
Now before I begin, let me be clear that when I speak of goddesses, worship and pantheons and so forth, it is to be taken as fantasy. It's just for fun. Think of it as in an historical context, such as in ancient Greece. If they had the internet, an 'Adminos Ron' might well have founded a Cult of the Strong Face or Cult of the Square Jaw, and we might have been disciples.
Women large jaw.com seems to have all the aspects of a temple dedicated to the cult of jaw worship.
We have our goddesses; those personalities whom we admire, or revere, or perhaps even love from afar. Some few *may* be poor actors, mediocre singers, second-rate athletes, but because of the structure of their faces, we consider them completely worthy of reverence. For many of us, their faces overshadow any flaw they might have. They comprise a cosmology, a pantheon of female deities.
A number of non-famous women have come into this 'temple' to display their facial structure like a demigoddess might reveal her divine origins. They are much like heroes to us; both human in that they deign to interact with us, and divine due to their heavenly countenances.
We offer up our tributes in text and images, much like a supplicant to an ancient goddess might have offered up his own form of obeisance. We wish that perhaps our intended goddess might get wind of our written praise, as a goddess of old might have been moved by the scent of burnt offerings and incense.
Whether goddess or demigoddess, we as mortals are apart from those whom we hold in such lofty regard. It is in fact, the nature of a dedicated website, as it has been with fan clubs. We have precious little contact with the objects of our reverences. To us, our deities might as well live above us in the heavens, and in practice, they barely know we exist, yet we still bring our offerings without resentment. They need do nothing for us, yet we remain faithful.

As has been established in http://www.womenlargejaw.com/square-jaw-is-not-masculine, the square jaw is not a trait linked to gender. The article also pointed out that other traits, such as a large chin, are, in fact, more closely related to testosterone levels, and so to gender. I would surmise that this article was written to rightly counter arguments by visitors that the site was celebrating a masculine feature in women, and to negate any spurious charges of homosexual tendencies.
However, I would like go a bit further, and attack the notion that attraction to a ‘masculine’ trait in females implies homosexual tendencies, as though the admirer of that trait is denying his *true* sexuality.
Whatever appears on a woman, large breasts or small, degree of natural muscularity, big chin or small, large hands or dainty, may be characterized by descriptives such as ‘masculine’ or ‘feminine’, but from those terms, we may not infer the sexual tendencies of the admirer of those traits. If someone prizes one or more ‘masculine’ traits in women, the operative phrase is… ‘in women’
The ‘accusation’ of homosexuality held more water in a time when that sexual preference was less accepted, and therefore something that could be assumed that some men would wish to hide. I think that this can largely be dismissed now. We are approaching a time when one may choose one’s preferred sexual partner, regardless of sex, with little or no repercussions. Therefore, today, a male who admires select ‘masculine’ traits in women, is free to admire any *male* paragon of such traits. That he does *not*, and prefers these traits in women *specifically*, should immediately indicate that he desires WOMEN with these traits, not men. .