Why is face so important biologically speaking?

[gaymidget]

I thought about it many times and I can't get a good explanation. So we know that wide hips and big breast are attractive because they show that a women is fertile and has good hormones. We know that a deep voice, height and broad frame are attractive because they show high testosterone which means that a men is strong and can defend a women and her offspring. But why the heck is face the most important part? Its so random, ugly parent can have good looking children, good looking parents can have ugly children. Sometimes there is a huge difference in attractiveness between siblings. Why do we care so much about something like a face which has 0 evolutionary utility? I

mean, yeah a recessed, malnourished and unhealthy looking face means unhealthy genes and offspring but what makes Chicos face more evolutionary beneficial than of someone healthy average looking? Is here any Aspie scientist who knows the answer? Are we maybe overestimating face because of dating apps when in person, height/frame/voice/muscles are equally as important? Is it maybe social status?

 

[Deleted member 7776]

Prenatal hormonal environment (good or bad) - indicator thereof and indicator of good genes or bad genes

 

[gaymidget]

Prenatal hormonal environment (good or bad) - indicator thereof and indicator of good genes or bad genes

You mean that good prenatal hormones means facial attractiveness and good genes? I mean, I am over average in face, I get easily women in clubs despite being a 5'10 manlet and framelet and the girls are often in the 6-8/10 bracket which isn't too bad. I got rated 5-6PSL on this forum. But good god, I have shit genes. I have small wrists, I have a rather bad frame, I am rather short, I have a highish voice and I got diagnosed with ADHD and a autoimmune disease which can make be bed ridden in older age. So I got shithands in the genetic lottery but I can get girls because of my Dads high cheekbones which I got. So it makes 0 sense.

 

[TheoryMaxxer]

Another dimension of facial attractiveness is "fighting success", more to do with how well you would take a punch than give one. The hooding and under-eye support for example, as well as a sharp-looking jaw.

Then there's the health to consider, in the skin texture and colour, with hair as well. There's also facial averageness and symmetry, which is sort of how you would identify someone as being of diverse yet still in the ingroup of a genetic group

At the end of the day, I'm sure it's not arbitrary and it's so important because it's so important, we would have not evolved this if it weren't beneficial

 

[TheoryMaxxer]

You mean that good prenatal hormones means facial attractiveness and good genes? I mean, I am over average in face, I get easily women in clubs despite being a 5'10 manlet and framelet and the girls are often in the 6-8/10 bracket which isn't too bad. I got rated 5-6PSL on this forum. But good god, I have shit genes. I have small wrists, I have a rather bad frame, I am rather short, I have a highish voice and I got diagnosed with ADHD and a autoimmune disease which can make be bed ridden in older age. So I got shithands in the genetic lottery but I can get girls because of my Dads high cheekbones which I got. So it makes 0 sense.

Can't speak of the frame, but 5'10 is average or above in most places, so that's just nonsense you have in your head. And the ADHD and autoimmune disorders would not have affected you in a hunter-gatherer environment, so you don't have shit genes for our true environment, just the modern one.

 

[MaxillaIsEverything]

Attractive people activate dopamine receptors in other people’s brains and the main indicator of attractiveness in humans is still facial symmetry. Like you said just signals good health and better tolerance of stress in development/upbringing. Preferences definitely changed though. Today a man’s physical strength is not nearly as important as it once was so extremely masculine faces no longer preferred. Now it is legit pure aesthetics caused by harmony of facial features.

 

[eduardkoopman]

Why is face so important biologically speaking?

Great or best indicator of good/bad genes, immune system, etc..

 

[Deleted member 9344]

First thing people look at...

 

[Deleted member 2632]

It is the most important feature to recognize other humans, thats why people get twins confused because they have similar faces, but not people with similar bodies or heights

Face is a sign of someone's age, health, race, and intelligence. Face expresses emotion, its where people communicate with others, it is used for sight, hearing, taste, and smell

Our skulls is the main difference between humans and apes, apes skulls grew their mandible much larger to chew harder food while humans cranium grew to allow for more brain size

 

[TheAnomaly]

Attractive people activate dopamine receptors in other people’s brains and the main indicator of attractiveness in humans is still facial symmetry. Like you said just signals good health and better tolerance of stress in development/upbringing. Preferences definitely changed though. Today a man’s physical strength is not nearly as important as it once was so extremely masculine faces no longer preferred. Now it is legit pure aesthetics caused by harmony of facial features.

Yes!!!

 

[AutisticBeaner]

it's all because of the airway, believe me

 

[Deleted member 2621]

health, good airways, high dht and t, good immune system

 

[Deleted member 8758]

Form and function. A good looking person has fulfilled their genetic potential, theres no guesswork when evaluating them.

Most people actually have good genes but cant showcase them because they had shitty development (like mouth breathing, poor nutrition, prenatal issues.)

The face affects more than just looks. If you face is recessed that retracts the positioning of your wind pipe and affects neck posture and a domino effect to other things that I dont care to sperg about. Importantly, good looking faces have optimized breathing, thats what sets them apart from ugly people (consider the sleep apnea epidemic we've had for decades.) They are functionally optimized to a high degree and that translates to us evaluating them as aesthetic.

 

[Deusmaximus]

Just the halo effect. Big and sharp bones are creating a more imposing and special face. The theories about healthy offspring and immune system is just cope and bullshit.
Otherwise big ogre looking hooligan boxer without harmony would be the highest of the smv.
The fact that a big upper eyelid exposure can destroy a mans attractiveness, just shows that smv has nothing to do with reproduction or survival success.

 

[mulattomaxxer]

Face is most important due to it telling you alot about somebodies hormonal profile and functional health. It also includes sexual selection based on aesthetics (a beautiful face is nice to look at) and current cultural beauty standards.

