>>12422742Good looking is going to vary culturally and has varied across time, to a degree. I am pretty sure many of the people claiming looks don't matter would be considered ugly across cultures and throughout history though. How would you come up with the good looking standards and to what degree can someone be off? You would also probably have to outlaw cosmetic surgery. How can you be sure someone doesn't look good now naturally or not? Also, when would a person be judged? Some people won't look good until they are much older.
There is a concern about people organizing and running all of this. They might become worried about maintaining their positions. They could lose their positions if they cannot keep finding something to purge. Look at various modern activist groups that were originally formed to achieve one goal. This goal has long since been achieved but, they don't want to dissolve the organization thereby losing access to power. So they keep finding something new for the organization to crusade against.
Intelligence would run into similar problems as looks. Relaying on tests to determine intelligence would bred the populations to be good at taking the test. Not necessarily being intelligence. Then there is the whole corruption around something so important. Look at morden school testing.
Finally there is the problem of breeding for only specific traits. These problems are found in pretty much all of our domestic animals. Focusing on certain trails can inadvertently breed in negative and/or breed out secondary positive treats. Pitbulls cannot reproduce without help. Horses with brittle bones, Rhodesian Ridgeback with small holes in their skink leading directly to their spinal nerve column, etc.
