You are here

Facial masculinization in beauty pageant contestants: an example from the Miss Germany 2002 pageant

This article illustrates an example of how morphing different faces leads to a composite face that is better looking than the individual faces comprising the composite. Also, the individual faces considered here belong to the contestants in the 2002 Miss Germany pageant, which implies that the composite face reflects the central tendency among these contestants.

The data in this post are taken from the work of Christoph Braun, Martin Gruendl, Claus Marberger and Christoph Scherber (see here).

The 2002 Miss Germany pageant had 22 contestants, 7 of which are shown below and compared to the composite face resulting from blending the facial features of these contestants.

Miss North-Rhine/Westphalia (left) and Miss Thuringia (right).

Miss North-Rhine/Westphalia (left) and Miss Thuringia (right).

Miss Bavaria (left) and Miss Bremen (right).

Miss Bavaria (left) and Miss Bremen (right).

Miss South Germany (left) and Miss Baden-Wuerttemberg (right).

Miss South Germany (left) and Miss Baden-Wuerttemberg (right).

Miss Berlin (left; Katrin Wrobel; the pageant winner) and the composite face (right).

Miss Berlin (left; the pageant winner) and the composite face (right).

The attractiveness of the faces of the contestants was rated by 47 people on a 1-to-7 scale; 1 being very unattractive and 7 being very attractive.

The composite face was rated the most attractive with an average score of 6.2. The pageant winner, Miss Berlin (Katrin Wrobel), got an average score of 2.8 and not one of the judges rated her at least as attractive as the composite face. The highest score among the contestants was obtained by Miss Bremen (4.9). Note that clear facial masculinization is seen in all the contestants shown above except Miss Bremen. Reflecting the elevated facial masculinization that is a common observation among contemporary beauty pageant contestants, the composite is also somewhat masculinized compared to many feminine women out there (some examples here; learn about the subtlety of masculinity-femininity in facial features here).

None of this should be surprising. Contemporary beauty contests in Western nations are not known to apply exacting aesthetic criteria to judge participants and select the winner. There are political pressures, an example of which is seen in assigning weight to how well a participant answers questions, whereby a less attractive contestant could obtain a higher rank overall than a more attractive contestant. Also, the high status of high-fashion models clearly shows in the selection of beauty pageant contestants (some data regarding the masculinization of the physique among Miss America contestants from the 1960s to 2000 are described here).

No comment on the facial masculinization in the Miss Germany 2002 pageant contestants has been provided by Gruendl et al. The researchers are apparently not aware of this issue, given that their paper addressing what constitutes attractiveness features the following photo and accompanying legend.

Kate Moss

Original legend for the picture above: Links das Supermodel Kate Moss, rechts das für unser Kindchenschema-Experiment fotografierte Mädchen Johanna (4 Jahre) aus dem Regensburger Universitätskindergarten. Das Gesicht von Kate Moss weist deutlich kindchenhafte Merkmale auf, besitzt aber zugleich auch Reifekennzeichen wie hohe, ausgeprägte Wangenknochen und konkave Wangen, die durch Make-up noch betont werden. Nach Cunningham (1986) macht gerade die Kombination dieser Merkmale ihr Gesicht sehr attraktiv.

Translated to English, the comment above compares the facial features of supermodel Kate Moss with a 4-year-old girl. According to the authors, Kate Moss clearly has some juvenile facial features in conjunction with mature traits such as high and pronounced cheekbones, a combination that makes her very attractive!

There is no way most people will rate the face of kate Moss as attractive, let alone very attractive:

Kate Moss
Kate Moss

The comment on cheekbones by Gruendl et al. is curious: masculinization results in high cheekbones and whether pronounced cheekbones make a woman more attractive is best answered by comparing the cheekbones of high-fashion models with that of glamour models.

Kate Moss’ claim to fame is her extensive use by nonheterosexual fashion designer Calvin Klein, who is known to select female models who look like underage boys and whose homoerotic ad campaigns leave no doubt as to his sexuality. As is true of the typical homosexual fashion designer, Calvin Klein stopped using Kate Moss when she turned into her mid-20s, most likely because it was increasingly becoming difficult for her to continue to look like an adolescent male.

Surely, it is high time the organizers of beauty pageant contests realize that what male homosexual fashion designers find aesthetically appealing in their female models, namely looks approximating those of adolescent boys (e.g., faces, physiques), are not what mentally normal people find attractive in women.

