Archives of Sexual Behavior

, Volume 44, Issue 5, pp 1377–1394 | Cite as

Facial Structure Predicts Sexual Orientation in Both Men and Women

  • Malvina N. Skorska
  • Shawn N. Geniole
  • Brandon M. Vrysen
  • Cheryl M. McCormick
  • Anthony F. BogaertEmail author
Original Paper


Biological models have typically framed sexual orientation in terms of effects of variation in fetal androgen signaling on sexual differentiation, although other biological models exist. Despite marked sex differences in facial structure, the relationship between sexual orientation and facial structure is understudied. A total of 52 lesbian women, 134 heterosexual women, 77 gay men, and 127 heterosexual men were recruited at a Canadian campus and various Canadian Pride and sexuality events. We found that facial structure differed depending on sexual orientation; substantial variation in sexual orientation was predicted using facial metrics computed by a facial modelling program from photographs of White faces. At the univariate level, lesbian and heterosexual women differed in 17 facial features (out of 63) and four were unique multivariate predictors in logistic regression. Gay and heterosexual men differed in 11 facial features at the univariate level, of which three were unique multivariate predictors. Some, but not all, of the facial metrics differed between the sexes. Lesbian women had noses that were more turned up (also more turned up in heterosexual men), mouths that were more puckered, smaller foreheads, and marginally more masculine face shapes (also in heterosexual men) than heterosexual women. Gay men had more convex cheeks, shorter noses (also in heterosexual women), and foreheads that were more tilted back relative to heterosexual men. Principal components analysis and discriminant functions analysis generally corroborated these results. The mechanisms underlying variation in craniofacial structure—both related and unrelated to sexual differentiation—may thus be important in understanding the development of sexual orientation.


Sexual orientation Sexuality Faces Facial structure Sexual differentiation 



The first two authors contributed equally to this work. Thank you to K. Walczyk, L. Jamieson, K. Zeller, C. Davis, K. Spin, J. Bramley, S. Norgaard, and A. DesRoches for assistance with the collection of the original database. Thank you to D. Molnar for assistance with statistical analyses. Thank you to the three anonymous reviewers and the Editor for insightful comments related to this article. This research was supported by Social Sciences and Humanities Research Council grants to A. F. Bogaert [335-737-042] and to C. M. McCormick [334-222-005].


  1. Anderson, J. (2012). Whose voice counts? A critical examination of discourses surrounding the Body Mass Index. Fat Studies, 1, 195–207. doi: 10.1080/21604851.2012.656500.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bao, A. M., & Swaab, D. F. (2011). Sexual differentiation of the human brain: relation to gender identity, sexual orientation and neuropsychiatric disorders. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 32, 214–226. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2011.02.007.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Blanchard, R. (2004). Quantitative and theoretical analyses of the relation between older brothers and homosexuality in men. Journal of Theoretical Biology, 230, 173–187. doi: 10.1016/j.jtbi.2004.04.021.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Blanchard, R. (2008). Sex ratio of older siblings in heterosexual and homosexual right-handed and non-right-handed men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 37, 977–981. doi: 10.1007/s10508-006-9119-2.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Blanchard, R., & Bogaert, A. F. (1996). Homosexuality in men and number of older brothers. American Journal of Psychiatry, 153, 27–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bogaert, A. F. (2007). Extreme right-handedness, older brothers, and sexual orientation in men. Neuropsychology, 21, 141–148. doi: 10.1037/0894-4105.21.1.141.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bogaert, A. F. (2010). Physical development and sexual orientation in men and women: An analysis of NATSAL-2000. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 110–116. doi: 10.1007/s10508-008-9398-x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Bogaert, A. F., & Hershberger, S. (1999). The relation between sexual orientation and penile size. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 28, 213–221. doi: 10.1023/A:1018780108597.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Bogaert, A. F., & Liu, J. (2013). Physical size and sexual orientation: Analysis of the Chinese Health and Family Life Survey. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 42, 1555–1559. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0110-4.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Bogaert, A. F., & Skorska, M. (2011). Sexual orientation, fraternal birth order, and the maternal immune hypothesis: A review. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 32, 247–254. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2011.02.004.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Breedlove, S. M. (2010). Minireview: Organizational hypothesis: Instances of the fingerpost. Endocrinology, 151, 4116–4122. doi: 10.1210/en.2010-0041.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Bulygina, E., Mitteroecker, P., & Aiello, L. (2006). Ontogeny of facial dimorphism and patterns of individual development within one human population. American Journal of Physical Anthropology, 131, 432–443. doi: 10.1002/ajpa.20317.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Burke, D., & Sulikowski, D. (2010). A new viewpoint on the evolution of sexually dimorphic human faces. Evolutionary Psychology, 8, 573–585.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. Carpinella, C. M., & Johnson, K. L. (2013). Politics of the face: The role of sex-typicality in trait assessments of politicians. Social Cognition, 31, 770–779.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Carré, J. M., & McCormick, C. M. (2008). In your face: Facial metrics predict aggressive behaviour in the laboratory and in varsity and professional hockey players. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 275, 2651–2656. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2008.0873.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Cohen, J., Cohen, P., West, S. G., & Aiken, L. S. (2003). Applied multiple regression/correlation analysis for the behavioral sciences (3rd ed.). Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.Google Scholar
  17. Enlow, D. H. (1982). Handbook of facial growth (2nd ed.). Philadelphia: W.B. Saunders.Google Scholar
  18. Ernsberger, P. (2012). BMI, body build, body fatness, and health risks. Fat Studies, 1, 6–12. doi: 10.1080/21604851.2012.627788.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Fang, F., Clapham, P. J., & Chung, K. C. (2011). A systematic review of inter-ethnic variability in facial dimensions. Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery, 127, 874–881. doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e318200afdb.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Freeman, J. B., Johnson, K. L., Ambady, N., & Rule, N. O. (2010). Sexual orientation perception involves gendered facial cues. Personality and Social Psychology Bulletin, 36, 1318–1331. doi: 10.1177/0146167210378755.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Greene, R. M., & Pisano, M. M. (2010). Palate morphogenesis: Current understanding and future directions. Birth Defects Research Part C: Embryo Today: Reviews, 90, 133–154. doi: 10.1002/bdrc.20180.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Grimbos, T., Dawood, K., Burriss, R. P., Zucker, K. J., & Puts, D. A. (2010). Sexual orientation and the second to fourth finger length ratio: A meta-analysis in men and women. Behavioral Neuroscience, 124, 278–287. doi: 10.1037/a0018764.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Hamer, D. H., Hu, S., Magnuson, V. L., Hu, N., & Pattatucci, A. M. L. (1993). A linkage between DNA markers on the X-chromosome and male sexual orientation. Science, 261, 321–327. doi: 10.1126/science.8332896.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Hines, M. (2011). Prenatal endocrine influences on sexual orientation and on sexually differentiated childhood behavior. Frontiers in Neuroendocrinology, 32, 170–182. doi: 10.1016/j.yfrne.2011.02.006.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Hughes, S. M., & Bremme, R. (2011). The effects of facial symmetry and sexually-dimorphic facial proportions on assessments of sexual orientation. Journal of Social, Evolutionary, and Cultural Psychology, 5, 214–230.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Jelenkovic, A., Poveda, A., Susanne, C., & Rebato, E. (2010). Common genetic and environmental factors among craniofacial traits in Belgian nuclear families: Comparing skeletal and soft-tissue related phenotypes. Journal of Comparative Human Biology, 61, 191–203. doi: 10.1016/j.jchb.2009.10.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Lalumiere, M. L., Blanchard, R., & Zucker, K. J. (2000). Sexual orientation and handedness in men and women: A meta-analysis. Psychological Bulletin, 126, 575–592. doi: 10.1037//0033-2909.126.4.575.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. LeVay, S. (2010). Gay, straight, and the reason why: The science of sexual orientation. New York: Oxford University Press.Google Scholar
  29. Lyons, M., Lynch, A., Brewer, G., & Bruno, D. (2014). Detection of sexual orientation (“gaydar”) by homosexual and heterosexual women. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 345–352. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0144-7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. McDermid, S. A., Zucker, K. J., Bradley, S. J., & Maing, D. M. (1998). Effects of physical appearance on masculine trait ratings of boys and girls with gender identity disorder. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 27, 253–267. doi: 10.1023/A:1018650401386.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Meindl, K., Windhager, S., Wallner, B., & Schaefer, K. (2012). Second-to-fourth digit ratio and facial shape in boys: The lower the digit ratio, the more robust the face. Proceedings of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences, 279, 2457–2463. doi: 10.1098/rspb.2011.2351.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Rhodes, G. (2006). The evolutionary psychology of facial beauty. Annual Review of Psychology, 57, 199–226. doi: 10.1146/annurev.psych.57.102904.190208.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Rice, W. R., Friberg, U., & Gavrilets, S. (2012). Homosexuality as a consequence of epigenetically canalized sexual development. Quarterly Review of Biology, 87, 343–368. doi: 10.1086/668167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Rule, N. O., & Ambady, N. (2008). Brief exposures: Male sexual orientation is accurately perceived at 50 ms. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 44, 1100–1105. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2007.12.001.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., Adams, R. B., & Macrae, C. N. (2007). Us and them: Memory advantages in perceptually ambiguous groups. Psychonomic Bulletin & Review, 14, 687–692.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., Adams, R. B., & Macrae, C. N. (2008). Accuracy and awareness in the perception and categorization of male sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 95, 1019–1028. doi: 10.1037/a0013194.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Rule, N. O., Ambady, N., & Hallett, K. C. (2009). Female sexual orientation is perceived accurately, rapidly, and automatically from the face and its features. Journal of Experimental Social Psychology, 45, 1245–1251. doi: 10.1016/j.jesp.2009.07.010.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Saewyc, E. M. (2011). Research on adolescent sexual orientation: Development, health disparities, stigma, and resilience. Journal of Research on Adolescence, 21, 256–272. doi: 10.1111/j.1532-7795.2010.00727.x.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Schwartz, G., Kim, R. M., Kolundzija, A. B., Rieger, G., & Sanders, A. R. (2010). Biodemographic and physical correlates of sexual orientation in men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 39, 93–109. doi: 10.1007/s10508-009-9499-1.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Singh, D., Vidaurri, M., Zambarano, R. J., & Dabbs, J. M. (1999). Lesbian erotic role identification: Behavioral, morphological, and hormonal correlates. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 76, 1035–1049. doi: 10.1037/0022-3514.76.6.1035.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Singular Inversions. (2010). FaceGen Modeller, Version 3.5.
  42. Stern, C., West, T. V., Jost, J. T., & Rule, N. O. (2013). The politics of gaydar: Ideological differences in the use of gendered cues in categorizing sexual orientation. Journal of Personality and Social Psychology, 104, 520–541. doi: 10.1037/a0031187.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Tabachnick, B. G., & Fidell, L. S. (2007). Using multivariate statistics (5th ed.). Boston, MA: Pearson Education.Google Scholar
  44. Tabak, J. A., & Zayas, V. (2012). The roles of featural and configural face processing in snap judgments of sexual orientation. PLoS One, 7, e36671. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0036671.PubMedCentralPubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Tskhay, K. O., & Rule, N. O. (2013). Accuracy in categorizing perceptually ambiguous groups: A review and meta-analysis. Personality and Social Psychology Review, 17, 72–86. doi: 10.1177/1088868312461308.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Valentova, J. V., Kleisner, K., Havlicek, J., & Neustupa, J. (2014). Shape differences between the faces of homosexual and heterosexual men. Archives of Sexual Behavior, 43, 353–361. doi: 10.1007/s10508-013-0194-x.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Verdonck, A., Gaethofs, M., Carels, C., & de Zegher, F. (1999). Effect of low-dose testosterone treatment on craniofacial growth in boys with delayed puberty. European Journal of Orthodontics, 21, 137–143. doi: 10.1093/ejo/21.2.137.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Williams, T. J., Pepitone, M. E., Christensen, S. E., Cooke, B. M., Huberman, A. D., Breedlove, N. J., et al. (2000). Finger-length ratios and sexual orientation. Nature, 404, 455–456. doi: 10.1038/35006555.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Yamaguchi, M. K., Hirukawa, T., & Kanazawa, S. (1995). Judgment of gender through facial parts. Perception, 24, 563–564. doi: 10.1068/p240563.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Yang, H., Shen, J., Chen, J., & Fang, F. (2011). Face adaptation improves gender discrimination. Vision Research, 51, 105–110. doi: 10.1016/j.visres.2010.10.006.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 2014

Authors and Affiliations

  • Malvina N. Skorska
    • 1
  • Shawn N. Geniole
    • 1
  • Brandon M. Vrysen
    • 1
  • Cheryl M. McCormick
    • 1
  • Anthony F. Bogaert
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of PsychologyBrock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada
  2. 2.Department of Health SciencesBrock UniversitySt. CatharinesCanada

Personalised recommendations