Over the past 250 years, America’s beauty standards have been in a constant state of evolution, undergoing reinventions with every passing decade.

From the bold allure of red lips and paper-thin eyebrows to the voluminous elegance of permed hairstyles, not only have makeup and hair trends shifted, but the aesthetics of women’s appearances have transformed as well.

In the cinematic scene of the 1930s, Katharine Hepburn captivated audiences with her defined bone structure. Meanwhile, the era’s quintessential blonde bombshell, Marilyn Monroe, was celebrated for her luminous skin and signature beauty mark.

By the late 1960s, Aretha Franklin had risen to fame, enchanting admirers with her distinctive style, including flowing blowouts and eyelashes reminiscent of Twiggy’s iconic look.

During this same period, plastic surgery began to gain popularity, bringing facelifts into the mainstream and making them more accessible to the public.

In the 1980s, stars like Madonna came to the forefront as she embraced all different kinds of styles, including lining her eyes with heavy eyeliner and keeping her signature gap tooth intact.

And now, flash forward to 2026 and it is clear we have come a long way from the beauty of former First Lady Dolley Madison, as women are aiming for oversized lips and dewy, glowing skin are everyone’s obsession and undetected work is the goal. 

In honor of America’s 250th anniversary, the Daily Mail has taken a look back at the aesthetic trends that have shaped women’s faces throughout the years and how they have evolved. 

‘In the most basic terms, over the past 100 years, the beautiful face flips back and forth between minimized and maximized, and in each decade, the available technologies and practices determine how far someone can go to achieve that ideal,’ Texas-based plastic surgeon Dr Frank Agullo told the Daily Mail.

Dr Rachel Mason, of La Femme Plastic Surgery in Las Vegas, described the beauty standards over the last century as following a ‘pendulum swing.’ 

‘In the 1920s, the popular look was much more understated and androgynous, with softer facial features and flatter chests,’ the plastic surgeon explained to the Daily Mail.

‘By the fifties, it flipped entirely to hyper-feminine Hollywood glamour, where everyone wanted an hourglass figure, full lips and a lifted bust line,’ she said.

Dr Agullo agreed, sharing that in the 1920s and 1930s, beauty was ‘minimized’ and ‘understated.’ 

‘Thin, plucked brows, a rosebud or cupid’s bow mouth, pale matte skin and flat hair to give a more boyish silhouette, all designed to be more doll-like,’ Dr Agullo told the Daily Mail.

‘Almost entirely achievable with cosmetics and hairstyling,’ he said. 

This was especially evident with stars of that time, like actress Clara Bow, who was known for her cupid’s bow lip, painting them to appear much smaller than her natural lips.

Actress Shirley Temple was also known in Hollywood for her understated and natural beauty, particularly her signature curly hair that fell in ringlets, especially when she was young.

‘Back in the twenties and thirties, your options were pretty much limited to a new hairstyle, clever makeup tricks, or a corset, simply because the medical capabilities didn’t exist yet,’ Dr Mason told the Daily Mail.

Of course, today’s world couldn’t look more different, as we have everything from advanced devices to injectables and surgical procedures. 

In the 1940s and 50s, things shifted once again.

‘The 1940s and ’50s brought the face into full glamour, with bombshells Marilyn Monroe and Elizabeth Taylor as icons: bold arched brows, red lipstick, fuller lips and hourglass physiques,’ Dr Agullo said.

‘Beauty was no longer dainty but bold,’ he said.

Dr Mason told the Daily Mail that during this era, everyone wanted ‘an hourglass figure, full lips, and a lifted bust line.’  

One of the most famous women from this era was the iconic Marilyn Monroe, who set the standard for years to come with her bombshell beauty.

Her legendary look included big, full lips which she often painted red, as well as her perfectly-arched eyebrows. 

She also had a flawless complexion and stunning, rounded cheekbones. 

According to Vogue, none of this was by accident. She reportedly had a very extensive beauty routine, which included applying layers of Vaseline under her foundation to get glistening skin and taking freezing-cold baths to keep her skin taut.

