Aesthetic differences between attractive male and female face profiles

Mathematical and statistical analysis on the difference of attractive faces revealed the following. Although statistically significant differences were not found in other measurements, in  profile view attractive male and female celebrity faces showed significant difference in the nasolabial angle between the sexes..

 

The mean nasolabial angle of the average attractive female face was 105.47°(standard deviation(SD): 13.63°), whereas it was 93.62°(SD: 9.83°) for men, showing a acute angle in men. The profile analysis of the female face reveals that attractive females have an upward cephalic tip projection of nose. According to a foreign study, Sergl et al.⁴ reported that the most prominent characteristic of a male face was the degree of convexity or concavity. In my analysis of Korea’s celebrity faces, the profile convexity was 164.86° in men and 167.19° in women.

Larrabee⁵ explained that the most aesthetically ideal nasolabial angle of a Caucasian woman was 90-115°. In a similar study, Auger⁶ reported that women considered attractive in the 1900s had the nasolabial angle of 100.42-105.20°. On the other hand, Porter et al.⁷ in 2003 found that the nasolabial angle of an ordinary African women was 86±11°. Farkas⁸ found that the nasolabial angle in attractive Caucasian women was 102.1° (SD:8.2°) and that in Caucasian men was 98.5°(SD:10.5°). In 1972, Hinds and Kent⁹ reported that the nasolabial angle of average women was 110°, whereas it was 90° in men.  

In 1992, Connie and Chiu’s study on average Southern Chinese men and women¹⁰ found that the nasolabial angle was 97.4° in women and 90.1° in men, indicating there were racial and gender differences. Comparing these data with my analyses, one can understand that the ideal nasolabial angle of men did not change over time but that of women became gradually more obtuse.

 

[Advertisement] MAGNUM(Q-switched Nd:YAG Laser) – Manufacturer: (www.i-dana.com)]

 

 In another study, Lines et al.¹¹ examined attractiveness of seven profile silhouettes in 347 subjects and found that people, though there was no significant difference in statistics, tended to prefer a woman’s face with a more obtuse nasolabial angle. The authors explained that the difference between the attractive male and female face profiles was ‘the interlabial protrusion angle’. The interlabial protrusion angle of an attractive female face protrudes 10° more compared to that of a male face. This angle is about 150-170° (average 160°) in men and 160-180°(average 170°) in men. Overlapping silhouettes of attractive male and female profiles show that the nose bridge and nasal tip of a man protrudes anteriorly, attractive male has more acute nasolabial angle, the end of the chin protrudes forward and the anthropometric point of ‘subnasale’ is moved anteriorly. Their study result excellently shows the difference between an ideal male and female faces, and the result are very coincidental finding to my study.

Based on these data, one can predict that women will be averse toward inward slanted teeth. Therefore, during thesurgery of bimaxillary protrusion, caution should be given to avoid overcorrection. With regards to rhinoplasty in Caucasians, Auger⁶ t al reported that upper lip protrusion(∠pg-g-ls) was 4.61° around 1900-1929 but increased to 6.98° around 1980-1992. The lower lip protrusion(∠pg-g-li) was 1.75° in the early 1900s but increased to 4.02° in the modern days. This shows that the amount of protrusion in women’s lips tends to increase with time. Therefore, it is necessary to accurately understandthe exact patients’ aesthetic desire and preference when surgeons perform rhinoplasty, surgery for lip protrusion,, chin contouring, or bimaxillary surgery.

The nasal tip of an attractive female face points slightly more upward compared to that of an attractive male face. However, a nasolabial angle larger than 105° in women and 95° in men may result in unnatural and aesthetically undesirable appearance. It is advisable to refer to the above references for nose, lips, and chin surgery.

 

Aesthetic differences in front view of the face between attractive male and female faces

 

I analyzed the front view of the attractive male and female faces and found that there were statistically significant differences between men and women in terms of the length of the lower face, vertical length of the eyes, ratio of horizontal to vertical length of the mouth, width of the mandible, contour lines and angles of the cheek and jaws.

According to traditional theories of aesthetic plastic surgery, the vertical length of the entire face is divided into equal thirds (33.3%) based on the anthropometric points of tr-g-sn-gn.¹² In my study, however, the lower face (the lowest third of the face) of an attractive female face took up 32.7% of the vertical length of the face, showing a relatively shorter mandibles. This is in agreement with the study of Lee JS et al.¹³ which examined the faces of Miss Koreas and Korean female college students.

My results on attractive Korean female faces can be compared to those of Farkas¹¹, a pioneer of modern anthropometrics in Caucasians. The ideal ratio of the length to width of an attractive Caucasian woman’s face was 133.98%, whereas, that of an attractive Korean female face was 134.3%, which shows that this ratio is similar in attractive Asians and Caucasians. This suggests that the ratio of the attractive facial length to width is similar across different races.

On the other hand, I found that women had a longer upper face compared to men, although the difference was not statistically significant (F=53.73>M=51.94). Farkas¹¹ explained that the proportion of the upper face was 53.7% (SD:2.1%) in “attractive faces” and 53.4% (SD:2.5%) in “the most attractive faces.” From this finding, we can see that the attractive faces of Korean women and Caucasian women have a similar proportion of the upper face.

There was a difference in the length of the lower face between attractive men and women. In my study, the lower face length in relation to the total face length was longer in men than women (BAPA index; M=46.59%>F=43.81%). Farkas⁸ reported that the ratio of the length to width of lower face was 48.79% in an attractive Caucasian woman. On the other hand, it was 43.81% in my findings from attractive Korean women. Therefore, ideal Korean female faces had a slightly shorter lower face compared to their Caucasian counterparts. Caucasians view a more masculine and broad jaws in women as attractive, however, Koreans prefer smaller jaws as aesthetically pleasing.

As for the measurements of the eye in attractive men and women, women have larger vertical length(palpebral fissure height) of the eye compared to men. There are many studies on the anthropometric values of the vertical length of the eye but my BAPA index, which is my own way of measurement, for the vertical length of the eye was 7.50% in women and 6.21% in men. On the other hand, the BAPA index for the vertical length of the eye in Farkas⁸’s attractive Caucasian women was only 6.86%. This shows that the height to width ratio (not the absolute size) the eyes, considering facial balance and harmony was larger in Korean women than in Caucasians. Compared to the anthropometric measurements in attractive Korean women in the study of Wee et al. ¹⁴, the most attractive female faces have greater vertical and horizontal length of the eye as time goes by. Refer to my study published in Aesthetic Plastic Surgery for the racial differences of attractive eyes. ¹⁵

The proportion of the horizontal length of the mouth to the face width was 35.68% in Wee’s study¹⁴, 39.5% in attractive faces and 39.9% in the most attractive faces in Farkas’s study. However, it was 34.30% in attractive Korean women, showing that Koreans preferred a dainty mouth. As expected, an attractive Korean male face had a wider mouth than the female counterpart (BAPA index was 36.25% in men and 34.30% in women).

According to a previous anthropometric study in Koreans, the most prominent difference in the front view of the face between Korean men and women was the widths of the nose (interalar distance) and mouth.¹⁶ The nasal width is 40±3.09mm in Korean men and 36.91±3.80mm in Korean women. The width of the mouth was 50.30±11.97mm in Korean men and 46.41±4.05mm in Korean women. Korean women had a markedly smaller mouth than men and these results are in agreement with my study.

Considering oveall facial harmony and balance, as for the length and width of the mandible,  men had a values in ratio measurement of the horizontal length of the mandible to the face width compared to women (BAPA index was 87.26% in men and 81.59% in women). Korean women had a more oval shape of mandible and slender outlines of the lower law compared to men.

 

As summary, comparing the overall harmony and balance of aesthetic facial subunits between the most attractive men and women has led to following findings.  

