# What's the advantage of having softer facial features? **URL:** \ **Category:** Factual Questions\ **Created:** [February 5, 2018, 6:40am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204 "2018-02-05T06:40:58Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 6\ **Page:** 3
**Author:** ![madsircool](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/madsircool/32/3432_2.png) [@madsircool](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/madsircool)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 12:46pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/41 "2018-02-07T12:46:36Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > The OP’s threads often run something along the lines of: “In the wilderness, 50 000 years ago, when we were using sticks to bash the heads of lions and Neanderthals, feature A would have been advantageous while feature B would have been disadvantageous, so why is feature B considered more attractive than feature A?” Which reminds me of this: [you might not like it but this is what - Google Search](https://www.google.ca/search?q=you+might+not+like+it+but+this+is+what&num=20&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjL9s6Aj5LZAhVG9YMKHcNjBsgQ_AUICigB&biw=1527&bih=845#imgrc=b_Wn8Q-b1QATnM:) > It’s not a dumb starting question but it would be nice if the lesson were learned from one thread to another. > I have no idea if it’s the OP’s case, but there is an idea among some evolutionary psychology types that all evolutionary pressure is about evolving in a nasty, brutish and short life. You can prominently see this when PUAs and their ilk analyse human relations in terms alpha/beta wolves. They seem to think that success in life is about being the most brutal bully. > > It’s quite probable that up until 50 000-5000 years ago, life was indeed, overall, nasty, brutish and short. More recently, in particularly harsh periods or milieus, a major part of fitness is about brutal domination or the threat thereof. For example, in times of war or famine. Even in times of peace and plenty, the alpha/beta model may be accurate for the criminal underworld and prison. > > Such people often like to talk about chimpanzees and how the alpha male gets to mate with the females while beta males don’t. Yet such people hardly ever talk another primate which resembles humans at least as much as chimpanzees: bonobos. Civilized society resembles the bonobos’ tranquil consensual exchanges and conflict de-escalation rather more than chimpanzees. > > Even among chimpanzees, violence and threats may be common but grooming (making nice with others) is a common way to gain status ( [Chimpanzee - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chimpanzee#Social_structure) ). The alpha chimp is often a sort of politician and diplomat. A chimpanzee who seeks to become alpha by being a tyrannical bully can cause other chimps to form a coalition against him (what we would call a coup). > > The researcher who came up with the alpha/beta wolves theory has disavowed such a way of describing social behavior ([Dominance hierarchy - Wikipedia](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alpha_(ethology)#Controversy) ). Turns out, it had more to do with strangers being stuck together in trying circumstances (like we see in criminal gangs or prison) than natural behavior. Note how the human subcultures where the brutish alpha model is most accurate, gangs and prison, are at the bottom of society. Also note how the most effective militaries emphasize teamwork and require leaders to care for their subordinates. > > Once you’re in a well-organized society with the economic basics covered, once you no longer live in fear and desperation, how well you do has more to do with positive-sum cooperation than zero-sum competition. It has more to do with kindness, impulse-control and intelligence than domineering behavior or the ability to prevail in physical confrontations. > > It’s why women will care a lot more about [Ryan Gosling](https://www.google.ca/search?q=ryan+gosling&num=20&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwjo-_yUoJLZAhVhjFQKHfwqAxkQ_AUICigB&biw=1527&bih=845) being good with animals or [Paul McCartney](https://www.biography.com/.image/t_share/MTE5NTU2MzE2Mjk4OTcwNjM1/paul-mccartney-9390850-1-402.jpg) wanting to hold your hand than about Stipe Miocic being UFC heavyweight champion. Look at one of the most desirable women in the world, Anne Hathaway, she could have gotten just about any man and she went for Adam Shulman, the human incarnation of a [puppy](https://www.google.ca/search?q=adam+shulman&num=20&hl=en&source=lnms&tbm=isch&sa=X&ved=0ahUKEwiGqtvxm5LZAhVS4WMKHQqXBHcQ_AUICigB&biw=1527&bih=845) . Does [this guy](http://realstreetshit.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/06/young-musk-e1427758046552.jpg) look like he went to the top of society through violence? > > Neotenous features may be related to youth but also to minds which are kind and intelligent rather than brutish, who have power because they have the ability and willingness to help rather than to hurt. Sounds like the difference between GQ posters and Pit posters. 😛 ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 1:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/42 "2018-02-07T13:12:18Z")
> [@MrDibble](#): > > Less resources spent on making the features - less bone, less muscle. If they’re not needed (because we’re not fighting in the same direct physical way - knobs on the head is not going to stop a pointy rock between the ribs, because we’re cooking our food, because we can _make_ eye shades) then spending calcium and protein etc on shaping them is just a waste. Better to spend it on longer limbs, or bigger boobs, or whatever else floats your cohorts’ boats. I’ve been leaning this way. I don’t think it’s given that the differences in bone structure were readily apparent in a fully fleshed out face. If the larger bony projections aren’t visible they’re not going to be a factor in sexual selection. Any differences could as easily be explained as a less complex lower resource means of providing room for larger brains without making delivery of newborns more difficult. ---
