There's nothing wrong with high standards, but one should be realistic, and the standards should have more to do with the depth of personality and how they treat you, that sort of thing, and less to do with superficial things.
I worked with someone years ago who had a similar list of criteria. The requirements I remember had to do with how much money he made, how much money he had saved up, and how much money he spent on her on the first date. Well you know, if a guy spends the required amount (a high $ figure at that time) on each first date he goes on, how's he supposed to save anything up?
That's not actually the point though. The point is that her list consisted mostly of superficial stuff. It's not about how much money he spends, it's more about how he treats you, how the two of you interact, what you have in common, how you get along, etc. But none of those kinds of things made her list. Instead of "he must spend $x on our first date" it should have been, "he must make me laugh on our first date" or some such.
Looking back, I think it was a sort of defense mechanism. I'm not married because I can't find the perfect guy who meets my list of impossible criteria. As opposed to, I'm not married because there's something wrong with me. Not that there was anything wrong with her -- that's not what I'm saying. I just think that deep down she probably had self-esteem issues and this was a way for her to make some kind of excuse for why she wasn't married. I'm guessing she'd either been hurt in the past or had had some bad d@ting experiences and this was her way of putting up a boundary and having a reason for not being in a rel@tionship.
As far as lowering your standards, as long as they are the right kind of standards (not superficial ones), then don't do it.
And regarding the idea that someone who is good looking wouldn't be attractive to someone who isn't, that's bogus too. I know couples where one is great looking and the other, not so much. A successful marriage is just so not about looks.