① Profile analysis of attractive Korean male and female faces showed statistically similar harmony and balance of facial features between men and women, with the exception of the nasolabial angle. This was unexpected but my results do not diverge far from lots of previous studies  on general population of different races or  on attractive individuals. In particular, the systematic comparison of facial profiles of men and women conducted by Erbay et al.¹⁷ revealed that cephalometry analysis of Anatolian Turkish adults, examined by the method of Steiner, Ricketts, Burstone, Suchner, Holdaway, and Merrifield, etc, found no statistically significant differences in soft tissue measurements between men and women, regardless of their attractiveness. These results are consistant with my study result.

② Analysis of frontal views of attractive male and female faces showed there were statistically significant differences between the male and female face in terms of the lower face length, vertical length of the eye, ratio of width to length of the mouth, the horizontal width of the mandible, and angles, contour and shape of the cheek and jaw. Therefore, jaw surgery, upper eyelid surgery, lip and facial contouring surgeries should be planned considering these gender differences to bring more satisfactory,natural, aesthetically pleasing resultsl for each gender.   

In the next article, we will take a look at how attractiveness is across generations.

 

References

1. 1. http://www.plasticsurgery.org/Documents/news-resources/statistics/2012-Plastic-Surgery-Statistics/top-5-male-cosmetic-surgery.pdf
2. 2. http://www.plasticsurgery.org/news/plastic-surgery-statistics/2012-plastic-surgery-statistics.html
3. 3. http://plasticsurgerybeforeafter.net/steven-tyler-plastic-surgery/
4. 4. Sergl HG, Zentner A, Krause G, An experimental study of the esthetic effect of facial profiles, J Orofac Orthop, 59(3), 116-126, 1998.
5. 5. Larrabee WF Jr: Facial analysis for rhinoplasty, Otolaryngol Clini North Am 20:653-674, 1987.
6. 6. Auger TA, Turley PK: The female soft tissue profile as presented in fashion magazines during the 1900s: A photographic analysis, Int J Adult Orthnd Orthognath Surg, 14:7-17, 1999.
7. 7. Porter JP, Olson KL, Analysis of the African American female nose, Plast Reconstr Surg. 111(2):620-628,2003.

8. 8. Farkas LG, Kolar JC: Anthropometrics and art in the aesthetics of women’s face. Clin Plast Surg 14: 599, 1987.

9. 9. Hinds, EC, Kent JN: Surgical treatment of developmental jaw deformities, St. Louis, The C.V. Mosby Company, 1972.

10. 10. Connie SW, Chiu BDS, Robert KFC: The facial soft tissue profile of the southern Chinese: prosthodontic considerations, Jr Prosthet Dent, 68:839, 1992.

11. 11. Lines PA, Lines RR, Lines CA: Profilometrics and facial esthetics. Am J Orthodont 73:648-657, 1978.

12. 12. Bartlett SP, Wornom I 3^rd, Whitaker LA, Evaluation of facial skeletal aesthetics and surgical planning, Clin Plast Surg, 18(1): 1-9, 1991.

13. 13. Lee JS, Kim HK, Kim YW: Anthropometric analysis of the attractive and normal faces in Korean female. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg 31: 526, 2004.

14. 14. Wee SS, Ham KS, Lee JU: Anthropometrical studies on the standard beauty of Korean adult female. J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg, 8: 283, 1981.

15. 15. Rhee SC, Woo KS, Kwon B. Biometric study of eyelid shape and dimensions of different races with references to beauty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 36(5):1236-45. 2012.

16. 16. Kim CJ, Han KS, Kim Y, Cho YJ: A facial anthropometric study on the Korean youth, J Korean Soc Plast Reconstr Surg, 15:427, 1988.

17. 17. Erbay EF, Caniklioğlu, CM, Soft tissue profile in Anatolian Turkish adults: Part II. Comparison of different soft tissue analyses in the evaluation of beauty, Am J Orthod Dentofacial Orthop, 121(1): 65-72, 2002.

 

-To be continued-