Apparently, the features and you are born with determine attractiveness and there is not much you can do about it.
44 female undergraduates, aged between 18 and 21, were each photographed with and without their make-up. The shots were shown at random to another 62 male and female students who were asked to rate the women for attractiveness. The scale of one to seven, with one being very unattractive and seven being very attractive, was used. Each student saw either the before or after photograph but never both, so they could not compare two images of the same woman. That seems fair.
When the ratings were analyzed, the results showed make-up accounted for just two per cent variation in what or was not deemed attractive. The woman’s general attractiveness, features or identity was much more important, accounting for 69 per cent.
In other words, the variation in faces and attractiveness of a woman far overshadowed the application of make-up when it came to rating their looks. In other words, make-up makes no difference in the way others see you.
Why do these aging women paint their faces in the style they used half a century ago? And why does any beautiful woman resort to plastic surgery to maintain their youth? Aging faces are wonderful. Just think of Dame Judi Dench, Q in recent Bond films.
I look at male actors, who mostly show the face they were born with like Sean Connery and wonder why their female counterparts doll themselves up with a clown face and false eyelashes. Men and women are human beings who age with time. Both the sexes have faces, bodies and minds.
I think it's about time for the females to use the sense they were born with and not allow themselves to be drawn into a false world of glamor. The inequality is startling, when you consider the way both the male and the female present themselves to the world.
Has this study changed the way you think about make-up?