NOTICE:

DO NOT ATTEMPT TREATMENT WITHOUT LICENCED MEDICAL CONSULTATION AND SUPERVISION

This is a public discussion forum. The owners, staff, and users of this website are not engaged in rendering professional services to the individual reader. Do not use the content of this website as an alternative to personal examination and advice from licenced healthcare providers. Do not begin, delay, or discontinue treatments and/or exercises without licenced medical supervision.

[Discussion] Why so many young women nowadays with amazing jawlines | forward growth  

  RSS
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member

This is a pattern that I've observed ever since finding about Ortothropics and mewing. I started paying more careful attention to how developed are other people's faces, analyzing their features, trying to decode what makes them beautiful.

And one pattern I noticed over and over again. Young women, between the ages of 20 - 25, who have god-tier forward growth (we're talking Natalie Portman or Ariana Grande level). I see them on the streets, I see them on Instagram. They literally look model-tier. Some of them could even model, but maybe they're not aware of their beauty.

What I see on them:

  • excellent forward growth of the maxilla
  • proeminent cheekbones
  • excellent under-eye support
  • very developed mandibles, great jawlines. This is a feature which I see more and more on young women, even it's not necessarily the most feminine.

What could be the explanations behind it? A few thoughts

  • proper breastfeeding
  • proper learning of swallowing patterns in childhood
  • no allergies in childhood
  • gum chewing: This would explain masseter hypertrophy, but it would not explain up-swinged maxilla

Diet: This generation is more inclined to explore veganism and the like, so it's unlikely they get that amazing facial grownth because they're eating a lot of tough foods.

Another thing I'd like to touch on and raise a question: Why is it that it's mostly girls with great facial development? 

Sure, there are men too, but I'd say the majority are women. 

I see a lot of men with recessed maxillas and CFD. Maybe boys are more prone to alllergies?

Quote
Posted : 05/07/2019 10:19 am
135
 135
Active Member

Some thoughts:

Women are more intuitive and attentive to aesthetics than men. If they're delicately applying makeup each morning to go to school, there's a better chance that kind of person will walk gracefully and upright. Men will slouch in front of the computer all day and think nothing of it. Women will go out into public and have great posture all day.

A girl I dated and her friends used to balance books on their head for extended periods of time "for fun" and to learn grace. 

Also, if their parents enrolled them in dance (especially ballroom and ballet) or gymnastics... this makes a big impact during youth. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 05/07/2019 1:39 pm
TGW
 TGW
TGW Admin Admin

I agree with your observations. My opinion:

Women have smaller skulls than men, and generally this means that less growth is required to reach the genetic potential. Babies have the virtually the same skull size in both genders, but the adult skull dimensions (in every plane) are generally larger for males than females.

A fully developed androgynous male skull requires a lot more bone growth than a feminine female skull. The finish line for development is closer to the starting line for women, compared to men.

In comparison between men, my general observation seems to be that shorter men with smaller skulls tend to have better development than tall men with large skulls. It's the same principal in play - the genetic potential for the larger skulled men is much harder to reach, and even small slip-ups in development show up clearly in the face. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 05/07/2019 2:51 pm
Neigh liked
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

I don't observe this in one gender more than another. It seems about equal. 

Women just are better at fooling us that they have more aesthetic features due to makeup.

I will say that women have phenotypic shorter faces than men (shorter maxilla not necessarily shorter midface). This is why their lower thirds are also shorter. Shorter face = more neoteny = greater impression of good development. 

As far as larger mandibles, women's mandibles do grow with age. Observe English women. I am sure @Jawanomics is aware of this phenomenon. But this doesn't mean they are forward grown. Large mandible =/= forward growth.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 05/07/2019 4:22 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

More thoughts: women have a naturally lower fwhr than men due to narrower faces. So a woman with good development will need less palate expansion to look aesthetic compared to a man. A man can be good looking with a narrow estrogenic face, but nobody will classify him as having optimal bone development (even if his Mew score is good).

