Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Universal Concepts of Beauty and Their Implications on Clinical Approach to Female Cosmetic Patient

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Gender and Dermatology

  • 986 Accesses

Abstract

Beauty is easy to recognize and difficult to define. Mathematicians, philosophers, digital processing specialists, sociologists–all had developed different approaches to assess human harmony and beauty.

Profound understanding of attractiveness is needed to achieve desired beautification when using minimally invasive procedures, such as dermal fillers or neuromodulator injections. These procedures are gender-specific, enhancing specific “reproductive signals” typical for males or females.

Lips and cheekbones augmentation is used to increase feminine traits, while injecting the chin and jawline creates a more masculine look. Basic guidelines are provided regarding the techniques to be used to enhance sexual dimorphism.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 219.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 279.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 379.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. Hatfield E, Sprecher S. Mirror, mirror: the importance of looks in everyday life. New York: SUNY Press; 1986.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Dion K, Berscheid E, Walster E. What is beautiful is good. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1972;24:285–90.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  3. Eagly AH, Ashmore RD, Makhijani MG, Longo LC. What is beautiful is good: a meta-analytic reviewof research on the physical attractiveness stereotype. Psychol Bull. 1991;110:109–28.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  4. Langlois JH, Kalakanis L, Rubenstein AJ, Larson A, Hallam M, Smoot M. Maxims or myth of beauty? A meta-analytic and theoretical review. Psychol Bull. 2000;126:390–423.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Seidman G, Miller OS. Effects of gender and physical attractiveness on visual attention to Facebook profiles. Cyberpsychol Behav Soc Netw. 2013;16(1):20–4.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Schultz W, Dayan P, Montague PR. A natural substance of prediction and reward. Science. 1997;275:1593–9.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  7. Kampe KW, Frith CD, Dolan RJ, Frith U. Reward value of attractiveness and gaze. Nature. 2001;413:589.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  8. Farkas LG, Kolar JC. Anthropometrics and art in the aesthetics of women’s faces. Clin Plast Surg. 1987;14:599–616.

    CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Wang D, Qian G, Zhang M, Farkas LG. Differences in horizontal, neoclassical facial canons in Chinese (Han) and North American Caucasian populations. Aesthet Plast Surg. 1997;21:265–9.

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Livio M. The golden ratio: the story of phi: the world’s most astonishing number. New York: Broadway Books; 2002.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Available at: www.beautyanalysis.com. Accessed Sept 2017.

  12. Berry DS. Attractiveness, attraction, and sexual selection: evolutionary perspectives on the form and function of physical attractiveness. In: Zanna MP, editor. Advances in experimental social psychology, vol. 32. San Diego: Academic; 2000. p. 373–42.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Etcoff N. Survival of the prettiest: the science od beauty, vol. 325. New York: Anchor-Doubleday; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Cunningham MR, Roberts AR, Barbee AP, Druen PB, Wu C-H. Their ideas of beauty are, on whole, the same as ours: consistence and variability in the cross-cultural perception of female attractiveness. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1995;68:261–79.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. Langlois JH, Roggman LA, Casey RJ, Ritter JM, Reiser-Danner LA, Jenkins VY. Infent preferences for attractive faces: rudiments of stereotype? Dev Psychol. 1987;23:363–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Langlois JH, Ritter JM, Roggman LA, Vaughn LS. Facial diversity and infant preferences for attractive faces. Dev Psychol. 1991;27:79–84.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. Rhodes G, Simmons L, Peters M. Attractiveness and sexual behavior: does attractiveness enhance mating success? Evol Hum Behav. 2005;26:186–201.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Prum RO. Aesthetic evolution by mate choice: Darwin’s really dangerous ides. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2012;367:2253–65.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  19. Rhodes G, Zebrowitz LA. Facial attractiveness: evolutionary, cognitive and social perspectives. Westport: Ablex; 2002. p. 311.