She left such a legacy that even Kim Kardashian wanted to get in on the fun, as she famously borrowed her archival rhinestone dress – the one that Monroe wore to sing ‘Happy Birthday’ to then-President John F. Kennedy – to wear to the 2023 Met Gala. 

Elizabeth Taylor was also an iconic beauty of the time, as she was known for her violet-colored eyes and bold, dark eyebrows.

‘The 1960s swung toward youth and androgyny with waiflike Twiggy, emphasized by large doe eyes with heavy false lashes and a slender, young body,’ Dr Agullo said. 

‘Farrah Fawcett defined the 1970s natural, sun-kissed and barely-there look,’ he shared.

Indeed, it was the 1960s and 70s when classic beauties like Jackie Kennedy became ultra-popular, famous for her flawless skin and neutral, elegant makeup that she wore so well.

At the time, bouffant hairstyles were also a defining trend, with stars like Brigitte Bardot and Sophia Loren often sporting the look. 

However, like many other trends, the bouffant faded fast and in came the 1980s and 90s.

‘The 1980s brought bolder features, with Brooke Shields’ thick, dark brows, the era of heavy eye and cheek color, and fitness-as-beauty with the beginning of supermodels, where the body began to have as much impact as the face,’ Dr Agullo said.

‘Then, the 1990s flipped hard to a skinny, heroin-chic look characterized by thin bodies, overplucked brows and a stark, pared-down face, as epitomized by Kate Moss,’ he said.

Of course, the beauty and style of famous figures like Princess Diana and Carolyn Bessette also dominated the 1990s, as many girls tried to re-create their timeless, radiant beauty – and still are.

They were both known for their simple elegance and ‘undone’ looks, wearing little makeup much of the time.  

On the other end of the spectrum, Madonna’s fun, Queen of Pop persona also played a big role in the beauty standards and trends in the 1980s and 90s.

She was able to wear almost any look, rocking bold, red lipstick and big hair one day and a pixie cut with heavy eyeliner on her lids the next.

Madonna was not afraid to embrace bold beauty, the opposite of the ‘undone’ Carolyn Bessette look.  

When the early 2000’s rolled around, everyone wanted to look like a pop star, as women embraced razor-thin brows, makeup with chunks of glitter in it and metallic, frosted lip colors.

At that time, it was in trend to be playful and have fun with your makeup and overall look.

But when we entered the 2010s, that’s when things really started to change in a very unprecedented way, according to doctors.  

‘The real shift happened in the 2010s when social media and high-def cameras created a massive obsession with structural exaggeration,’ Dr Mason told the Daily Mail.

‘That’s when we saw an absolute explosion of Brazilian Butt Lifts (BBLs), aggressively sharp jawlines, and over-plumped lips using thick dermal fillers,’ the doctor continued.

‘Today, that over-enhanced look has shifted back to using procedures to refresh the features in a way that looks completely natural,’ she said.

Dr Agullo seconded Dr Mason’s sentiments about the 2010s, sharing that trends began to be those that were achieved through plastic surgery. 

‘As we rolled into the 2010s, the conversation shifted entirely to the cosmetic plastic surgeons,’ Dr Agullo explained.

‘The Kardashian look, or the Instagram face, dominated: full, defined lips, pronounced brows, sculpted higher cheekbones and a sharp, snatched jawline, coupled with an hourglass exaggerated by a much fuller buttock,’ he said.

He called this the ‘maximizing era.’ 

‘These results were made with injectables, and lip fillers quickly transformed from a niche request to one of the most commonly requested things in my practice,’ he said.

It seemed like the Kardashians especially shaped the aesthetic trends of the 2010s as they focused on heavy, glamorous makeup, overfilled lips and contoured features.

Kylie Jenner heavily influenced this era as women became obsessed with having big, plump lips and using lip filler to achieve that.

Now, in 2026, things couldn’t be any more different.

