Wow! This is shocking. I think I am thoroughly confused about Fi signals after this. Auburn could you explain a little more on what you mean by downward vs other movements? Because I was looking at the muscles to the sides of the nose and they look constantly pinched. I wasn't paying any attention to the smirks actually, I don't think any of us were. So....I don't get it, honestly.
EDIT!! Sorry, I somehow skipped the first video explaining FiTe vs TiFe. Never mind!
First I must say there aren't just 2 mouth types that are easily learned. There are some half a dozen common Fi mouth types and about as many common Fe mouth types. (that's not factoring in the uncommon ones) In part these are necessarily learned through exposure. But the fundamental difference is something like this:
- It's not about the wideness of the mouth - It's not about the bigness of the cheeks - It's about whether the muscular tension beneath the skin is following the above arrow pattern
I've never tried to do this before so I'm gonna give lame names to this just for the sake of writing this up!
#1: Fi - Small Pudgy Bulges
^ This is Fi/Te. Notice however that the area directly next to his nose is not "pinched". In fact, nothing happens up until about half a centimeter away from the nose. But there, there is a very distinct "buldge" happening on both cheeks. Also, there is tautness everywhere, and there is some dimples that are formed from the horizontal splitting. The Fi/Te arrow pattern described above can be seen pretty clearly in this face. Also notice how the upper lip is somewhat curled in (like he's eating his upper lip). This is because there is upward tension causing the upper lip to somewhat rise up, but the leavator muscles around there aren't causing any visible "pinch" in the form of creases. At times, Fi's tension is best seen not in pinches but in tautness. In other words, the skin seems unusually stretched, like rubber.
#2: Fi Wide Wobbly Mouth
But as soon as I lay down that tautness rule of thumb, I have to break it also. Here we have a wide smile version of Fi on Gotye. The image to the right is indistinct (i.e. we cannot say Ti vs Fi) but the image on the left shows clear Fi signaling. What we see on the image on the left is "Fi breaking through cheeks" which is when the Fi tension disarms the face and causes it to reach the eyes. Notice however, that Gotye's smile still follows the arrow pattern of Fi/Te. It's vertical and wide. UP/DOWN and horizontal.. like an "H". To take a closer look at this, we have the below:
^ I've added arrows to show Gotye's Fi/Te pattern here. And also SeFi Keira Knightley also showing Fi's Breaking Through Cheeks, but in the most extreme sense. Looks kinda scary to me!
#3: Fi Medium Budges
And in this one we go back again to #1 mostly, but with some differences. Again we have some really taut areas of the mouth, with "distance" between the nose and cheeks, yet a distinct stretching happening. On the right-most image we also see the Fi Horizontal Splitting (on the right cheek). The center image shows that vertical tension, with all the smile contained within this vertical slice. Here's what I mean:
^ The whole smile is kinda contained within this area. Which again isn't about the area per se (#2 shows a pretty wide area) but it's more about how there's these invisible "walls" running vertically on both sides of the mouth which contain the smile in a vertical format, no matter how wide it gets. Again this is from the pattern of:
Now for some Fe smiles....
#1: Fe Apple Cheeks
So here with Cate Blanchett we have pretty lush and round cheeks. But this shouldn't be confused with tautness. The areas of her smile that deal with contraction (i.e. flexing) follow a curtain-like pattern. The smile pushes the folds of the skin to the left/right rather seamlessly. However, there is no Ti neutralization of the cheeks because they're so big.
#2: Fe Regular Cheeks
If I may borrow some of Leelee's wonderful images for this bit (hope it's ok!) ...
^ Here we have Ti's flat cheeks in the resting position, and Fe's smile in the smile position. Like Cate, it pushes the skin out to the sides. HOWEVER... unlike Gotye and Keira Knightley, it doesn't cause the UP/DOWN and horizontal effect. Instead it follows the curved arrows path (curtain effect).
#3: Fe Bulgy Apple Cheeks
Then there are some Fe users who even have bulgy cheeks but it's just because they've got so much muscle tone and fat:
^ Now like Gotye, this is a version of the Fi smile that is very lax.... not very taut, but in Matthew's case here it's still rather thin. On the right-most image, one cannot tell what sort of smile he has. He might be confused for having Ti's absent tension. But when he smiles we see the clear difference. The way he smiles is upwards, contained within that invisible two walls I mentioned above, and it sorta breaks through his cheeks in the center image. The left-most image shows an asymmetrical expression which is not a smirk but an asymmetrical smile. The asymmetry isn't being caused by a horizontal pull but from a vertical pull.