    Google Scholar 

  20. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Facial attractiveness. Trends Cogn Sci. 1999;3:452–60.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  21. Rubenstein AJ, Langlois JH, Roggman LA. What makes a face attractive and why: the role of averageness in defining facial beauty. In: Rhodes G, Zebrowitz LA, editors. Facial attractiveness: evolutionary, cognitive, and social perspectives, Advances in visual cognition, vol. 1. Westport: Ablex; 2002. p. 1–33.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Langlois JH, Roggman LA. Attractive faces are only average. Psychol Sci. 1990;1:115–21.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Light LL, Hollander S, Kayra-Stuart F. Why attractive people are harder to remember. Personal Soc Psychol Bull. 1981;7:269–76.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. Morris PR, Wickham LHV. Typicality and face recognition a critical re-evaluation of the two factor theory. Q J Exp Psychol A. 2001;54:863–77.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  25. O’Toole AJ, Price T, Vetter T, Barlett JC, Blanz V. 3D shape and 2D shape surface textures of human faces: the role of “averages” in attractiveness and age. Image Vis Comput. 1999;18:9–19.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. Rhodes G, Tremewan T. Averageness, exaggeration, and facial attractiveness. Psychol Sci. 1996;7:105–10.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Human facial beauty: averageness, symmetry, and parasite resistance. Hum Nat. 1993;4:237–69.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  28. Thornhill A, Moller AP. Developmental stability, disease and medicine. Biol Rev Camb Philos Soc. 1997;72:497–548.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  29. Gangestad SW, Buss DM. Pathogen prevalence and human mate preferences. Ethol Sociobiol. 1993;14:89–96.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Perret DI, Burt DM, Penton-Voak IS, Lee KJ, Rowland DA, Edwards R. Symmetry and human facial attractiveness. Evol Hum Behav. 1999;20:295–307.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. Moller AP, Swaddle JP. Developmental stability and evolution. New York: Oxford University Press; 1997.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Leung B, Forbes MR. Fluctuating asymmetry in relation to stress and fitness: effect of trait type as revealed by meta-analysis. Ecoscience. 1996;3:400–13.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. Moller AP. Developmental stability and fitness: a review. Am Nat. 1997;149:916–32.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  34. Moller AP, Thornhill R. A meta-analysis of the heritability of developmental stability. J Evol Biol. 1997;10(1):16.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. Moller AP, Thornhill R. Bilateral symmetry and sexual selection: a meta-analysis. Am Nat. 1998;151:174–92.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  36. Thornhill R, Gangestad SW. Human fluctuating asymmetry and sexual behavior. Psychol Sci. 1994;5:297–302.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. Manning JT, Scutt D, Lewis-Jones DI. Developmental stability, ejaculate size, and sperm quality in men. Evol Hum Behav. 1998;19:273–82.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. Waynforth DC. Male mating strategies among the Mayas of Belize (men). Ph.D. thesis, Albuquerque: University of New Mexico; 1999.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Rhodes G, Proffitt F, Grady JM, Sumich A. Facial symmetry and the perception of beauty. Psychonom Bull Rev. 1998;5:659–69.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. Rhodes G, Roberts J, Simmons L. Reflections on symmetry and attractiveness. Psychol Evol Gend. 1999;1:279–95.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Little AC, Hancock PJ. The role of masculinity and distinctiveness in judgments of human male facial attractiveness. Br J Psychol. 2002;9:451–64.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. Bashour M. History and current concepts in the analysis of facial attractiveness. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2006;118:741–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  43. Farkas LG. Anthropometric facial proportions in medicine. Springfield: Charles C Thomas; 1981.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Perret DI, Lee KJ, Penton-Voak I, Rowland D, Yoshkawa S, et al. Effects of sexual dimorphism on facial attractiveness. Nature. 1998;394:884–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. Penton-Voak IS, Jacobson A, Trivers R. Population differences in attractiveness judgments of male and female faces: comparing British and Jamaican samples. Evol Hum Behav. 2004;25:355–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. Rhodes G, Hickford C, Jeffery L. Sex typicality and attractiveness: are supermale and superfemale faces super-attractive? Br J Psychol. 2000;191:125–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. O’Toole AJ, Deffenbacher KA, Valentin D, McKee K, Huff D, Abdi H. The perception of face gender: the role of stimulus structure in recognition and classification. Mem Cogn. 1998;26:146–60.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Johnston VS, Franklin M. Is beauty in the eye of the beholder? Ethol Sociobiol. 1993;14:183–99.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  49. Penton-Vaok IS, Perret DI. Consistency and individual differences in facial attractiveness judgements: an evolutionary perspective. Soc Res. 2000;67:219–44.

    Google Scholar 

  50. Henns R. Perceiving age and attractiveness in facial photographs. J Appl Soc Psychol. 1991;21:933–46.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  51. Mathes EW, Brennan SM, Haugen PM. Ratingsof physical attractiveness as a function of age. J Soc Psychol. 1985;125:157–68.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  52. Zebrowitz LA, Olson K, Hoffman K. Stability of babyfaceness and attractiveness across the life span. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1993;64:453–66.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  53. Eibl-Ebesfeldt I. Human ethology. New York: Aldine De-Gruyter; 1989.

