The phenomenon itself has been mentioned and discussed so many times that I presume that it is completely uncontroversial by now. The only question remaining is how to account for it – and here I guess that all discerning observers are fed up with the standard boilerplate of completely unconvincing ad hoc explanations (less alcohol consumption, less hard drugs, less sunbathing without sunscreen, more youthful fashion and styling, drinking more water, etc.).
After all, while all of these factors might explain why on the whole people look less aged than they used to, it cannot explain why they look significantly more neotenous/soft-featured/structurally underdeveloped – and these are completely different things. That is to say, while, say, today's 30-something might become prematurely wrinkled and worn out by indulging in many of these vices, he will still end up looking far less structurally mature, robust, and sharp-shaped than his parents and grandparents were at the same age.
Even more intruiguingly, this phenomenon applies to both sexes, so even the rapid testosterone decline observed over the last few decades (which, in itself, seems to be a much more relevant factor than any of those mentioned above) cannot fully account for it. In sum, it is a very real and impactful change that defies any easy explanations, and which should be reflected upon all the more deeply.
Conspicuously illustrative cases that could be multiplied ad infinitum:
- Sean Connery and Thomas Brodie-Sangster at 34 (admittedly an extreme comparison, but it's used to emphasize the extreme degree of change – today it's not that difficult to find other 34-year-olds who look similar to Brodie-Sangster, but it's practically impossible to find any 34-year-old who looks even remotely similar to Sean Connery at that age)
- Harvard students in the 1960s and Harvard students in the 2020s (this one is also very telling, since it cannot be accused of selection bias or cherrypicking celebrities)
- Harvard female law students in the 1950s and in the 2020s (ditto)
- Tom Holland and George Lazenby at 29
- Rod Steiger and Nicholas Hoult at 35
- Carrie Fisher and Mckenna Grace at 19
- Elizabeth Taylor at 13 and Lauren Maberry at 30
Posted by Sure_Distance1
37 Comments
People use their hands a lot less at all stages of life. Less manual work = softer features all around.
That coupled with worse diets all around = softer pudgier faces lol.
No need for a conspiracy, it’s just how it goes.
It’s true, don’t know why you’ve been downvoted. Funnily enough I watched Three Men and a Baby today (what a throwback!), and can’t believe how much more masculine and attractive the male actors were compared to men today!
Lazenby drank like a fish and smoked like a chimney – he wasn’t a childhood actor like Tom Holland who has been paid to eat healthy and workout everyday since he was a teenager
I think a combination of not fighting in wars, no smoking, less sun exposure, no heavy drinking etc. But I do agree ppl looked much older in older movies. The parents of teens often looked to be in their 70s. Plastic surgery is really prevalent now. It may be a case of responsibility, too. I think older generations had it tougher. Working on farms, gritty jobs or like I said going off to war. The younger generations seem take better care of themselves.
may I add, I noticed the tone of voice in people around my age (50) often comes out as much younger than it should
More like people look 40 when they’re 40 and not when they’re 25
Carrie Fisher had much more of a baby face than McKenna Grace does. But yes, there is less testosterone flowing through human systems today due to a host of reasons.
Incidentally, human being respond very favorably to baby faces, so maybe they are selected more often as mates.
Less T. Five O’Clock shadow used to be common.
Environmental and dietary toxins promote estrogen production. Soy boys.
Eventually we’re going to look like a 4ft grey alien with big eyes and pale skin
sunscreen, hydration, better diets, no one smokes anymore. Gen Z and the youngest millennials barely drink.
Workouts, strength training, etc promote testosterone production in both men and women. You can see that men are not focusing on their physical development as before.
1. We are much much better hydrated as a society than they were then.
2. Better nutrition all around
3. The fact that they are from an older era, wear older clothes, have older styles, etc makes them appear older in the face as well. (Try imagining each slide switching clothing and you can tell it’s playing a part)
4. Less smoking & drinking
5. Less exposure to things like lead and asbestos
6. Maturing at later stages in life (age of marrying, starting work, having kids are all later)- the lack of stress at young ages significantly slows the aging process
7. Endless supply of beauty trends/products/etc that help somewhat
Edit: these are also images of celebrities, so many of these rich people have access to the very best. In worse off areas you can still find plenty of people who look much older than they are. Of course, many of these people don’t check the boxes above, leading to their appearance.
