So now we can explain how evolution helped us to define 'beauty', and - "... Now a new study could shed some light on this phenomenon. Researchers at St Andrews University in Scotland measured the oestrogen levels of 56 female students and found that "female facial appearance holds detectable clues, to reproductive health, that are considered attractive in other people." In other words the women with the prettier faces -- those who had bigger eyes and lips, and a smaller jaw -- were also more fertile. However, there's only one problem -- the signals only really work without makeup, never mind cosmetic surgery. So what's the average bloke to do? He's out there on a Saturday night trying his best to propagate the species, but his whole radar is being put severely out of whack by all that mascara, lip gloss, botox and collagen, allowing those less fertile ladies to jump the queue in the search for Mr Right. "
- Who is more attractive? (click picture to see the answer)
Sorry, how do I justify blogging this? 
- Evolution is great science, with application to every branch of study in this world, including business strategy and economics
- This discovery supports evolutionary selection as a 'cause' to our definition of 'beauty', hence also that such definition transcend cultures
- Try to make it to Boing Boing?
Update: New Scientists
3 comments:
Breasts don't move? ;)
I don't think the definition of beauty is as universal as people think, though. In 16th century Europe, fat women were considered beautiful, since only the rich could get fat, generally speaking. Beauty is definitely tied to culture, although there are some common themes across cultures.
:) This is very preliminary research results.
They have only listing the more common feature, big eye, small jaws (I think Chinese prefer small lips), I guess maybe symmetric features as well.
I think healthiness (symmetry and reasonable fat) as well, as a separate criteria.
Breast should also be related to ostroegen and health good hormone level.
I think the key point is, there is a rationale in evolution terms.
Because those who are not selected to mate have already lost in the evolution race.
Today, we choose slim over fat mates, because slim people live longer than fat ones. So our criteria also shift according to evolution needs.
Move :)
Yes, movable features attract more attention, and contain more "effective signals".
Post a Comment