Aesthetics =/= Mew score. Also worth mentioning

ReplyQuote
Posted : 05/07/2019 7:18 pm
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member
Posted by: TGW

Women have smaller skulls than men

Thanks for the response, this is the only point where I have doubts. The women that I see have well-developed skulls overall, and oftentimes, greater in size vs men. They also have very high FWHR (which also contributes to the impression of larger skull, maybe). 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 06/07/2019 1:46 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

High fwhr isn't a common feminine trait. Male skulls grow laterally much more than women's. For example, the women in your original example like Natalie Portman and Ariana Grande both have small skulls and a low fwhr as they have quite gracile and narrow faces. Ari even has a bit of a narrow midface on top of that (her eyes are spaced close together). So on either of these examples the women neither have atypically wide skulls (high fwhr) or even wide midface ratios. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 06/07/2019 2:10 pm
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member

So you're telling me, that in this example, her FWHR is not high?

Look at the width of her maxilla.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 06/07/2019 2:30 pm
Fred
 Fred
Estimable Member

It's hard to tell she's not facing the camera directly.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 06/07/2019 3:26 pm
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member
Posted by: Fred

It's hard to tell she's not facing the camera directly.

Look at the distance between her nose and her right zygo. Double that and you can imagine

ReplyQuote
Posted : 06/07/2019 3:40 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: GreekGodBrody

So you're telling me, that in this example, her FWHR is not high?

Look at the width of her maxilla.

Is that Natalie Portman?

Anyway, seeing someone's face alone without the eyes and temples isn't a good way to tell fwhr. But she doesn't look masculine anyway. Low bodyfat and high cheekbones doesn't mean she has a fwhr that rivals a male. Show me a pic of her next to a regular dude and then we can see. 

The point is that an average male face is probably wider than hers, anyway. Her having nicely defined cheekbones doesn't preclude men having a larger fwhr. 

My wife has very prominent cheekbones. They look more defined than mine at a higher bodyfat. My fwhr is still higher than hers simply because my temples are further apart and my skull is overall larger.

Her Mew score is probably in the 30s for that matter. Very short faced. But I still have a skull that grew laterally more than hers, and also grew more downward so my lower third is longer than hers, too. Along with me having a longer philtrum, larger teeth, wider mouth, etc.

These sexual dimorphic traits are still there. Yet I have cfd and she doesn't. Doesn't mean I don't look less masculine than she does. A male with bad development will still have male traits compared to an average female. These traits include a larger fwhr, wider palate/mouth, and longer face (higher forehead, longer lower third)

ReplyQuote
Posted : 07/07/2019 7:31 am
Slinky
Trusted Member

also has someone noticed skinny people tend to have worse posture and facial structure in general?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 07/07/2019 10:06 am
6MAXIMUS3 liked
6MAXIMUS3
Active Member
Posted by: Slinky

also has someone noticed skinny people tend to have worse posture and facial structure in general?

I'm skinny too.

Maybe it's more noticeable on skinny people. 

Skinny people are usually more flexible so maybe they can get into bad posture more easily too. 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 07/07/2019 10:40 am
AlphaMinus
Estimable Member

It's definitely worth pointing out that women do a LOT of fooling with makeup techniques these days. Makeup isn't like it used to be in the 70's and 80's. Women are actively painting themselves entirely new faces with entirely new bone structure. They're giving themselves zygos they didn't have, they're reshaping their noses and they're reshaping their eyes. It's worth Googling Imaging "contour makeup before after" because it's quite frightening to see the "before" pictures and how unrecognizable they are in the "after" photos. You have very plain girls with virtually no bone structure essentially painting a "babe" face on themselves, almost like wearing a mask. 

The worst part of it is that you have naturally beautiful women making themselves look worse with makeup. This girl is a prime example. She is a radiant natural beauty beforehand, but after the makeup looks like a big generic "meh." 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 07/07/2019 12:34 pm
Neigh, Kyte, GreekGodBrody and 1 people liked
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

Is that Natalie Portman?

