Beauty in the Eye of the Beholder?

We established that mankind was the only part of God’s creation for which He got off his throne and got his hands dirty, and when He was done, He said: “It was very good”. This serves to emphasize that we were created as God’s craftsmanship, his centerpiece, his work of art, his chef-d'oeuvre. As we dig through man’s understanding of beauty, I want you to remember once again to always see yourself in the lens of your Maker, in whose image you were made. I want you to remember that you were beautifully and marvelously made.

Parmenides a pre-Socratic philosopher was considered the father of metaphysics or ontology. Ontology studies the nature of reality. There is one aspect of reality that is deemed objective, so there is only one reality. This essentially means that reality is created outside of the mind of the observer. With regards to beauty, this means that beauty exists outside of myself and my belief does not interfere with its existence. This constitutes the objective aspect of beauty.

Then the other aspect of reality is a reality created in the mind of the observer. Reality does not exist, but is a construct. This means there could be several realities because different realities are created in people’s minds. When it comes to beauty, this essentially means that beauty does not exist, but it is created in the mind of the observer. There are several beauties, and this one is called the subjective aspect of beauty.

The objective aspect of beauty:

Can beauty be objective? Several researchers have attempted to prove it. Charles Darwin in 1871, ranked as one of the first scientist to write about human beauty, concluded that there was no universal standard of beauty, but he was later rebuffed by Samuels and Ewy in 1985. Samuels and Ewy demonstrated that 3-month old and 6-month old babies had the cognitive capability to discriminate attractiveness. When shown pictures of people that were deemed attractive by adults, they looked at these pictures longer. This proves that there is an innate perceptual mechanism that detects and responds specifically to faces and that there are certain features that define beauty, that even infants can recognize, and this goes well above age, gender or race.

The following characteristics have been used to define the objectivity of beauty:

Averageness

In 1878 Sir Francis Galton set out to determine the commonality between criminal faces, so he decided to put their portraits on the same photographic plate. The intent was to create an average of the faces. It was then that he discovered the beauty of averages.

“Averageness refers to the extent to which the face of an individual closely resembles the majority of the faces in a population.”

The extent to which the face resembles a prototypic face. This then means faces that are distant from the average are perceived to not be attractive, while those that are close to the average become more and more attractive.

Symmetry

Brad Pitt, one of my favorite actors, was considered to be the actor with one of the symmetrical faces in Hollywood. He scored 9.67 out of 10. Beyoncé scored 7.28, while Angelina Jolie scored 7.13. Most celebrities scored above 6.

“Symmetry represents the extent to which one half of the figure is the same as the other half. Around a medial axis.”

Sexual dimorphism

Sexual dimorphism refers to the phenotypic difference in adult human faces that reflect the masculinization or feminization of secondary sexual characteristics. During adolescence, sexual dimorphism is ontogenetically enabled by ratios of testosterone to estrogen.

Body fat distribution

Body fat distribution is a sexually dimorphic trait. The accumulation and the regulation of utilization of fat is affected by sex hormones. Basically, testosterone and estrogen determine where fat is deposited on the body. For instance, after puberty females deposit more fat on the hips. However, the difference in fat distribution can be established by measuring the waist and hip to compute what is called a waist-to-hip ratio (WHR). Research has shown that men consider women with low WHR as attractive. The most preferred WHR in women is 0.7. Victoria Secret model, Adriana Lima has a WHR of 0.68 while Kim Kardashian has a WHR of 0.66.

This can be further illustrated by the pre-eminence of the corset, even though it caused internal injury it continued to rise in popularity. Corsets would exaggerate the hips with regards to the waist, and this was considered a symbol of beauty. Female attractiveness in western societies is defined by full hips against a narrow waist. To achieve this objective, women make use of liposuction and various undergarments that gives the appearance of a low WHR and slender waist. While other body features have been cited as a source of attractiveness in females, this is the one that has stood the test of time.

There is only minimal research however, dealing with women's preference for male body structure and body fat distribution. Nonetheless, the waist-to-shoulder ratio (WSR) is commonly believed to be sexually dimorphic. Studies show that women prefer men with a “V-shaped” torso, and broad shoulders relative to the waist or hip size. In one research it was shown that a WHR of 0.8–0.9 and WSR of 0.6 was rated as most attractive in males. Another preference in male body attractiveness is the presence of low fatness and high muscularity. Nevertheless, it is important to note that studies are overall limited and conducted in a few cultures.

Other traits:

Other traits include skin homogeneity. Studies have shown that people with a more even skin tone are found to be more attractive. Also, proportion is considered another trait of attractiveness, as our brains are said to recognize proportions in faces. Mona Lisa, by Leonardo DaVinci is said to have divine proportions or golden ratio. Finally, but not least, youthfulness is considered an objective trait of beauty. This is perhaps one of the most obvious ones, as cosmetics companies invest a lot of money in products to fight wrinkles and sagginess.

