Looksmaxxing for women

Most looksmaxxing content online was built around male facial dimorphism, where high FWHR, a wide gonial angle, and a sharp jawline carry positive weight. Female-perceived attractiveness research points in a different direction. Published cross-cultural studies on sexual dimorphism (Perrett et al. 1998 on feminized vs. masculinized composites; Said and Todorov 2011 on facial-shape preferences) consistently find that a softer jawline, a shorter chin, larger eye-to-face-area ratio, and fuller mid-face proportions read as more feminine and, on average, more attractive in female faces. The same metrics that boost a male composite often drag a female one — a wide bigonial measurement that reads as "strong jaw" on a man typically reads as "heavier lower face" on a woman.

That is why this page reframes the 17-metric report instead of using the default male-coded weighting. Brow prominence (well-defined arch, age-appropriate fullness), lip prominence (vermilion border definition and proportional lower-to-upper lip ratio), eye spacing and aperture, and midface fullness carry more weight in the female-coded composite. A high FWHR is treated as neutral-to-negative for a feminine face rather than as the positive signal it is for a masculine one. None of this is "lowering the bar" for women — it is matching the scoring to the research on what is actually being perceived.

The practical implication: if you scored low on a male-coded face tool and you are a woman, you may have been measured against the wrong distribution. Refractive features (eyes, brow, lip) and a balanced midface carry the bulk of female-coded composite signal. The report tells you which of those is your specific drag metric so you can work on the lever that actually moves your distribution, not the one that moves someone else's.

A common pattern in feedback to female users on male-coded face tools is "your jawline scored low, work on your jawline." For a feminine face, that recommendation is usually backwards. The published preference research (Perrett, Lee, Penton-Voak and others throughout the 1990s and 2000s) repeatedly shows feminized facial proportions — including a softer, more tapered lower face — being rated higher in attractiveness for female faces. A bigonial measurement at the male-attractive range often shifts a female face toward what reads as a heavier or more square presentation, not a stronger one.

The female-coded report on this page does not push you to "sharpen your jawline." It tells you what your lower-face proportion is actually doing in a feminine context — whether a softer line is reading as elegant or whether posture, lower-face fat distribution, or framing is fighting you. Most of the time the move is not the jaw itself; it is the angle, the posture, the haircut that frames the chin and neck, or the body composition. The score reflects this by treating a feminine jawline shape as neutral signal rather than as a deficit.