Anyway, seeing someone's face alone without the eyes and temples isn't a good way to tell fwhr. But she doesn't look masculine anyway. Low bodyfat and high cheekbones doesn't mean she has a fwhr that rivals a male. Show me a pic of her next to a regular dude and then we can see. 

No, it's not NP of course, that's why I 've hidden the eyes to ensure her privacy.

If I show her side profile, one can notice she has insane forward growth. Beauty is objective, after all

ReplyQuote
Posted : 08/07/2019 3:48 am
TGW
 TGW
TGW Admin Admin

@Greekgodbrody @eddiemoney

Catch-up growth in the rat skull after retardation during the suckling period.

In rats whose growth was restricted by rearing in large litters the skull was less affected than the spine and the brain case less than the face. No sex difference was apparent during under nutrition but on subsequent rehabilitation females had caught up to controls in four out of five skull measurements within 4 weeks and by the end of the experiment the skulls of the neonatally undernourished females were the same size and shape as the controls. In the case of males, however, the skull of the undernourished rats never attained the same width as the controls

Small sample; but female rats with insufficient growth were able to catch up to proper form, while the male rats never did

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/07/2019 2:38 pm
Roflcopters
Trusted Member

Maybe posture aswell?

Females give alot of attention to their body, more then men do. 

Might be a dumb suggestion but.. 

What if its related to them pushing their butts out and chest up? At least from a young age I think it would make a difference

Lmao hey I'm just saying 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/07/2019 3:59 pm
sparkyyy
Active Member
Posted by: AlphaMinus

It's definitely worth pointing out that women do a LOT of fooling with makeup techniques these days. Makeup isn't like it used to be in the 70's and 80's. Women are actively painting themselves entirely new faces with entirely new bone structure. They're giving themselves zygos they didn't have, they're reshaping their noses and they're reshaping their eyes. It's worth Googling Imaging "contour makeup before after" because it's quite frightening to see the "before" pictures and how unrecognizable they are in the "after" photos. You have very plain girls with virtually no bone structure essentially painting a "babe" face on themselves, almost like wearing a mask. 

The worst part of it is that you have naturally beautiful women making themselves look worse with makeup. This girl is a prime example. She is a radiant natural beauty beforehand, but after the makeup looks like a big generic "meh." 

 

She looks better with make up.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 15/07/2019 10:21 pm
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Ideal female development needs much less bone than male development. So a woman can look like a babe with small bone development where a male would look either androgynous or feminine. 

So girls need less growth than men. Excessively grown facial bones look less attractive on women. If a girl has excessive facial bone development she looks masculine. Especially if it lengthens her skull vertically. 

As far as forward growth is concerned, the female has a shorter maxilla than the male and a more pointed chin. These are sexually dimorphic differences. But men also have larger teeth and palates which elongates the lower third. So men are more developed on that aspect.

In terms of fwhr I already said males win since the make face grows up and down and also outwardly. Men have wider faces than women so fwhr is higher in men. 

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 17/07/2019 3:38 pm
Pame
 Pame
Trusted Member
Posted by: EddieMoney

Ideal female development needs much less bone than male development. So a woman can look like a babe with small bone development where a male would look either androgynous or feminine. 

So girls need less growth than men. Excessively grown facial bones look less attractive on women. If a girl has excessive facial bone development she looks masculine. Especially if it lengthens her skull vertically. 

As far as forward growth is concerned, the female has a shorter maxilla than the male and a more pointed chin. These are sexually dimorphic differences. But men also have larger teeth and palates which elongates the lower third. So men are more developed on that aspect.

In terms of fwhr I already said males win since the make face grows up and down and also outwardly. Men have wider faces than women so fwhr is higher in men. 

