Facial appearance is a cue to oestrogen levels in women

[LadyRae]

These comments are extremely entertaining

 

[JamesGatz]

I remember making a similar claim on a different thread that you can tell everything about a person (including hormonal profile) just based on their face and I got ridiculed for it by ursideae and now I see this

lo and behold: she has a thread basically saying the same thing I said in a more scientific way

Anyway the difference for sexual attractiveness between the 2 women are obvious:

Left being higher estrogen - makes women look horny (sharper bone definition) (ready to mate) and more submissive (hence its easier for you to approach her so hence why most men find the women on the left to look better)

Right being low serotonin/estrogen - makes women look more dominant (its more difficult to approach her) even though this women is probably more likely to say yes to an approach because since shes low-serotonin shes more open to sex than the left - she looks more "manipulative" because shes mentally strong as a result of low serotonin

So basically:

The girl on the left is more sexually attractive (since serotonin/estrogen is high) because her face is screaming she needs sex asap

The girl on the right is considered less sexually attractive because she is not in a stressed state - she's down for sex but she's more chill about it and not in a rush (unlike the girl on the left)

In the real world : the girl on the right is more likely to accept your advances and also is smarter/has a better personality then the left but she'd be more dominant so depends on what you prefer - the girl on the left is just horny

Another thing: these images aren't accurate - the girl on the right would have a wider skull than the girl on the left because low-serotonin/estrogen would drive her androgens up - if the image of the girl on the right had bigger skull/jaws then this image would be accurate

 

[ursidae]

I remember making a similar claim on a different thread that you can tell everything about a person (including hormonal profile) just based on their face and I got ridiculed for it by ursideae and now I see this

lo and behold: she has a thread basically saying the same thing I said in a more scientific way

Anyway the difference for sexual attractiveness between the 2 women are obvious:

Left being higher estrogen - makes women look horny (sharper bone definition) (ready to mate) and more submissive (hence its easier for you to approach her so hence why most men find the women on the left to look better)

Right being low serotonin/estrogen - makes women look more dominant (its more difficult to approach her) even though this women is probably more likely to say yes to an approach because since shes low-serotonin shes more open to sex than the left - she looks more "manipulative" because shes mentally strong as a result of low serotonin

So basically:

The girl on the left is more sexually attractive (since serotonin/estrogen is high) because her face is screaming she needs sex asap

The girl on the right is considered less sexually attractive because she is not in a stressed state - she's down for sex but she's more chill about it and not in a rush (unlike the girl on the left)

In the real world : the girl on the right is more likely to accept your advances and also is smarter/has a better personality then the left but she'd be more dominant so depends on what you prefer - the girl on the left is just horny

Another thing: these images aren't accurate - the girl on the right would have a wider skull than the girl on the left because low-serotonin/estrogen would drive her androgens up - if the image of the girl on the right had bigger skull/jaws then this image would be accurate

the issue is that it there are entire ethnic groups that may resemble a certain appearance that we interpret as entirely hormonally driven. I've actually addressed it briefly in this thread. Running this through a facial recognition program, east asian women (and men!) have a much greater similarity to the healthy female phenotype, while mediterranean and armenoid women resemble the infertile phenotype very closely. This can create flaws in this method of judging people's hormonal profiles by their features, in that if you congregate a group of infertile east asian women and compare them to a group of fertile armenoid women, the former group will be falsely interpreted as more fertile due to their racially inherent traits that are mainly climatic adaptations overlapping with the traits of the hormonally healthy phenotype. For this reason, the study was performed on a group of women of the same ethnic group. The same bias applies to gracile people here who favour the dietary recommendations racially robust phenotypes thinking it would change their race. Conclusion: you need to compare yourself to the people of your race only.

So if you whip out another 19th century physiognomy textbook about people with aquiline noses being wicked for instance, ask yourself the question if they're Basque or West Anatolian as this trait predominates in those group of people and to what degree the appearance of their nose deviates from the average of their phenotype. Being born with an aquiline nose as a Basque is to be expected while if you're from the Baltics and your ancestors all have short, upturned noses, perhaps it takes an abnormality in the craniofacial development to get a hook nose. The physiognomy books you posted do not consider this and were likely a weapon to encourage the persecution of people that all possess the trait, because, as you may imagine, there is a variety of temperaments within the people of an ethnic group