What genes code for beauty?

P

pluto2

Banned
Banned
What genes make for a beautiful face? What's the difference in genes between people who have a beautiful face and ones who do not? Also what genes cause some people to have a healthy and good-looking face skin?
 
Beauty is such a relative term, it is hardly possible (eve if known) to assign certain genes to them, especially as a number of aspects of beauty are not entirely determined genetically. One of the easier aspects would be symmetry, however even here I am not aware of any loci really associated with it.
 
The "vanity" gene as well as the "Narcissus" gene have a great deal to do with the view. :poke:
 
Specifically, skin tone is an important factor for both men and women, and generally neither prefer lily-white or blue-black. Their preferences fall somewhere in between, but more likely olive to brown, I would guess. That is to say Mediterranean, Spanish or Central American folks probably have the best looking skin. I'm sure the stats wouldn't be far off if you could perform a somewhat objective survey.

So what's that gene? Whatever codes for the skin pigment melanin. I would imagine that it's a group of genes rather than a single gene, although the extremes such as the blue-black and lily-white probably result from mutants of a single gene.

To put it in evolutionary terms, if you live in Switzerland, why waste energy making pigment proteins? Save it for harvesting crops, staying warm and the like.

And if you live in Central Africa close to the equator there is an obvious selective pressure from the sun. Hence mutants (I would presume) had a beneficial survival rate.

Other features such as the facial proportions vary quite a bit and probably have little to do with evolution in the classic Natural Selection sense. The activity of sexual selection most likely varies depending on the region and ethnic group, though tribalism tends to support a "like me" selection, so if you have a large nose you will pick a partner with a large nose to keep a pure "blood line" or whatever.

Also you had genetic clustering. Families expanded into communities and eventually tribes, so if you take a group living in isolation somewhere in Brazil, for example, it is likely that have far more in common genetically than a sample population from New York City.

There, in NYC, sexual selection is the primary driver of genetic drift. Whether this will result in genetic convergence - ie all men looking like Johnny Depp and all women looking like Angelina Joli remains to be seen. This selection based on idealized traits is a rather recent phenomenon, but doubtless it will affect our genome in some way.

Sorry, geeky guys. :(

Of course brains are also a factor so we here at Sci Forums may not be totally screwed.

Finally diversity is key. If you compare the popularity of bi-racial or multi-ethnic actors and actresses to their white-bred or all black, all Mexican, all Asian counterparts, you find that the prevalence of mixed race folks in the ranks of Hollywood's elite is quite a bit higher than in the population at large:

Hale Berry, Brandon Lee, Angelina Joli herself, I believe, is bi-racial (could be wrong about that)...

While years ago doing "the deed" with someone outside you racial or ethnic group might get you linched - or dragged behind a pickup - the results seem to be pleasing overall. Bottom line: we, the movie-going and clothes-purchasing consumer public, seem increasingly to prefer mutts.

Democrat Barack Obama is only half black. Quite a good looking stud he is, too.

Just ask any of the millions of ladies who are voting for him. Whatever your political feelings you have to admit he's got the look.
 
I've got to wonder if the whole multi-ethnic thing is due to psychological factors, rather than the "there are a greater mix of ethnicities in an area, therefore random chance says races will intermix more often there". Personally, I'm a whitey, and while I of course find other white women attractive, the ones of different ethnicity strike me as more interesting and often have beautiful traits that are more new to me. I dunno, is it just me?

Could just be me though, to be fair, I grew up as an expat, an American overseas, so different cultures might get me going a little more than the average person.
 
spidergoat said:
What do you mean, which? Would the name mean anything to you?
Click to expand...

I want the names. I'm eager for names. For example, from a previous thread i know that genes which are responsible for the development of the human body are Homeotic genes but this doesn't exactly tell me which genes cause beauty.
 
Gently Passing said:
Specifically, skin tone is an important factor for both men and women, and generally neither prefer lily-white or blue-black. Their preferences fall somewhere in between, but more likely olive to brown, I would guess. That is to say Mediterranean, Spanish or Central American folks probably have the best looking skin. I'm sure the stats wouldn't be far off if you could perform a somewhat objective survey.

So what's that gene? Whatever codes for the skin pigment melanin. I would imagine that it's a group of genes rather than a single gene, although the extremes such as the blue-black and lily-white probably result from mutants of a single gene.
Click to expand...

