The image of Jesus on the Shroud seems genuine. If that is truly Jesus on the Shroud, then depictions of Jesus are very flattering because the man on the Shroud is average-looking at best. Now Jesus was perfect morally and mentally, and yet physically he was not impressive (if the Shroud is to be used as evidence of what he looked like).
First of all, you throw Our Blessed Lord's Holy Name around with a contemptuous familiarity. Secondly, your using Him as an example to prove whatever point you're trying to make are daring to the point of being offensive to pious ears. Even if you believe it to be true, due reverence for Our Blessed Lord's Divine Person should impel you to hold your tongue about it.
As to the point you're making: As has been pointed out, beauty, as most people understand it today, is highly subjective, with standards differing from culture to culture and era to era. But if we try to leave out the baser, carnal concept of "attractiveness," (for no one knows less about a man's "attractiveness" than I) we can sum up beauty as a more perfect reflection of God's Creation; God is a God of Order and not chaos, so a face whose features are symmetrical and well-ordered can be said to be beautiful in this sense.
Here is the Face on the Shroud:
Here are some CGI renderings of the Face on the Shroud by artist Ray Downing (done for a halfway decent program that aired a few years ago on the otherwise reprehensible History Channel):
I see there a face of perfect symmetry and order, and one remarkable close to many Traditional devotional images of Our Blessed Lord, like the Christ Pantocrator in the ancient Monastery of St. Catherine in the Sinai (6th Century):
Most importantly, in addition to being ordered and symmetrical, this Face is manful. And masculinity is a concept that's been given the short shrift in our current sick age's concept of male "attractiveness," where faggy, effeminate un-men like these are considered ideal: