 933275 Between 0.973 and 0.988

So even fucking Brad Pitt doesn't have a 1:1 jaw ratio. Could you even imagine how insane a jaw with a greater ratio would be. A jaw like that is physically impossible due to the skull shape unless someone is fat or has insane masseters / fucked up cheekbones somehow.

Some additonal notes:
I estimated where the gonion should be by drawing a line along the mouth, sometimes it is slightly lower than this which would give a smaller ratio so have a +- 0.03 to all my ratios

Also there are two factors that affect how we percieve the jaw width (There are many but these two are the most important)
-Cheekbones / hollow cheeks. Like in the first example his jaw is wide but his cheekbones protrude out at the top not like O'Pry's which has a diagonal / line from his gonion to the cheekbones. If you have this (similar to amnesia and salludon) then you would naturally have a lower ratio and would look better with a slightly lower one since your jaw is effectively the same width.

-Masseters. Pitt's masseters make it so that the jaw actually gets wider above the gonion which makes the jaw look even wider. This is why I gave to ratios for Pitt. Though even at the widest part of his massetters it never actually goes wider than his cheekbones.

What's Ideal?
This has been discussed to death already and you can find a lot of people talking about it here and in general most agree that you should be above 0.8 and around 0.9 is very good.
The one thing I have to add to this is the part about the cheekbones, where if they are like the first guy's cheekbones you might look better with a ratio of 0.85 - 0.88 instead.
Irrelevant, it’s about prominence and angularity . Ratios are secondary
 

Similar threads

baku9
Replies
37
Views
2K
highschoolmaxxer
highschoolmaxxer
Manana
Replies
30
Views
2K
synock21
synock21
F
Replies
30
Views
1K
CalulArgintiu59
CalulArgintiu59
longjohnmong
Replies
7
Views
957
xeqri
xeqri

Users who are viewing this thread

Back
Top