Categories: 

Comments

This is an interesting observation. I have never thought of this notion before. I have watched a lot of pagents and I have never seen such things. Perhaps I was just captivated by the beauty that I see. I never had any idea how biology and genetics play their roles.

I agree that Kate Moss is sooo NOT attractive.

whoever owns this site deserves an award for the most
awesome REAL beauty site on the internet!!!
If you read this, TONS of KUDOS!!
you make a difference to every beauty!
God Bless

Priscilla: I appreciate the blessings.

MISS BREMEN IS REALLY BEAUTIFUL. I THOUGHT SHE WAS THAT UNREALISTIC COMPOSITE BEAUTY WHEN I WATCHED THAT DOCUMENTARY UNATTENTIVELY. SHE IS MUCH PRETTIER THAN COMPOSITE. ONLY HER EYES COULD BE A LITTLE WIDER APART.

"Surely, it is high time the organizers of beauty pageant contests realize that what male homosexual fashion designers find aesthetically appealing in their female models, namely looks approximating those of adolescent boys (e.g., faces, physiques), are not what mentally normal people find attractive in women."

I highly disagree with the term "mentally normal people" in referring to non-homosexual persons. There is nothing wrong with homosexuals "mentally", and all do not share the same aesthetic tastes. Nor are all fashion designers homosexual males.

Carolyn: Of course, not all fashion designers are gay and all homosexuals do not share the same preferences. However, there is a high frequency of psychiatric disorders among homosexuals, and a careful examination reveals that the increased prevalence of mental illnesses among homosexuals is largely unaccounted for by stigma, prejudice, discrimination and victimization. So what makes homosexuals mentally normal?

You have lost time and effort on this extensive "research" ,just to justify your taste for big breasted,thunder thighed women with no eyebrows,cheekbones or chins that look like retards????
oh wait no! not only to justify that , you also used to call homosexual individuals mentally ill and that nothern europeans are the perfect race.

YOURE SERIOUSLY FUCKED UP! LOL

But in all , I find it very amusing and sad minstead of insulting.

I feel compassion for you erik , but also simpaty, beause youre dellusions are funny and quite entertaining well.

Kate Moss, while maybe unappealing to most (average,ordinary people with ordinary vulgar tastes) is 100 times much more atractive than the retard specimens on your "atractive" list of women with pancake faces.
Were you molested as a child erik?

Adrian: The women that I have shown in the attractive women section are in the low- to mid-range of the medically normal/healthy weight range, and you describe them as big-breasted and thunder-thighed! The average person can see how mentally sound you are.

I have not described homosexuals as mentally ill; just stated and cited evidence that this community has high rates of psychiatric disorders. There are plenty of homosexuals with no mental illness. Mental normality is a different issue from mental illness. Something normal functions in accordance with design. I have seen no evidence that homosexuality results from design, but plenty of evidence to the contrary, and hence have no reason to believe that homosexuals are mentally normal.

I haven't described Northern Europeans as "the perfect race."

Erik , youre not normal ,you like women who look like the gerbers logo with a d cup. LOL sorry dude.

Youre also not functional ,you do extensive research to justify your prefference for women that look mentally retarded,why dont you go out, buy them a beer and fuck em? it would me much easier.

Erik,

My compliments for putting this together so well. I wholeheartedly agree with you.
As for the comments by Adrian: I knew you wrote a few "dangerous" things, things that we almost are not allowed to say anymore, things that can be taken out of the context easily. Which is exactly what Adrian does. Don't let folks like him scare you off.

I am looking forward to any more articles on this site, I will bookmarm it !

Regards,

Paul.

Given the exact proportional measurement criteria they have devised, wouldn't it be possible to digitally render a model of the "perfectly" beautiful woman?

Erik : Do you think the woman with high cheeksbone, board face, flat or hook nose, dark skin, coarse hair can be feminine too?

The hairstyles of these models look really outdated to me.

There are plenty of homosexuals with no mental illness. Mental normality is a different issue from mental illness. Something normal functions in accordance with design. I have seen no evidence that homosexuality results from design.