I wasn't talking about skin tone. What i meant by good-looking face skin is skin which is without bumps, plugs, enlarged pores or tiny holes.




weed_eater_guy said:
I've got to wonder if the whole multi-ethnic thing is due to psychological factors, rather than the "there are a greater mix of ethnicities in an area, therefore random chance says races will intermix more often there". Personally, I'm a whitey, and while I of course find other white women attractive, the ones of different ethnicity strike me as more interesting and often have beautiful traits that are more new to me. I dunno, is it just me?

Could just be me though, to be fair, I grew up as an expat, an American overseas, so different cultures might get me going a little more than the average person.
Click to expand...

Thanks but what does it have to do with the topic in question?
 
Last edited:
This is a difficult question as beauty is subjective. To make this discussion proceed more objectively, though, let's establish a definition of beauty which applies to science. How about likelihood of finding a mate not otherwise determined by social or mental characteristics?

We'd also have to rule out genital abnormalities.

I would suspect that genetic variance among specific "craniofacial" genes may be undetectable or inconsequential in determining beauty or attractiveness.

I would suggest that mutations or deletions in more systemic genes lead to abnormalities in appearance, and (in Darwinian terms), difficulty getting laid.

Michael Jackson's condition, where his skin turns white in patches, is clearly a result of some kind of (probably) recessive condition. Janet doesn't have it and, as far as I know, nor do any of the other three of the Five Jacksons. That points to an almost classical Mendelian inheritance - further supported by the fact that it is expressed in a male.

He hides his face in public avoiding the spotlight for most of the last 15-20 years. We can assume that this condition at least partially accounts for his reclusive behavior.

Abraham Lincoln probably suffered from Marfan Syndrome, a condition where the skeleton continues to grow even after puberty when, for the most part, it ceases in phenotypically normal humans.

Thus Lincoln's condition, and the resultant "ugliness" to which he himself referred in some rather famous quotations, was not a result of a "craniofacial" gene, but a regulatory gene which effected growth.

Marfans patients are generally taller than average. Lincoln was somewhere in the 6'5" - 6'8" range.

The nose, fingers, jaw and other bony structures grow abnormally large throughout the patient's lifespan resulting in health problems and, of course, deviation from the normal standards of attractiveness - or to say it bluntly - to being ugly.

Neither condition is craniofacial in origin. Both clearly have a profound effect on appearance.
 
One of the crucial components of facial beauty is symmetry. People with symmetrical faces are judged more attractive by a huge cross-cultural majority of people than those who's faces are crooked and non-symmetrical. What I mean by symmetry is, straight mouth, eyes that are located in the same position relative to the side of the face, nose down the center line of the face, etc...

So whatever genes determine facial symmetry play a huge roll in determining beauty.
 
This thread is useless.. there will never be an answer unless some nut comes up with the names of those 17000 genes.
:shrug:
 
Enmos said:
This thread is useless.. there will never be an answer unless some nut comes up with the names of those 17000 genes.
:shrug:
Click to expand...
Don't fret. I referred to craniofacial genes in my post, though I refuted the argument that their (individual) impact has a tremendous effect on "beauty." I also defined beauty in Evolutionary/Biological terms in order to make a scientific discussion possible.

To sum it up: Beauty is that collection of phenotypic components which benefits one's ability to find a mate and (presumably) reproduce.

That's about as scientific as it can get, I'm afraid.

My argument is that beauty - if we define it as a social response, or as a means of sexual selection, is rather a lack of defects or abnormalities as opposed to the presence of "good" genes versus the lack of bad ones.

I am proposing that ugly people - those who have difficulty finding sexual partners with which to mate - suffer from some form of genetic or developmental abnormality.

This line of logic leads us to an interesting (I think) conclusion: that sexual selection based on appearance is a means of selecting against those who may carry undesirable genes. Let's face it, folks with such genetic conditions as Muscular Dystrophy or Dwarfism have problems finding sexual partners.

As far as I know there is not a "symmetry gene", rather symmetry or lack thereof is more likely a result of developmental factors such as a lack of blood supply to some region in the growing fetus' body.

In other words beauty is incredibly subjective and genetics far too complicated to neatly define sexual appeal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top