this feels like one of those shrink wrapped dinosaur situations. like they arent doing a good job estimating how her soft tissue would have been distributed at all. why are her eyebrows so low, why are her cheeks so lean, why is there so much tissue below her lips, why is her hairline so high and with a bit of a widows peak? it feels like they put a mans tissue distribution on a womans frame completely uncritically and called it good.
edit: i think the harsh drop lighting theyre displaying this under is making it way worse too. it might not look quite as bad with softer more diffuse lighting.
Yeah this looks completely wrong to me… Like sure, they would look very different, but they wouldn’t be indistinguishable from men. Even from an evolutionary perspective that’s just silly.
Even today we have women that have “facial bone structures we associate with masculinity” as they describe. It’s not like we are working blind and trying to reconstruct a dinosaur or an extraterrestrial. Though maybe for some scientists, women are similarly rare.
I looked up some examples of “masculine women faces” online in 2 minutes. Even though they look “masculine”, they clearly don’t look like Gigachad or whatever this reconstruction is.
I can actually see Myself in a romantic/queerplatonic, non-physical relationship with a bi man. But not a straight or exclusively gay man. I went on a date with a man once, we both had a good time.
this feels like one of those shrink wrapped dinosaur situations. like they arent doing a good job estimating how her soft tissue would have been distributed at all. why are her eyebrows so low, why are her cheeks so lean, why is there so much tissue below her lips, why is her hairline so high and with a bit of a widows peak? it feels like they put a mans tissue distribution on a womans frame completely uncritically and called it good.
edit: i think the harsh drop lighting theyre displaying this under is making it way worse too. it might not look quite as bad with softer more diffuse lighting.
Yeah this looks completely wrong to me… Like sure, they would look very different, but they wouldn’t be indistinguishable from men. Even from an evolutionary perspective that’s just silly.
Even today we have women that have “facial bone structures we associate with masculinity” as they describe. It’s not like we are working blind and trying to reconstruct a dinosaur or an extraterrestrial. Though maybe for some scientists, women are similarly rare.
I looked up some examples of “masculine women faces” online in 2 minutes. Even though they look “masculine”, they clearly don’t look like Gigachad or whatever this reconstruction is.
example photos
All three are beautiful. And in other news, I’m a gay enby.
I’m a sidelined former passionate Ally, can you explain to me how an enby can be “gay” and not “pan?”
I’m not into men, and I’m less into women than I am into enbies close to My gender. There are plenty of enby genders I’m not into, too.
Ah okay that makes sense.
I can actually see Myself in a romantic/queerplatonic, non-physical relationship with a bi man. But not a straight or exclusively gay man. I went on a date with a man once, we both had a good time.
IKnowSomeOfTheseWords.goodburger
Would they look very different though? Even 9000 years ago, they would still have mostly human DNA.