Women are beginning to shy away from the overdone look and back into one of simplicity and appearing ‘natural.’

‘Today, there is a much greater emphasis on personalized, natural-looking results,’ Dr Mason shared.

‘I’m seeing more patients opt for reversals or downsizing procedures, whether that means exchanging larger breast implants for smaller ones, dissolving filler or even pursuing BBL reductions,’ she said.

‘Rather than chasing dramatic transformations, many patients are focused on enhancing their natural features and addressing signs of aging through subtle yet highly impactful procedures, such as blepharoplasty and fat transfer treatments to restore volume and soften hollowness,’ Dr Mason said.

She explained that nowadays, the goal is to ‘no longer look like everyone else.’

‘My patients want to look like the absolute best version of themselves, whether they’re navigating aging or reclaiming their bodies after kids and weight loss,’ Dr Mason explained.

‘The ultimate win for them today is getting that one specific compliment: “Wow, you look incredible, what is your secret?”‘

Today, celebrities like Hailey Bieber, Anne Hathaway, Emma Stone and Sofia Richie Grainge all emulate this ‘quiet luxury,’ relaxed look. 

They are always glowing and look great, but it’s hard to pinpoint exactly what they’ve had done, because it’s so subtle.

Dr Agullo said that much of what the beauty standards are today are reached by ‘medical intervention,’ like Botox and dermal fillers – even GLP-1s.

‘Another large factor, one I emphasize and talk about constantly, is GLP-1 medications, such as Wegovy and Ozempic, that cause rapid weight loss,’ Dr Agullo said.

‘The rapid weight loss is thinning faces out at an ever-faster rate and at an earlier age, dubbed the Ozempic face, prompting younger patients to ask for volume restoration and lift,’ he said.

Now, women are entering a time when the beauty standard has never been more unique.

‘The face of today is not just sculpted to a different shape, it is the product of clinical intervention rather than purely cosmetic effort, which has never been a factor throughout most of the 20th century,’ Dr Agullo said.

A Muslim nonprofit organization with significant connections to New York City Mayor Zohran Mamdani recently secured $85,000 from the City Council’s taxpayer funds. This allocation was made despite previous criticism. In January, the group held a fundraiser in Brooklyn that showcased items endorsing Hamas and other terrorist entities.

The Muslim American Society of Brooklyn and Staten Island was granted $70,000 from the Council’s discretionary funds, thanks to Council Member Kayla Santosuosso, a Democrat representing Bay Ridge and parts of southern Brooklyn. An additional $15,000 was provided by Alexa Avilés, another Democrat whose district encompasses Red Hook and Sunset Park.

This decision to award the funds was taken despite City Council Speaker Julie Menin expressing her astonishment earlier this year. In January, she was made aware of the terrorist-related items being sold by the nonprofit, which had previously acquired $265,000 over three years under former Speaker Adrienne Adams.

Menin, who is the first Jewish speaker of the Council, indicated in her comments to The Post that she would halt the disbursement of $80,000 in pending funds to the Muslim American Society until a legal investigation by city lawyers was completed, which could also influence future financing.

According to Yoav Gonen, a spokesman for the Council, the Office of the General Counsel carried out an investigation and determined that there was “no affiliation” between the nonprofit and the vendor responsible for the contentious items. Furthermore, the Muslim American Society has since severed ties with the vendor, Thrift For Gaza.

“The nonprofit’s funding was restored after its leadership committed in writing to enhanced screening and prevention protocols for all future vendors using its space,” he said.

Councilwoman and staunch Zionist Inna Vernikov (R-Brooklyn) said “individual members get to decide what groups get their discretionary dollars, but funding nonprofits that appear to flat out support designated terrorist organizations and spread radical, Jew-hating propaganda is far beyond the pale and potentially illegal.”

“And if this was some kind of an alleged hiccup, did MAS apologize and condemn Hamas? No,” she added.

“These members must explain to the public why their taxpayer dollars should be given to America-hating jihadis, rather than so many other groups who have a legitimate purpose and actual needs.”

