After my piece a couple of days ago about the race to replace John Reid as Labour candidate for Airdrie & Shotts, something resembling an actual debate has taken place in the blogosphere.
Yousuf gets the ball rolling by defending All-Woman Shortlists.
Will says they shouldn't be necessary.
Jeff takes the plunge and says how ridiculous AWS are - and incurs the wrath of... well, just about everyone. He also doesn't think there needs to be gender equality in politics - a view somewhat out of sync with political correctness.
Will responds, taking on the wider issue of female representation in politics and questions the democratic nature of AWS.
And Kezia takes Will & Jeff to task for "misjudged wisdom."
All in all, a fairly interesting discussion.
I'd like to point out that my original point was similar to Will's - not that it was made in anything like as eloquent a manner. I don't think AWS should be necessary (though the Hansard Society seems to think it is) and I think good female MPs/MSPs can be elected without the system in place.
But my original question has still not been answered in any meaningful fashion by anyone contributing to the debate. If we agree (and I know Jeff doesn't) that there needs to be more opportunities for women to enter politics, how can we do that that without resorting to the "political gerrymandering" that is AWS if we think it is fundamentally undemocratic?