The question isn't ridiculous, it's just phrased in a ridiculous way. Most women, assuming they're not sociopaths or trying to breed a master race, look for gestalt attractiveness and compatibility in mate selection rather than compiling a pro/con list of a guy's genes. Same with men - it would be weird for a guy to say "and bonus, she has a lower risk of heart disease than average, and her ample bosoms imply that my children will not go hungry".

To the extent that genetics inform those characteristics that people find attractive, yes - all other things being equal it would probably be to your advantage to have a genetic predisposition for 20/20 vision. That being said, the idea that this is an overt, conscious decision, wherein a woman will choose a guy specifically because of his genes, is silly. Or terrifying.

It also completely misunderstands how genetics work. It's almost never the case that there is a 1:1 relationship between genotype and phenotype. Epigenetics and purely environmental factors go much father in explaining someone's teeth or vision than genes alone do.