**Author:** ![MichaelEmouse](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/michaelemouse/32/101_2.png) [@MichaelEmouse](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/MichaelEmouse)\ **Post date:** [February 7, 2018, 4:19pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/43 "2018-02-07T16:19:34Z")
> [@Contemplation](#): > > You seem to be implying that rougher features are associated with aggression. AFAIK, there is no correlation between physical features and aggressive behavior. Somone with the physical features I described in the first post could be a very gentle, yet still be able to withstand blows to the face in case it happens, as well has having a nice brow ridge to shield the eyes from the sun. > **[A man's aggression is written all over his face, say scientists](https://www.independent.co.uk/news/science/a-man-s-aggression-is-written-all-over-his-face-say-scientists-902904.html)** > > A man's aggressive tendencies are written in his facial features, according to a study that has found a link between bad temper and the shape of a man's face. > **[Men’s Facial Width-to-Height Ratio Predicts Aggression: A Meta-Analysis](https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4388848/)** > > Recent research has identified men’s facial width-to-height ratio (fWHR) as a reliable predictor of aggressive tendencies and behavior. Other research, however, has failed to replicate the fWHR-aggression relationship and has questioned whether ... Even if they weren’t correlated, the belief, even a subconscious association, would be enough to be a factor. I also have a memory (can’t track down the source) that women in poorer countries tend to prefer men with rougher facial features. ---
**Author:** ![Euphrosyne](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/e/d9b06d/32.png) [@Euphrosyne](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Euphrosyne)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 4:18am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/44 "2018-02-08T04:18:55Z")
As social organization among humans began to involve more and more individuals and small groups, and as human society grew increasingly specialized and complex, perhaps features which might be described as “softer” actually registered a wider and more precise array of facial expressions - these in themselves can be a profound form of communication. Particularly among hunters: among a band of hunters, a gaze in one direction or another, a lift of the eyebrow, a quirk of the mouth can give silent directions about the location of quarry. During battle, or when encountering potentially hostile bands: whom to trust? What might this stranger be up to? Is my underling truly loyal to me? Are my men really with me? Where is the enemy? Among extended family members who live together: who are allies; who are on the outs. Who is currying favor with the patriarch; whose fond gaze does the matriarch’s eye fall upon? Everyone needs to know . . . and respond accordingly. Facial expressions - much quicker than words - lightning fast; and much more difficult to prevaricate or fabricate with them. I’d say critical to a complex human civilization. And a softer facial structure provides a more varied “canvas” upon which these many messages can appear, in all their subtleties of hue, saturation, light, shadow, and tone. I have heard the opinion that women’s facial features are softer than those of men because a special role of women is often to form the primary bond with the newborn infant, and so the softness and delicacy of her mother’s features give reassurance to the infant of its mother’s love, assists the infant to recognize its mother’s face instantly, and helps the infant to develop the necessary neurological wiring with which to carry on social interactions, by practicing making these facial expressions with its mother, and responding to hers. Mother and baby thus become “one” as a social unit, instead of as a biological unit, as might be said to have been the case - figuratively - during gestation. Perhaps also becoming “one” to one extent or another, with another human or humans is exactly what these social bonds are about, and doing so enhances the success of more complex and abstract communication involving bodily gestures and verbalizing. Perhaps also, to the extent that eye movements, facial expressions, words, gestures, and tones of voice communicate the same message, humans feel they can trust the communication. And to the extent that any one of these modalities of communication is at variance with one or more of the others, humans sense that something about the other person may be “off.” Which can be a life or death thing to know about others. All speculation on my part. ---
**Author:** ![Surreal](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/eada6e/32.png) [@Surreal](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Surreal)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 7:00am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/45 "2018-02-08T07:00:26Z")
nm ---
**Author:** ![SamuelA](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/c77e96/32.png) [@SamuelA](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/SamuelA)\ **Post date:** [February 8, 2018, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204/46 "2018-02-08T15:24:28Z")
> [@MichaelEmouse](#): > > Even if they weren’t correlated, the belief, even a subconscious association, would be enough to be a factor. One of the experiments they talk about in evolutionary bio textbooks is little vole creatures and their mating calls. To sum it up, it turns out that the voles prefer to hear mating calls that are more complex. Researchers found you can make artificially complex mating calls that no living vole ever emits and that the voles prefer the artificial call over a recording emitting by a real female. Their conclusion was evolution is imperfect, it ‘designed’ through trial an error a neural subsystem in the vole. That neural subsystem ‘prefers’ things that don’t even exist, it’s buggy. Similarly, in humans, we advertise and create dolls of women with proportions that almost no woman alive has. Legs so long and skinny they wouldn’t support any weight. Hips so narrow the woman wouldn’t be able to birth any offspring. Necks so long and slender they’d have neck pain for their entire life. Obviously this isn’t evolution playing a deeper game, it’s just a buggy neural subsystem that only worked well enough to get to this point. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/whats-the-advantage-of-having-softer-facial-features/808204.md?page=2)