I got down voted into oblivion on the previous dupe of this post for saying pretty much the same thing with regard to a sunset clause. I think it is a very reas

I got down voted into oblivion on the previous dupe of this post for saying pretty much the same thing with regard to a sunset clause. I think it is a very reasonable idea. The argument that this goes against meritocracy only makes sense if you inherently think men are better at the role. If you think men and women are likely to be equally as good, it makes more sense that men are currently in the privileged position of getting a role that could be filled by a more qualified woman. As an aside, on the dupe, there are 40 posts or so arguing against this move. Literally every positive post was downvoted, none with a single argument in response. There are clearly a few toxic down voters on HN, particularly when it comes to issues of male privilege.