Damn - I was eating while browsing those pics! If I would be on a diet I would thank you about this but not now...
..anyway, to be really serious (tho I already was) the truth is that beauty is not subjective, people say otherwise only to cling on whatever hope they can if they themselves are not lucky in looks department, same like "beauty lies in the eye of beholder" - it's all complete crap, but it's not PC to say so.
You can have perfect symmetry but if on half is ugly the whole thing with still be twice as ugly.
I usually look at beauty as the lack of an obvious flaw that takes away enjoyment of what you;re looking at. a picture of rolling hills with green grass and flowers can completely be considered beautiful... a pollen sufferer would disagree because all they see is stuff they're allergic to. The busty model in the first image may be traditionally "hot" but there are guys who prefer smaller breasts and would consider her less attractive.
Subjective pretty much means it's in the eye of the beholder.
I'm not sure what your point is. Beauty may or may not be subjective, but how are you supposed to learn that from this test? Sure men would prefer to have sex with Bar Rafaeli over a dead maggot and and open wound. Does that really surprise you? I think your problem here is that beauty in this sense is based on category.
Well duh idiot lol, this question is completely biased. You didn't even give the other two links a face. If someone picks a hairy, ugly man and a pile of roadkill, I'm choosing the hairy, ugly man! Just because the roadkill is disgusting.