Whether the chart is "stupid" is a matter of opinion. For one, there is not a "huge difference" between 5 and 6. From "low-tier normie" to "normie" is not that big of a step. Low-tier normie isn't ugly, and "normie" isn't good-looking, so I don't see where you have a problem with that.
Also, there is some difference among Chads (8-9), just like there is between top athletes. But, in any case, I never claimed that my chart is gospel. That's why I said it's "give or take", meaning it's not perfect. But, the point is that you can rank virtually anything, and looks are no different. Not sure why you're so adamantly against this.
Finally, I've seen men that can be categorized as 10/10, but never got their name or saved their picture, so I can't provide examples off hand. But, they do exist, and they are objectively better looking than other males. After all, beauty is NOT in the "eye of the beholder". There are certain empirical markers of good genes that are manifested through looks. So, it's not all about "weird preferences".