#5: Wide Bulgy Smile
And perhaps the weirdest Fi smile of all... is Janet Jackson's. This is where we totally see how wide an Fi smile can really get. Notice how the area directly above her lip has plenty of space between her nose. In fact, there is no pinching at all next to her nose. BUTTT... there is a hell of a massive horizontal splitting going on. And this is again because of the Fi/Te "H" pattern of pulling. Notice how this differs from Cate Blanchett's smile. Even though they're around the same width, and they have around the same sort of muscle tone, Jackson's got a lot more pulling happening because the upward muscles are fighting against the downward muscles. To show what I mean:
^ the above display doesn't really indicate the "H" pattern of Fi/Te's pulling. Again, the "pinching" by the nose is less of a signal than the overall presence of absence of that "H" pattern of pulling. That's really where the Fi/Te mouth anatomy exists.
I think what we see in Chuck is an Ekman signal of disgust there, which is really similar to Fi's disgust but not quite the same - since Fe users can also show disgust (or anger). Here's another example of an Fe showing disgust/anger:
I think that if this is a chronic element of an Fe user's face (as it is with FeNi Jordan Peterson) it indicates a certain type of aggression. Jordan Peterson has directive Fe, which also causes that 'harsher' look on his face. I've also seen this sort of tension in Fe users with higher levels of neuroticism as per the Big Five.
Sort of on the same topic, I've seen examples of 'asymmetrical smiles' that at first I thought were Fi, but later realised were actually a type of Fe asymmetry. Perhaps those of us who are new to Vultology and rely on the signal names more than hours of video data experience tend to latch onto those names and misapply them because we're not sure what they specifically refer to.
For example, it came up in the Markus Zusak thread that he does asymmetrical smiles, but I think he's doing them zygomatically (although he hasn't been 'officially' typed):
I also came across Jerry A. Coyne because I was interested in 'Why Evolution is True'. I watched some videos of him, and 'asymmetrical smiles' were one of his most common signals, along with some kind of 'resting smile emotion' that hardly ever leaves his face - it looks like he's always laughing at something. I quickly assumed he must be Fi (because of the asymetrical smiles and thinking "Scientist, good fit for Fi dom"), but after listening to him for a while and reading the book, he strikes me as very Fe dominant. His comments are very dismissive ("Evolution is so obvious; it's ridiculous that people can't see it; public policy should reflect the irrefutable facts; evolution is fact, fact, fact" etc.). This doesn't strike me as someone led by Fi.
It would be good to do some kind of clarification on Levator asymmetry vs Zygomatic asymmetry.
I was wondering where that post vanished off to, lol. Thanks for the long explanation. So it's not the pinching so much as the H pattern. Got it. It's a really difficult thing to see. I think it'll take me a while to see it as well as you guys (expected). I DO see a weird pudginess in my cheeks underneath a tightening when I smile or just be talking sometimes that reminds me of the no. 1 small pudgy smiles. This whole time I've been thinking its the pinching that matters most. Will have to start looking at things very differently now.
“If every tiny flower wanted to be a rose, spring would lose its loveliness.”
Auburn , from the explanations/pics here, the chat and the point Kahawa makes about defining/describing signals, I've been wondering if part of the issue is in quantifying/defining the pattern of signals that are seen/meant: at least in a standardized repeatable way like Eckman's signals.
So it seems from the above that what is sought is evidence of lifelong or prolonged use/development of certain facial muscles (pudginess) over mere evidence of use of these muscles. Or at least the prioritizing of the first over the latter. It may, for example, make sense that someone is over-using these muscles due to a transitory issue like a period of stress or a more prolonged issue like mental illness. If this is the case, I do think CT should describe the signals in a way that reflects that: ie that it's not use per se although this is usually a good indicator but proof of concentrated use of certain muscles over a lifetime? In any case, I do realize you guys are in the process of creating this kind of tool/system, and I do think this would be helpful to do that.
Also, I wonder from the same if the pudginess is not as a lot of us might think simply the result of the use of these muscles per se but rather of their use (consistently) in a very particular way, ie smiling/laughing/happy expressions. This would again make sense if someone appeared to use them for negative expressions but not happy ones (flat cheeks) ie to suspect a more emotional explanation that a CF signal.
All this is, of course, assuming I'm following the explanation of the H + pudginess dynamic given above accurately.
Also, Aub, I've always used that straightish line beneath the bulges to tell the horizontal split but I can kinda see it in both Janet Jackson's and Kate Blanchette's bulges so I'm having difficulty telling those two in particular apart. Help with that? Neil deGrasse too. Is it in the tight skin?
This is also challenging for me to explain.. ..but in a good way, as it's forcing me to try better to delineate the difference, so thank you.
