>>41344
To clarify, you can use the rating scale objectively, or use it subjectively. It's just that people usually mean objective ratings. For example, you can objectively rate a woman to be a 5/10, but since she has something you like that's unconventional, you personally rate her higher, like a 6 or 7.
Additionally, being realistic here, when it comes to rating men, women do not have any variation of preferences. There is no subjectivity. There are no women getting wet over a man's beer gut or fondling his moobs. Women effectively all get horny for one type of man. So for rating men, the rating might as well be fully objective. (Also notice how the examples you gave, except for maybe the plates, are all about what men find attractive in women, it's never the other way around.)
Not even mentioning the various sciences studying specifically objective beauty, there are things that are unquestionably objective, like weight. For men, it goes muscular > athletic > healthy > under/overweight > fat > obese. Same goes for shit like height, income, and every other metric that applies to men.
>a form of attraction that is hard to put into words
You can personally be crazy for someone, while still being able to objectively gauge their level of looks.