On tit-for-tat legislation

[malthaussen]

4. You think so?

That's akin to the "at least they're exposed to the subject" argument. The problem with that, as I see it, is if the subject is represented in a frivolous or irrational light, it may provoke discussion -- but not productive discussion.

It might be argued that such tit-for-tat activity creates awareness of the problem because, say, men might not notice the significance of some of the laws we're passing to oppress women, but would notice laws proposed to oppress themselves, and could by that means be brought to take attention of what is being handed to women. That argument would be based on a rather low evaluation of the perceptiveness of men, but hey, I'm a guy, I don't see a problem there. But the question remains whether the gain there would be offset by the loss of people who might throw up their hands in frustration and say, "You are all just a pack of cards!"

-- Mal