 

Would you say theres a bigger variety in attractiveness among males than females in general? I feel like females might be generally more attractive, and the most reccessed males are extremely recessed whilst the most attractive ones are exceptionally attractive.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/07/2019 6:20 am
elevee
Trusted Member

@ray135

I can support your post with experience. It's not necessarily that women are intuitively anything, but they are certainly coached by their parents and society from a very young age to maximize their appearance and carry themselves well. I'm from an ordinary working class family (not the kind that would give a young girl finishing school, cosmetic surgery or trips to the tanning booth) yet from as far back as I can remember my mother reminded me to stand up straight, to walk with  a clean stride instead of a shuffle, to chew with my mouth closed.

Many of those things things affect the physical structure of a growing child. Boys are generally allowed to 'coast' more, I think. Girls are very rarely allowed to coast, but it seems like a norm for boys. I notice the difference in coaching whenever I see teenagers on a date. Invariably the girl has done her hair and put  on some nice clothes and pretty shoes (whatever is 'nice' to her, given her culture and background) and the boy has his everyday getup.

Boys just...slum a lot. And over time, form does follow function. So while I can't say that I've seen too many women like the one Brody posted as an example and I totally agree that contouring makeup (and routine use of cosmetic procedures like fillers & collagen among women who are already young and attractive) are skewing perception, I can absolutely say that gender norms affect body development.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 28/08/2019 7:28 am
GreekGodBrody
Trusted Member
Posted by: @elevee

It's not necessarily that women are intuitively anything, but they are certainly coached by their parents and society from a very young age to maximize their appearance and carry themselves well

I went out on a date with a girl recently and I could notice exactly what you described here. Very good posture, straight shoulders, head straight. Of course she has great forward growth. Couldn't stop staring at her cheekbones, lol.

She put in a lot of effort / attention. to dress well, to look pretty

ReplyQuote
Posted : 29/08/2019 2:55 am
elevee
Trusted Member

@greekgodbrody

Yes, exactly.

It troubles me when I hear young men on this forum think they can't attract a woman because their features aren't _____ enough, because I promise there are a lot of women in this world who appear way more attractive than they could be, because they are working it.  Men could learn a lot from women about using what they have to best advantage. That's not even makeup, just dressing carefully and carrying yourself well. Not very many women coast, but an awful lot of men do without realizing it. 

Guys can earn an awful lot of miles with the ladies by working their clothes, shoes, grooming, and carriage. The style doesn't even matter. If a woman can just see you're making an effort, it makes you genuinely more attractive. Women put so much work into looking their best and its such a relief to feel that someone else is reciprocating the effort, not taking it for granted.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 01/09/2019 7:27 pm
Progress
Member Moderator

Here is something to consider. In the pic @qwerty135 shared in here John Mew explains how teeth contact, not the tongue, is the main facilitator of upswing, i.e. the movement that ultimately creates the prominent jawline:

 

Interestingly, on Wikipedia's article about bruxism it is explained that up to third of mostly female population engages in daytime non-grinding bruxism:

Could it be that daytime clenching is a predominantly functional (though potentially excessive) habit and that females, being more instinctively aware of their anatomies as it was suggested by others above, are more likely to engage in it, therefore explaining the clear difference between average male & female development? (On the other hand, the equal gender distribution, lower prevalence, presence of grinding and unconscious nature of nighttime bruxism suggest that it is more likely to be dysfunctional behavior).

 

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/09/2019 3:48 am
printfactory
Eminent Member

When I clench my teeth I can kind of hook my tongue behind the bony parts of the sphenoid that sick out of the palate (pterygoid hamulus?) and feel some pressure on the bridge of my nose and sometimes the cheek bones. However if i keep my teeth a bit apart I can´t exert that kind of force for some reason.

Also I feel like pushing like that made my asymmetries a bit worse.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/09/2019 4:54 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Upswing mainly benefits women aesthetically more than it does men anyway. Women seem like they have better development because women naturally have shorter faces than men. This allows their chin to be more pointy and their Mew line to be low.