You can have a properly developed fully functional face and it still be unaesthetic. Beauty is a gift not a reward from having an optimal genetics + enviroment. Beauty standards are also influenced by society, which is why you have diffrent beauty standards across the world, although eurocentric beauty standards are the most dominate force.

 

[Mr.cope]

Im taking AP psychology and it has something to do with natural selection

 

[Mr.cope]

Even if the male lion cant sexually please a female lion the female lion will just leave him, and their kids if they have any

 

[Deleted member 6573]

Because humans are inherently vain creatures and the face is the first thing you see, and the main thing you see. When you talk to a person, you look at their face. When you think of someone, you think of their face.

 

[Schizoidcel]

Post-2007 females don't really pick partners based on evolutionary utility anymore

Fisherian runaway

Fisherian runaway is a model of how sexual selection can lead to exaggerated physical or behavioral traits (ornament) and exaggerated preferences for these traits...

incels.wiki

The sexy son hypothesis was proposed by Weatherhead & Robertson in 1979 and considers the consequence of runaway selection for female mate choice.[25] It simply states that the positive feedback loop can make women so attracted to a man's ornament that women will readily choose a "sexy man" regardless of other considerations such as his morality or paternal investment, because the man's ornament—which is partly heritable—will confer the same reproductive advantage on their male offspring. The male offspring will hence also be "sexy" to other women, making up for any other flaws on part of their father.[26] This is particularly staggering in women, otherwise coy, engaging in casual sex with men way above their league (i.e. getting pumped and dumped), then resulting in single mothers and the betabuxx phenomenon.

Since women heavily depended on men's provision throughout human history,[27] only a tiny percentage of men are good looking enough to make up for other potential flaws and hence can skip women's typical coy waiting time.[28] Women would also much more readily forego using a condom with a good looking mate.[29] Of course, men also more readily copulate with sexy women, even more than women, but men have less parental investment and hence do not need to care as much about such considerations. This is evidenced by men's much higher inclination to copulate with a random stranger, i.e. lower standards for casual sex.[28] Men are also more choosy when they actually have to provide.

Hence, for women, copulating only based on sexiness has more drastic implications, explaining why people care less about the "sexy daughters" phenomenon. However, arguably, a similarly risky strategy for men is raping a sexy woman (to produce sexy daughters as a promising vehicle of their own genes). Both are irresponsible and socially parasitic as they depend on others investing in the offspring (in modern societies via taxes). Engaging in alpha fuxx, beta buxx, the woman risks not being provided for. Engaging in rape, the man risks death and exile and also won't provide for the offspring. But provided some do engage in these strategies, may mean such sexual strategies have evolved because better looking offspring can make up for these risks on average (in terms of evolutionary fitness).

It is disputed to which extent male choice can actually result in a positive-feedback process for selecting female ornament (sexy daughters),[citation needed] but men's ridiculously strong attraction to large female breasts strongly points to runaway selection regarding sexy daughters.

Maladaptiveness
Various members of the manosphere claimed that the increasingly dimorphic beauty standards that men are expected to adhere to in a harsher modern dating environment may be the beginning of a Fisherian runaway or intensification of existing ones. Women are thought to increasingly choose men with the most sexually dimorphic traits such as cartoonishly large muscles and frame, with no selective attention paid to traits like loyalty or morality. As such, women's mate choice may be maladaptive and reduce population viability.

This results in an even higher competitive environment among men without physically sexually dimorphic traits. Due to behavioral traits also being sexually selected, it has been claimed, men will also become more psychopathic and disagreeable to win female attention, exaggerating character traits which many see as incompatible with modern civilization. There is indeed some evidence that dark triad traits are currently being sexually selected by (at least Western) women,[30][31] and that criminal and anti-social men often have more sexual partners and reproductive success.[32][33][34] Some view this data as evidence of the beginning of a process of fisherian runaway selection. Research on sexual selection theory by Puts (2010) suggested women's preference for highly dominant men may have partly been a result of sexual selection.[35][36]

The originator of the concept of Fisherian runaway, Ronald Fisher, had a teleological view of evolution where he saw natural and sexual selection as being united in driving evolutionary 'progress' towards a higher form of life. He invoked fears of runaway selection leading to the decline of societies, warning that selection for what he saw as more frivolous qualities such as wealth alone would result in negative social outcomes.[37]

Men's rights activist Warren Farrell in his book, The Myth of Male Power, warned women that their preference for and encouragement of, "hunter-killer", "star quarterback", type men could cause the extinction of the human race with the arrival of nuclear technology. He also claimed that since civilization and the industrial revolution dark triad traits have become maladaptive, as the traits which foster a healthy society have switched from might-makes-right individual brutality, to cooperation, intelligence, empathy etc.

Even though anti-social men do outreproduce nice guys,[38] today's society differs from Farrell's predictions in that there is actually a trend for men to become more androgynous/feminine, e.g. testosterone levels, sperm count[39] and mandible sizes have reduced considerably,[40] possibly caused by mutation, pollution, obesity and/or a masculinity crisis. Demotivated from competing in production of social value, today's men increasingly engage in LDARing, NEETing, or spending all their time looksmaxxing, with women seemingly increasingly becoming choosy about looks enabled by their financial independence, as sexologist Kristin Spitznogle pointed out. Hence, society is becoming an exact mirror image of the Wodaabe African tribe, the most matriarchal society on the planet, but also slight selection toward more ruthless and anti-social males at the same time.

• 
  Typical human male after 500 years of unconstrained female sexuality
• 
  … and after 1000 years. The multiple heads are very prone to breaking off and becoming infected. Higher disagreeableness provokes wars

 

[TheAnomaly]

Good Post!!! Love this scientific black pill stuff.