Skillcoil brought up some interesting points, which should be addressed.
It is true that this thread is ethnocentric. But you should ask yourself why it is ethnocentric. There is a simple reason. Most of the information that I gather is based on (1) identifiable celebrities known for their physical beauty, (2) whether they are in astro.com's data base, and (3) whether they have an AA Rodden rating (or close to it at times), the latter of which is extremely important since we are using the ascendant as a focal point.
The ethnocentric and racial issue has resulted because of an extreme difficulty in finding beautiful celebrities who have a double A Rodden rating. I have looked for Beyonce, Vanessa Williams, Jada Smith, Iman, Naomi Campbell, Hard Kaur, Shruti Hassan, Konnie Huq, Yu Wexia, Michelle Yeoh, etc. They are either not in the data base or have such a poor Rodden rating as to be completely unreliable.
Are there different standards throughout the world? Yes, in a sense, but it is a misleading statement. Aside from various isolated cultures who engage in bizarre behavior, such as making a woman eat herself fat or having rings placed in increments around the neck of young girls until each one looks like a giraffe, beauty is the same. Look at India, China, Japan. The differences are mild. As I said in another post, and I will say it again: Physical beauty is geometry of the body, based on precise ratios with mild deviation. Noticing that someone is beautiful and another is ugly is as subjective as noticing that one shape is a circle and the other is a square.
There are millions of beautiful ethnic women you could have included, you need to be comprehensive in your research so that your conclusions are more generalizable. The site http://www.astrosage.com/celebrity-horoscope/
has the charts of many famous Bollywood and Hollywood stars with precise birth times. This site also rates the quality of birth data and is very useful.