I would say it's not about the presence or absence of bulges (indeed prolonged life use from smiling/happiness can cause this), it's about the quality of how the smile contracts. Even when Fe users have lush plump cheeks, the area below the bulge looks different. Here's another Fe user showing an Fe smile:
And here again Cate and Jackson:
Notice how Cate and Rachel McAdams' smiles are similar to each other but different from Jackson's. The lines that form underneath their apple cheeks are more lax and are a bit more like stretch marks ("folds") from their smile pushing their skin out to the sides. A closer look here:
^ but here we see Jackson's area below the bulge is smooooth, rather than a series of lines. It has that tautness to it. It doesn't have that 'curtain' effect. Like so:
I wonder if that makes sense? But again, as soon as I lay down a rule of thumb, I have to break it, since there are plenty of Fi users with lax cheeks that lack the bulginess and their cheeks will be prone to contend with a different set of rules. What I can say is, this above rule applies as a differentiator in individuls who have naturally bulgy cheeks or a lot of cheek tone. For people with lax cheeks, we simply apply a different set of differentiations.
^ here we have Fi/Te Clinton showing the horiozntal splitting. she is very old so she has wrinkles, but notice that the area right around her mouth is still super taut. Then the wrinkes set in after the bulge on the far right and far left sides of her face. I hope that makes sense.
Thanks Auburn , for that explanation. These things really are granular, aren't they? Yes, I see what you mean re the wrinkly curtail and the clean kinda-fruity Fi big bulge. So it's not straightness at all but how the skin wraps itself around the bulge, or rather how much the bulge forms the skin. The Fi round fruit doesn't hide as well in the skin because the downward or horizontal pull stretches it tighter. Wow. Thing is, I knew I could see "something" different in Janet but I didn't know what it was. This makes it clearer. Thank you!
Edit: Actually scratch that, it's more that Fe smile pushes the skin towards the buldge and hides it better and Fi downward motions in chin and such pull the skin away from the bulge, exposing it more....lol. I'm only just now starting to get that.
The Fi big bulge has a bit of a manic look to it. Almost like a really forced smile, lol. Not to insult people with Janet's facial features but her bulges are sort of isolated in a way whereas the curtain smile bulges are more harmonized/connected with the skin around the mouth.
The Fi round fruit doesn't hide as well in the skin because the downward or horizontal pull stretches it tighter. Wow. Thing is, I knew I could see "something" different in Janet but I didn't know what it was. This makes it clearer. Thank you!
The downward pull, like an elastic band, causes the tautness. Conflicting tension up and down. Whereas Fe smiles don't have that conflicting tension, it's just going UP... and fighting against gravity or the cheek that's in the way.
But even having said this, some Fi smiles (re: African origin especially) will be indistinguishable from some Fe smiles in static pictures. Gotta also factor in dynamic movements, but with both together it gets pretty solid.
// and again this only applies for making distinctions between people with naturally plump cheeks
The Fi big bulge has a bit of a manic look to it. Almost like a really forced smile, lol.
Fi/Te smiles will have that sort of odd look to them often times, especially if they have the taut square:
Auburn , in those pictures of Cate and Janet I'm having a really hard time seeing the difference. Are you able to point out what muscles you think they're using specifically, and how Janet's Fi smile might be different than that last pic you posted, anatomically? The last pic looks very square and taught to me, but Janet's looks like the 'curtain' effect. I'm wondering which muscles she's activating, and to what degrees, if that's answerable.
Kahawa - Sure. One thing about African Americans is I think they may have less muscles in the face around the nose, which what causes the confusion. Oppositely, I suspect caucasian people have more muscles (literally more muscles, as autopsies seem to confirm is a difference between people) around the nose area - which is a genetic feature. This causes black people's smiles to be more confusing when determining Fi vs Fe, and this is one of the reasons why there are so many variations of Fi vs Fe smiles. I think Janet Jackson lacks the levator labii superioris (alaeque nasii) muscles, and so her Fi expressions happen wider.
^ This is also why caucasian people like Chuck may seem to have upward tension while not being Fi. And inversely, Janet seems to have a wide smile even though the quality of her mouth is definitely Fi/Te as we can see here:
^ Again this photo between Cate Blanchett and Janet Jackson is about as apparent as I can make the distinction without over-generalizing. I dunno how else to put it... It's super clear to me but maybe that's just because I've seen so many over time. Janet's smile lacks those vertical creases and is instead "smooth" like a gradient, due to the tautness of the skin going up and down.
^ Here is another attempt at highlighting the difference. The "horizontal split" will sometimes be a sharp-ish horizontal line (which is still different from the vertical stretch marks Fe often causes) but often the split looks like a gradient caused by the indentation in tension.
I really should mention again, however, that all these rules are rules of thumb. There are so many different face types, and exceptions. Because of how anatomy can cause the shape of skin and muscle to change in how it hugs around bone/skin, it's best to example people case by case. And to double-check this signal with dynamic ones.