Both Santosuosso and Avilés represent neighborhoods with large Muslim populations.

The new funding is earmarked for community safety, educational, youth-mentoring, cultural, job-training and other programs in both pols’ districts, according to the Council’s expense budget for member pet projects for the fiscal year that began Wednesday.

Santosuosso is the former deputy director of the Bay Ridge-based Arab American Association of New York, which received $124,500 in Council pork this fiscal year — including $5,000 through Santosuosso’s pot of funds.

During the MAS New York chapter’s Jan. 18 support-Sudan event at its Brooklyn youth center, vendors peddled keychains, stickers, pins and other tchotchkes supporting Hamas, Hezbollah and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine.

Other items at the event, called Thrift4Sudan, featured reverential images of late terrorist leaders Hassan Nasrallah of Hezbollah and Yahya Sinwar of Hamas, and a masked figure resembling the late Hamas spokesman Abu Obeida.

Merchandise also sported terror-group logos or directly called for the destruction of Israel, with slogans like “Let’s go bomb Tel Aviv” and “Death to the IDF,” The Times of Israel reported.

MAS’ New York leadership includes notorious pro-Hamas activist Abdullah Akl, who grew up attending its Brooklyn youth center on Bath Avenue and is also an organizer for the radical, anti-Israel group Within Our Lifetime.

MAS’ influence over city politics morphed following the November election of socialist Mamdani as NYC’s first Muslim mayor. MAS-NY’s executive director Sherif Ahmed and Hannah Towfeik, political director at MAS’ youth center, were part of Mamdani’s transition team that helped fill key City Hall posts.

A senior official from the United Nations is once again at the center of controversy for allegedly maligning Israel. This incident occurred after the official shared a social media post originally authored by an individual currently facing charges of incitement to terrorism and showing support for Hamas.

On June 18, U.N. Special Representative of the Secretary-General for Children and Armed Conflict Vanessa Frazier reposted an image of three small objects which the original poster, Sarah Wilkinson, claimed were cluster munitions “disguised as children’s toys” that Israelis had been “strategically dropping” over Lebanon. In her own post, Frazier stated, “If this is true it means that there is a deliberate, premeditated intent to kill children.”

Frazier, who has over 10,000 followers on X, has since deleted the post, but a screenshot of the original was provided to News Media.

When asked whether United Nations Secretary-General António Guterres supported Frazier’s decision to share the contentious post, his spokesperson, Stéphane Dujarric, informed News Media that “the retweet was removed some time ago and, as you are aware, a retweet does not mean endorsement of the original poster’s views.”

Andrew Fox, a senior fellow with the Henry Jackson Society, expressed to News Media that it is “absurd for a U.N. official to be so naive.”

Fox, a former officer in the British army who has expertise in Israeli Defense Forces (IDF) strategies, remarked that it is “quite significant that a U.N. official would hurry to propagate the age-old, antisemitic falsehood that Jews kill children. This reflects the harmful atmosphere built over nearly three years of deceit surrounding Israel. Any claim against the Jewish state, regardless of its implausibility, is instantly believed. This further erodes the credibility and reputation of the U.N. special representative.”

An IDF spokesman told News Media that the “allegation is baseless and unfounded. It is fake news, and we categorically reject it.”

The original poster of the cluster munitions accusation was arrested in the United Kingdom on terror charges in 2024, according to the World Socialist Web Site. The site, as well as Al Mayadeen English — Hezbollah’s media arm — link Wilkinson to the social media profile on X that shared the post Frazier elevated.

The BBC reported last week that Wilkinson will face trial in January on “two counts of encouragement of terrorism on social media, two counts of expressing an opinion or belief that was supportive of a proscribed organization, namely Hamas; and one of failing to comply with a police investigation.”

Though Wilkinson discussed her arrests and subsequent charges on her X account, she did not respond to News Media’s messages asking for comment about the charges she currently faces.