"The comment on cheekbones by Gruendl et al. is curious: masculinization results in high cheekbones"

Well he is wrong. High cheekbones are neither masculine or feminine. High cheekbones are generally an ethnic trait found among obviously certain ethnicities. A more accurate argument would be "masculinization results in HIGHER cheekbones". For example a Northern European man will rarely have really high cheekbones no matter how masculine he is. An Asian woman may not have low cheekbones no matter how feminine she is. Although high and low exist among all populations these are based on the interval or range of what the norm is within the population. So an extremely feminine Asian woman can have lower cheekbones than the AVERAGE Asian woman, but may not have cheekbones as low as say a Northern European woman who may actually be masculinized. Therefore, the whole cheekbone thing isn't really accurate. High and low cheekbones are more a result of ethnicity than actual feminization or masculinization. Every ethnicity has masculine and feminine features. The thin lips of many Germans for example are a masculine trait. An extremely feminine German woman will not have masculine lips, but the thinness will create a more masculine appearance than say if she had fuller lips. Scandinavians seem to retain fuller lips so compare two equally feminine women, one Scandinavian and one German, the Scandinavian woman with fuller lips may appear more attractive than an equally feminine German woman with thin lips...The percieved femininity was not the result of greater feminization, but of physical characteristics dependent on one's genes.

z: You asked whether a woman with high cheekbones, broad face, flat or hook nose, dark skin and coarse hair can be feminine. The answer is yes.

Godis: Gruendl et al. didn’t say that masculinization results in high cheekbones. I said that, and you are right that the correct statement is that masculinization results in a higher placement of the cheekbones. I wasn’t careful enough when I wrote the sentence. But you have committed a worse error: “The thin lips of many Germans for example are a masculine trait.” The correct notion is that controlling for other factors, thinner lips look more masculine. Your note on ethnic differences is irrelevant. All referenced comparisons are within an ethnic group. And your statements about cheekbone height are mistaken. Cheekbones are shrunk in Northern Europeans compared to East Asians. This means a higher-cheekboned appearance in Northern Europeans on average. You are confusing “high cheekbones” for wide cheekbones.

Well I like Northern European cheekbones. Anyways, I believe that robust cheekbones are most masculine period. Because whether your cheekbones are high or low if they are robust they will look masculine.

Erik you mentioned that this woman is masculine:

Photobucket

What in particular about her face makes her more on the masculine side over the feminine side?

She has low cheekbones, fine facial features, her mouth is small not wide, her cheeks are rounded her forehead high and dome shaped. What makes her masculine at all?

Then I see this woman in the feminine and attractive women section:

Photobucket

In all honesty if I compare this woman to a Victorias Secret model I would believe the Victorias Secret model is masculine, but I would believe this woman is literally a man. Please explain as to why you believe the woman in your attractive women section is attractive and feminine while you claim the woman above is more masculine?

I mean seriously. Looking at this chart you provide the first woman's face (that I posted) matches the "feminine" model face almost perfectly. She has the same chin, same cheekbones, same forehead. Her nose area and mouth area are very similair.

Then looking at the woman in your attractive section, she most definitley matches the more masculine face shape:

Photobucket

Look:

Photobucket

Photobucket

And if men are attracted to more feminine women and women more attracted to masculine men... what is the deal with the Kaulitz brothers? They are clearly effeminate, yet they have young girls around the world swooning over them. How do you explain that? This throws off your whole theory that masculinity makes men attractive and femininty women attractive. There is much more to the equation I am afraid:

THE KAULITZ BROTHERS Pictures, Images and Photos

Bill Kaulitz Icon Pictures, Images and Photos

Tom Kaulitz Pictures, Images and Photos

I have also read somewhere on here that you do not like or dislike the way Scarlet Johansson looks. This intrigues me because Scarlet Johansson is very feminine and has features more attractive than most of the women on in your attractive women's section...

scarlet Pictures, Images and Photos

scarlett johansson Pictures, Images and Photos

Scarlett Johansson Pictures, Images and Photos

Scarlet johansson Pictures, Images and Photos

Smile Scarlet Pictures, Images and Photos

anna Pictures, Images and Photos

Scarlet johansson Pictures, Images and Photos

I understand that Scarlet Johansson may not be your preference, but do not tell me that half those other women are your preference either. You LIKE all those women, so I cannot see why you are so neutral regarding Scarlet who is obviously very feminine and more feminine than many of your "attractive" women. Why not like her looks?

are not what "mentally normal people" find attractive in women.

That might be a bit harsh

Can someone explain to me which features of the composite face is masculinized?
I thought that face looks fine and couldn't see what features are masculinized even after comparing with the chart. is it the nose?

can any one tell me how the virtual miss germany composite face is masculine as Erik mentioned?
I can't figure out which features appear to be masculine. I am guessing it's the nose because I can't decide on this unless I am looking from the side view

Nightingale: I said about the composite, “the composite is also somewhat masculinized compared to many feminine women out there (some examples here….” In other words, I talked about “more masculine than,” not “masculine, period.” Compare the composite with the women featured at the link and you will see what I am referring to (note lip width, chin width and squaring, etc.).

