The sentence above in bold does not imply that people who do not find the said individual beautiful have a marginal perception of beauty. It says specifically that the placements in question often make people appear or seem beautiful to others.
Rather, it is your inference from the sentence that people who do not find the said individual beautiful have a marginal perception of beauty. That is, the judgement, the conclusion, belongs to you, and the idea itself is yours.
Hope this helps clarify my position on the matter for all following the thread.
"Inherently implies" is not the same as "inherently means". You are reading it as the latter. You did not think of what I said when accepting to take part in determining overall beauty via astrology, as in it's relation to the larger part of the human populace (rather than all of them... Since you said "often"). Essentially, people who disagree with this view are different... But should the theory you are demonstrating actually proves it's claims by vast surveys and research, then what does it make the people, who do not happen to be in this "vast populace"? Marginal. So, just because you were not in efforts to marginalize such people does not falsify the implication I used merely to demonstrate my distaste toward this approach and to provide you with with the basis as to why I choose to disagree with you.
In this way, you are right when you say my perception belongs to me, just as the perception of "some astrological components makes one more beautiful" and exude a "overall impression of beauty" to most people (often) belongs to you and other people who think the same way. The truth is, such a perception is inherently just the basis of a theory, not the basis of a fact... And this is proven by the fact that people who take part in this view do not have a psionic link to the collective consciousness to determine the overall impressions of beauty. You are saying that beauty is "featured" in Venus/Libra, while the fact is Venus determines how an individual demonstrates/approaches love and social/romantic interactions. Libra signifies inherent talents in affectionate and harmonious interactions with others. Human beauty as in it's relation to Venus or Libra are again just theories, not facts. Human perception is narrow and easily corrupted, and I would not be suprised if this discussion is utilized almost completely by women, whose perceptions of beauty tend to be twisted as a result of the today's capitalistic society, which is in efforts to make profit off everything... even sex and feminine values/attractiveness. This essentially results in a clandestine competition between women, whose attractiveness is evolutionarily determined by their beauty as opposed to power and reliablilty in men. You can research this subject further if you wish. So, it is no wonder that some people, especially women, use astrology as a possible means to determine their... "overall beauty".
The way I see it, the only way to determine the perception of beauty of an individual is through synastry. So, an individual with a Libra Venus in 10th house... If her Venus happens to be in the first house of anohter individual, then yes, it is likely for him to find her beautiful. But what if this isn't the case? What if her venus forms a quincunx with his venus/mars/sun, for example? Her personal beauty would not relate to his perception of it. A similar result would be the case when a woman's Libra ascendant, forms a quincunx with a man's Venus. I do not see him agreeing with the claim "Those with Libra ascendants are often beautiful". Personally, I choose to embody astrology only in it's relation to psyche rather than attempting to make subjective judgements with such theories. You are blaming my conclusions and judgements to be interferenced by subjectivity, yet ironically, it is your own judgements with such qualities. Probably without knowing it, you are defending your questionable conclusions by projecting your own subjectivity onto me, someone who happens to be in a disagreement with you. This is a likely tactic on arguments about ambivalent concepts.
The enlightened and uncorrupted perception of beauty is that all things and beings are beautiful, both in form and in their inherent harmony with other things. The perception you are demonstrating, is not as capacious and comparatively lacks in depth.