In response to questions about her removal of the X post and concerns about its original source, Frazier said that “regarding specific tweets, I understand why some of my social media activities have generated questions. Where concerns arose regarding posts, I took appropriate action. Nonetheless, the intended message is to emphasize the alarm of the Secretary-General in his Annual Report regarding the use of explosive weapons in populated areas in Lebanon, a matter that raises serious humanitarian concerns due to their long-lasting impact on civilians.”

Frazier said, “Ultimately, my mandate is not carried out through social media. It is carried out through the United Nations’ established monitoring and verification methodology, which applies the same standards to all parties to conflict.”

In March, JNS reported that Frazier posted that she was “deeply alarmed by reports of attacks on Iranian schools leaving a large number of casualties, mostly children.” A photograph accompanying the post showed numerous black body bags. When it became clear that the photo depicted victims of the Iranian regime’s crackdown on protesters, Frazier removed the post. She then created a new post with a similar sentiment featuring an updated picture.

On June 24, Israel’s Ambassador to the U.N. Danny Danon sent a letter to the U.N. Security Council president raising Israel’s “grave concerns regarding conduct that appears inconsistent with the neutrality, professionalism, and impartiality expected of a senior United Nations official.”

In his letter, a copy of which was provided to News Media, Danon said Frazier’s social media behavior suggests “a troubling pattern of engagement with unverified, disputed, or misleading material, alongside content raising concerns about antisemitic framing and extremist rhetoric.”

Danon also raised concerns about Frazier’s “abrupt interruption of [his] remarks during a United Nations side event,” which he said was “in disregard of basic procedural norms and the respect owed to Member States.”

Reuters called this exchange between Danon and Frazier “a furious shouting match.”

Frazier told News Media that her “intervention was procedural, not political. Its purpose was to help ensure that the discussion remained consistent with the standards expected in a United Nations forum,” where discussions “are expected to be conducted in accordance with established procedures and with respect for the dignity of participants and officials.”

The June 17 release of the Secretary-General’s Annual Report on Children and Armed Conflict has also raised concerns.

Anne Bayefsky, president of Human Rights Voices and director of the Touro Institute on Human Rights and the Holocaust, told News Media that the allegations in the report were “wild, dangerous blood libels divorced from reality.”

Bayefsky blasted the U.N.’s use of the term “verified” when describing allegations, despite a lack of description of how and through what sources those supposed verifications occurred.

She said, “It is important to recognize the direct connection between the ancient antisemitic blood libels accusing evil Jews of murdering non-Jewish children and the U.N. actors who repeat the same ugly falsehoods today. History teaches us just how dangerous these depraved lies are for Jews wherever they live.”

Frazier defended the report, saying it was “the product of a rigorous United Nations (U.N.) monitoring and verification process and reflects information reviewed at multiple levels of the U.N. system.” She said that “suggesting that the report is based on falsehoods does a disservice to all child victims, including Israeli children whose suffering is also documented in the report.”

Frazier also maintained she has “no bias against the State of Israel or against any Member States of the United Nations, and reject[s] the characterization,” saying that “as a U.N. official, accuracy, impartiality, and credibility are fundamental to my work.”

When asked by News Media if Guterres would examine Frazier’s tenure, Dujarric responded that “the Secretary-General has full confidence in Vanessa Frazier and her work.”

He defended Frazier, saying she “has not ‘vilified’ and is not ‘vilifying’ the State of Israel, or any other country for that matter. Her focus is not on any one single country but on the protection of children throughout the world. Under the mandate the Security Council has given her, she does not ‘blacklist’ Member States or other parties. The report exists to find ways to get all of the parties listed to improve their behavior, so that children can be protected in concrete ways. She has been effective in doing just that.” 

Danon said that “it comes as no surprise that Secretary-General Guterres expresses full confidence in Ms. Frazier.” He said Frazier’s report “is a symptom of [Guterres’] tenure. Under his leadership, the United Nations has repeatedly failed to uphold the standards of impartiality it claims to represent.”