Feel like for the second and third one you could take those modern folks, dress them the same, use the same old timey camera and they would pass as an era appropriate photo.
As for the actors, Sean Connery is apparently 34 in that photo, you can find a photo of Henry Cavill at 34 where it’s not far off from how Connery looks.
Filters are what you are seeing.
Theres a decently long Vsauce video going in depth on this subject: https://youtu.be/vjqt8T3tJIE?si=J5zA_tYGv-KN5RPR
I literally don’t see any differences in the third picture, development why are you showing a 23-year-old to lack a 46-year-old? Again you’re comparing middle-aged men to 20 year-old men.
The last one I don’t even know what you’re trying to say like you do understand there’s this thing called ageing why don’t you try comparing famous people who are old now till like 20-30 years ago and what they look like compared people to themselves and then we’ll have another look at this question you’re proposing
I think it’s sexual selection.
The beauty standard is changing.
More love marriages as opposed to pragmatic ones, which center physical attraction as opposed to survival in economic depression.
People eat a lot of softer foods now, which effects facial development. Less strong jaws, which effects the mid face.
Just look at images of all the first ladies.
It goes from handsome women to super model Melania trump in pretty short order.
Look at the wives of the Russian Lit guys.
You didn’t have to look like neotenous to get married as a woman, and intellect and work ethic were seen as being just as valueable.
I also think people bond less on an intellectual level in romantic relationships, and everything is catalyzed by physical attraction.
If a “masculine” looking man marries a petite featured woman, obviously they will have an attractive child. But the type of attractive changes. If that happens for a couple generations, and research does say there is some sort of hertiable trait as far as sexual preferences, then you get a different type of face eventually.
There are also people saying now that women on birth control prefer an effeminate male if they haven’t had children yet, but after they have children they prefer a more masculine male.
Here’s the study, you can read it:
https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/23528282/
The real reason has to be hormonal. There’s just less testosterone in men now. And culturally there is a weird obsession with trying to look younger.
Now if we could just see how all these people look first thing in the morning, side by side, that might paint a different picture.
Smoke a couple packs a day like they did back then and you’ll get that slim more defined cheek bones and a more weathered face.
Or just enjoy the youthful look that they should have had, sans smoking.
mckenna grace is only 19 though??
Aside from being far healthier in general now, selecting an already hand selected largely for their looks group of people doesn’t demonstrate anything other than what they look for has changed.
Smoking ages youa lot
For a while it seemed like people aged slower in recent times but something I’ve noticed is younger gen Z and older gen A are the first generation of young people that actually look older than the previous generations. It’s like the process has been reversed.
Estrogen? In literally everything?
Is this more testosterone propaganda pushed by big pharma?
It’s because time is speeding up. Jk kinda but it’s a popular theory that time is quickly starting to excel and it’s causing us to look like we age slower.
The real answer is water. Which I’ve only seen a few people mentioned. We are drinking better water and are hydrated better than before. In the more distant past, people relied on beer for hydration, not to get drunk but because getting uncontaminated water was harder than getting beer. In the more recently past, people just have more access to clean water. At least for now.
Smoking is on a case to case basis. I know plenty of people who moderately smoke in their 40s and look younger than people who don’t. Being exposed to things like asbestos does way more harm than smoking ever could do.
It’s all the estrogen mimic chemicals leeching into everything we eat and drink that hat comes packaged in plastic
The more docile a persons temperament the more neotenous they look. The resisters are breed out.
Less smokers?…idk
People are out in the sun less
less sun exposure, less smoking, unleaded gasoline, less drinking, more water, and people use sunscreen
Plastic mimics estrogen and disrupts our endocrine system ifykyk
Hear me out here… people don’t smoke 4 packs a day since they were 5 and become functioning alcoholics by 12 and do blow regularly by age 15.
I look pretty similar to my dad at my age, the main difference is that I’m taller, more muscular and have long hair. This is just cherry picking.
lol dawg these are cherry picked comparisons. Plenty of Chad lookin dudes out there nowadays