Men can benefit from slight upswing of course if they are excessively downward grown. But from aesthetics in dimorphism, men benefit more from palatal expansion since it widens the face and male faces are wider than female ones. But an overly short and projected maxilla in a man would decrease facial height.

Palate widening also would help male aesthetics since a man with a long midface can experience a shorter midface ratio by widening the face even if the Mew line stays static. This way his lower third would stay longer and his midface would still shorten (possibly through increasing space between the eyes).

Notice the shortening and narrowing of the morph as it becomes more feminine. The philtrum also gets shorter indicating the Mew line is lower in women. 

I think for male attractiveness, maxillary HEIGHT is better a bit higher than lower. But palate width must be wider and ramus length longer. 

Here is another example of why women don't need robust bones to be attractive. Miranda Kerr is probably one of the most neotenous women I have seen. Her bones aren't very developed at all. Her bony growth is actually weak. It is her soft tissue growth that makes her look feminine and "cute". Her Mew line is obviously low but she definitely doesn't have robust bones.

?ixlib=rb-1.1.0&q=45&auto=format&w=1000&fit=clip

On the other hand, Brooke Shields in her current age did develop robust bones. However, when her bones were LESS developed, she looked prettier.

Less bony prominence on a female is ideal.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/09/2019 11:16 am
Neigh liked
EddieMoney
Reputable Member

Tl;dr version: women don't have better forward growth than men. They have a vertically shorter maxilla due to the fact their skull grows less in all directions. This shortens their Mew line and causes them to have naturally shorter faces. But a woman with normal development will never have a skull more robust than a male. If she did, she would look like a guy.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 18/09/2019 11:27 am
Neigh
Active Member
Posted by: @eddiemoney

On the other hand, Brooke Shields in her current age did develop robust bones. However, when her bones were LESS developed, she looked prettier.

That's mostly true for women. Women usually look different after a BSSO, but rarely better unless she's borderline deformed.

Women can have a weak jaw, and recessed chin and still be pretty. Virtually no man can do the same. 

I know a lot of people are addicted to Greek comparisons, but I'd point out that Greeks were a largely homosexual society. Their beauty standards were 100% male centered. They say an ideal woman is basically a 15 year old boy. Alexander would concur. But that's not really the biological norm for sexual attraction. Greek standards are only loosely correct for men. They're WAY off for women. Probably worse off than Bantus.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/10/2019 12:07 am
EddieMoney
Reputable Member
Posted by: @neigh
Posted by: @eddiemoney

On the other hand, Brooke Shields in her current age did develop robust bones. However, when her bones were LESS developed, she looked prettier.

That's mostly true for women. Women usually look different after a BSSO, but rarely better unless she's borderline deformed.

Women can have a weak jaw, and recessed chin and still be pretty. Virtually no man can do the same. 

I know a lot of people are addicted to Greek comparisons, but I'd point out that Greeks were a largely homosexual society. Their beauty standards were 100% male centered. They say an ideal woman is basically a 15 year old boy. Alexander would concur. But that's not really the biological norm for sexual attraction. Greek standards are only loosely correct for men. They're WAY off for women. Probably worse off than Bantus.

Any examples of this? Are you referring to the androgynous look of Greek statues?

ReplyQuote
Posted : 04/10/2019 10:04 pm
Roflcopters
Trusted Member

Early intervention with orthos these days is also a big factor.

Also, we live in a world where looks matter more thn ever and girls are usually alot more attentive to that thn guys.

I'd say body posture, specifically pushing the chest up and out and the butt out most likely have a skeletal effect.

I don't wna sound like a chauvinist here but girls these days learn how to show their feminity and attractiveness this way.

Might sound dumb but just if you sit in a chair from 12 to 20 your skull will not grow correctly. But if you push your chest out and align the hips from 12 to 20 it probably will have a different outcome.

ReplyQuote
Posted : 05/10/2019 10:49 pm