A new meaning for "easy on the eyes"

Ever since noting the somewhat remarkable difference between Rachel McAdams in normal day-mode and Rachel McAdams in glamorous Hollywood knockout mode, I've been thinking a bit about the nature of beauty. Years ago I read a magazine article about the average pretty face (probably Discover magazine), and what I remember the researchers doing was computer-blending a lot of faces to come up with an average -- which happened to be pretty good-looking. Wish I could find that article again; the average face was a lot like the face I fell in love with (and which never quite let go) back in the early '80s.

But why was it attractive? The theory now is that the attractive/pretty face is easy to process in the brain because it's average:

Beauty is in the processing time of the beholder

"A paper published in the September issue of the journal Psychological Science proposes a new explanation for this phenomenon: Prototypical faces are pleasing because they’re easy for the brain to process. ... The authors challenge the popular idea from evolutionary psychology that people find prototypical faces attractive because average features indicate good health."

I have a problem with that -- beautiful faces are memorable, not average, and I think because of particular characteristics. Rachel McAdams has a square chin and big, luminous eyes. Reese Witherspoon has a very narrow chin (and I also remember reading that is a very attractive trait for women). In my own opinion, a beautiful face is an average face with a couple of quirks; like Cindy Crawford's mole, or the gap in Lauren Hutton's teeth.

Here's another take on that:

Hot or not composite images (just faces!)

and this (the "finalists" composite is really outstanding)

Miss Universe 2005 Composite Images

One thing I notice in the latter is that in the finalists image, the eyes "pop" more -- which means they're bigger, had better makeup, or both.

This makes sense -- here's why:

Barbie: Manufactured by Mattel, designed by evolution VIII

"There are at least two separate reasons why large eyes are part of ideal female beauty. First, as briefly mentioned in a previous post, large eyes (along with fuller lips, large foreheads, and smaller chins) are indicators of high levels of estrogen. And women who have higher levels of estrogen have easier time conceiving than women who have lower levels of estrogen. Women with larger eyes therefore on average make better mates than women with smaller eyes."

The second reason is based on neoteny (childlike features) -- the above to me explains the Rachel & Reese & Miss Universe 2005 effect. So a beautiful woman is not average -- she's got exaggerated features indicative of fertility. Combine that with a killer bod, and hey, I'm a male -- I know what I like.

By the way, if you're curious why a killer bod is something to like, it's a matter of waist girth and cup size. Don't say I didn't tell you (or warn you).