The subjective aspect of beauty:

“Beauty is no quality in things themselves: It exists merely in the mind which contemplates them, and each mind perceives a different beauty. To seek the real beauty, or real deformity, is as fruitless an inquiry, as to pretend to ascertain the real sweet or real bitter.” -David Hume.

There are several reasons why beauty is subjective, and they are discussed below. The key thing to note here is that, we do not experience reality, we experience our perception of reality. These perceptions are not made in a vacuum, they are formed and made through our past experiences. Because we have different experiences, we experience things, situations, and people differently, and that is valid for beauty as well.

Social factors

Studies have shown that when people make assumptions about beauty, they do so taking into account other factors that impair their objectivity. Sometimes they possess information such as reputation, family background, and relationship histories. The age, race, gender of the perceiver is also said to impact the perception of beauty. The perception of oneself also has an impact on how we perceive beauty in other people. Studies have shown that people that have issues complimenting other people lack appreciation in themselves. That is a major point here because it becomes difficult to see the beauty in other people when one is unable to see it in themselves.

Temporality

Other reasons, especially in females, include a temporality of the relationship sought. This virtually means that women found men with more masculine features to be attractive in the short term, a phenomenon I call the “bad boy effect”. Women associate masculinity to immunocompetence, and the ability to receive good genes that can be passed on to their offspring. However, masculinity is also associated with dishonesty, a higher propensity to infidelity, and other negative traits that are incongruent with paternal involvement and monogamous relationships. Because of this, men with less masculine traits are sometimes perceived to be less attractive by women that are seeking a long-term relationship.

History and Culture

In addition, the definition of what was beautiful also varied across history and culture. What was perceived in a certain era as beautiful, might not be perceived to be beautiful today. For instance, by manual removal of the hairline, upper-class women in the fifteenth century in Northern Europe, attempted to make their foreheads appear higher. During the same period, blond hair was also believed to be a symbol of beauty, with both men and women attempting to make their hair lighter by using dyes, bleach, etc. The standard of beauty is also influenced by culture. The below picture shows a Mursi woman in Ethiopia placing a plate into her lower lips. That picture terrifies me, but it is indeed considered a standard of beauty.

Picture by Bernard Gagnon

Other factors

The impact of media and globalization cannot be discounted on the impact of our perception of beauty. Several times people have been made to feel ugly, or inadequate based on what is portrayed to us on tv. It has become the cause of body dissatisfaction. Also, studies have shown that, people that smile versus people that have a neutral face are more attractive, and have the capacity to display sincerity. Maintaining good eye contact and dressing well also influences the perception of beauty. Hence why most people struggling with body dissatisfaction and even BDD invest a lot of finance and time in clothing.

The consensus is that Darwin was right, and that beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but what we must always remember is that we can rely on fallible beings, including ourselves to define whether we are beautiful or not. We must always look at ourselves in the lens of our maker.

Jeremiah 1:5 I knew you before I formed you in your mother’s womb.

References:

• Gangestad SW, Scheyd GJ. The evolution of human physical attractiveness. Annu Rev Anthropol. 2005;34:523–48.

• Little AC, Jones BC, Penton-Voak IS, Burt DM, Perrett DI. Partnership status and the temporal context of relationships influence human female preferences for sexual dimorphism in male face shape. Proc Royal Soc B Biol Sci. 2002;269(1496):1095–100.

• Provost M, Troje N, Quinsey V. Short-term mating strategies and attraction to masculinity in point-light walkers. Evol Hum Behav. 2008;29(1):65–9.

• Perrett DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak I, Rowland D, Yoshikawa S, Burt DM, et al. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature. 1998;394(6696):884–7.

• 6Mazur A. U.S. trends in feminine beauty and overadaptation. J Sex Res. 1986;22:281–330.

• Garner DM, Garfinkel PE, Schwartz D, Thompson M. Cultural expectations of thinness in women. Psy Rep. 1980;47(2):483–91.

• Singh D. Adaptive significance of female physical attractiveness: role of waist-to-hip ratio. J Pers Soc psychol. 1993;65(2):293–307.

• Englis B, Solomon M, Ashmore R. Beauty before the eyes of the beholder: the cultural en-coding of beauty types in magazine advertising and music television. J Advertising. 1994;23:49–64.

• Kenrick D, Gutierres S. Contrast effects and judgments of physical attractiveness: When beauty becomes a social problem. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1980;38(1):131–40.

• Mele S, Cazzato V, Urgesi C. The importance of perceptual experience in the esthetic appreciation of the body. PLoS One. 2013;8(12):e81378.