John K.: This is a very belated reply. In your first comment (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:38), you showed a picture of a woman and asked why I have called her masculine or why is she not feminine. I never called her masculine. I posted her picture here to illustrate that wider faces are not necessarily more feminine; how the width is achieved is important. The woman in question does not have low-placed cheekbones. The arch of her cheekbones (upper-side region) is prominent and the cheekbones are nowhere as low as in the computer-outline of a very feminine face.

One of your comments (Tue, 04/14/2009 - 03:47) showed the picture of a woman from the feminine and attractive woman section of this site. There is no such section. The referenced section is what I call the attractive woman section and does not exclusively focus on feminine women. The model you took specifically appears on a page that is marked as featuring somewhat masculinized women.

You referenced the effeminate Kaulitz brothers and said that girls worldwide swooning over them refutes my “whole theory that masculinity makes men attractive and femininty women attractive,” noting that there is much more to the equation. The Kaulitz brothers have stardom to overcompensate their effeminacy. Their example would invalidate my argument if I maintained that masculinity-femininity is the be all and end all of appeal, but if you read around you will come across me mentioning many factors apart from masculinity-femininity that influence physical attractiveness. Then there are factors influencing appeal that do not involve physical appearance. In the case of men, I have never portrayed a simplistic masculine-appearance-in-men-equates-to-attractiveness argument (see this).

You posted pictures of Scarlett Johansson and wondered why I am not a fan of hers. She is undoubtedly feminine, but I do not like her face.

She's ugly

Quote: "Kate Moss’ claim to fame is her extensive use by nonheterosexual fashion designer Calvin Klein, who is known to select female models who look like underage boys and whose homoerotic ad campaigns leave no doubt as to his sexuality. As is true of the typical homosexual fashion designer, Calvin Klein stopped using Kate Moss when she turned into her mid-20s, most likely because it was increasingly becoming difficult for her to continue to look like an adolescent male. "

So why did he took EVA MENDES for the new campaign????? O.o

to visitor 25 no it's not harsh, it's just not PC, but it's true though. Since the women featured by the webmaster fall into the normal weight and height range scientificully proven- then most people who are mentally normal will not find them fat as they are by no means fat; they may not be what all men like nor does Eric claim they should be -but they are not overweight or fat. Only someone who is obsessed with anorexic thinness like the fashion models portray would call them thunder thighs and fat. And no that's not code for fat woman as I am slim,toned, healthy , and happy; just healthy slim not anorexic and dying slim. There is a happy medium believe it or not):

But the point is while many ppl might not like how some or many of the women featured in the attractive section here look- and I don't for the most part or they wouldn't be the ideal in every way for all ppl- that doens't make them "fat." Only someone with issues would consider them fat, regardless of sexual orientation.

We have to study everything for an impartial viewpoint even if it's not PC and counter argument with another- not attack the webmaster's character which has nothing to do with the argument at hand.

Ruth is right. Eric is respectful of others , sometimes even when they unduly attack him because they have no valid argument and speak to him disrespectfully about matters which have little bearing on the research provided: namely his personal life which is his business alone. Those who stoop so low as to attack another's character it only says something about the character of the one doing that -and NOT Eric.

Those who don't like or agree with on the site need to come up with convincing counter arguments from a scientific backed up argument or leave the site alone. Coming here to fight and insult the webmaster is just childish and reflects poorly on those who do it. We can respect ppl regardless of whether we agree with them or not.

Also coming here and branding Eric insulting names doesn't help those who stoop to that to convince anyone believe the opposite of his theory; it just confirms his theory really. Otherwise why would ppl get so het up and worked up about something if it's not true?? And could easily be disproven?? Fair question.

Finally thanks Eric for this interesting and fascinating website which sheds light on lots of stuff for lots of ppl who are more interested in learning about stuff that can be backed up by research- rather than just joining the cattle or herd mentality in looking for what's politcally correct, and then putting down those who are more concerned with "reality" as seen by many now rather than what's "PC" . Bless you and thank you and I admire yr patience in putting up with ppl who just come to attack and fight for personal agendas): Or don't even bother to read through the whole site first before leaping to attack mode):

Good luck, I only came across this site 2 days ago by chance but plan to return): Thanks and keep up the good work!

Click here to post a new comment