    Google Scholar 

  54. Cunningham MR, Barbee AP, Pike CL. What do women want? Facialmetric assessment of multiple motives in the perception of male physical attractiveness. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1990;59:61–72.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  55. Cunningham MR. Measuring the physical and physical attractiveness: Quasi-experiments on the sociobiology of female facial beauty. J Pers Soc Psychol. 1986;50:925–35.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  56. Swift A, Remington K. BeautiPHIcation™: a global approach to facial beauty. Clin Plast Surg. 2011;38:347–77.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  57. Rhodes G, Lee K, Palermo R, Weiss M, Yoshikawa M, McLean I. Attractiveness of own-race, other-race and mixed-race faces. Perception. 2005;34:319–40.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  58. Liew S, Wu WT, Chan HH, Ho WWS, Kim H-J, Goodman GJ, Peng PHL, Rogers JD. Consensus on changing trends, attitudes, and concepts of Asian beauty. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 2016;40:193–201.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  59. Wu WT. Botox facial slimming/facial sculpting: the role of botulinum toxin-A in the treatment of hypertrophic masseteric muscle and parotid enlargement to narrow the lower facial width. Facial Plast Surg Clin North Am. 2001;18:133–40.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  60. Jayaratne YS, Deutsch CK, McGrath CP, Zwahlen RA. Are neoclassical canons valid for southern Chinese faces? PLoS One. 2012;7(12):e52593.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  61. Rho NK, Chang YY, Chao YY, Furuyama N, Huang PY, Kerscher M, Kim HJ, Park JY, Peng HL, Rummaneethorn P, Rzany B, Sundaram H, Wong CH, Yang Y, Prasetyo AD. Consensus recommendations for optimal augmentation of the Asian face with hyaluronic acid and calcium hydroxylapatite fillers. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;136:940–56.

    Article  CAS  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  62. de Maio M. Ethnic and gender consideration in the use of facial injectables: male patient. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2015;136:40s–3s.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  63. Wollina U. Perioral rejuvenation: restoration of attractiveness in aging females by minimally invasive procedures. Clin Interv Aging. 2013;8:1149–55.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  64. Popenko NA, Tripathi PB, Devcic Z, Karimi K, Osann K, Wong BJF. A quantitative approach to determining the ideal female lip aesthetic and its effect on facial attractiveness. JAMA Facial Plast Surg. 2017;19:261–7.

    Article  PubMed  PubMed Central  Google Scholar 

  65. Sarnoff DS, Gotkin RH. Six steps to the “perfect” lip. J Drugs Dermatol. 2012;11:1081–8.

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  66. de Maio M, Wu WTL, Goodman GJ, Monheit G. Facial assessment and injection guide for botulinum toxin and injectable hyaluronic acid fillers: focus on the lower face. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:393e–404e.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  67. Sudaram H, Cassuto D. Biophysical characteristics of hyaluronic acid soft-tissue fillers and their relevance to aesthetic applications. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2013;132:5s–21s.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  68. de Maio M, BeBulle K, Braz A, Rohrich RJ. Facial assessment and injection guide for botulinum toxin and injectable hyaluronic acid fillers: focus on the midface. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:540e–50e.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  69. de Maio M, Swift A, Signorini M, Fagien S. Facial assessment and injection guide for botulinum toxin and injectable hyaluronic acid fillers: focus on the upper face. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2017;140:265e–76e.

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Dermatology Unit, Wolfson Medical Center, Holon, Israel

    Marina Landau

Authors
  1. Marina Landau
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. Tel Aviv University, Tel Aviv, Israel

    Ethel Tur

  2. Department of Dermatology, UCSF Medical Center, San Francisco, California, USA

    Howard I. Maibach

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2018 Springer International Publishing AG, part of Springer Nature

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Landau, M. (2018). Universal Concepts of Beauty and Their Implications on Clinical Approach to Female Cosmetic Patient. In: Tur, E., Maibach, H. (eds) Gender and Dermatology. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72156-9_21

Download citation

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-72156-9_21

  • Published:

  • Publisher Name: Springer, Cham

  • Print ISBN: 978-3-319-72155-2

  • Online ISBN: 978-3-319-72156-9

  • eBook Packages: MedicineMedicine (R0)

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation