This manuscript analyzes the public debate over legislation designed to mock and reject regulations of abortion in the United States. The bills, such as one in Texas requiring men to remain abstinent and avoid seminal discharge outside of narrow circumstances, are intentionally unworkable to critique Targeted Regulation of Abortion Provider (TRAP) laws, and laws regulating access to abortion in the US. I argue the bills are a form of Burkean burlesque, a novel strategy of humor and biting critique in the context of the US abortion debate. As that debate is characterized primarily by Kenneth Burke’s tragic frame, with a foreclosure of a comic frame, the use of burlesque is a notable break from the previously established rhetorical landscape. The burlesque elements of the bill are contextualized against political humor generally and analyzed, with subsequent discussion unpacking the implications and possible pitfalls of the limited proliferation of burlesque. Ultimately, burlesque is concluded to be situationally appropriate in responding to the rhetorical constraints of the abortion debate, but pragmatically dangerous by offering legislation that can further polarize both rhetorics of abortion and individual rhetors.

中文翻译：

---

州议会大厦的荒谬：滑稽立法和拒绝政治

这份手稿分析了关于旨在嘲笑和拒绝美国堕胎规定的立法的公开辩论。这些法案，例如德克萨斯州的一项法案，要求男性在狭隘的环境之外保持禁欲并避免精液排出，这对于批评有针对性的堕胎提供者（TRAP）法律和规范美国堕胎机会的法律是行不通的。我认为这些法案是伯克式滑稽剧的一种形式，在美国堕胎辩论的背景下是一种幽默和尖锐批评的新颖策略。由于这场辩论的主要特点是肯尼思·伯克 (Kenneth Burke) 的悲剧框架，取消了漫画框架的赎回权，因此滑稽剧的使用是对先前建立的修辞景观的显着突破。该法案的滑稽元素被普遍与政治幽默背道而驰，并进行了分析，随后的讨论揭示了滑稽表演有限扩散的影响和可能的陷阱。最终，滑稽戏的结论是在应对堕胎辩论的修辞约束时在情境上是合适的，但通过提供可以进一步两极分化堕胎修辞和个人修辞的立法，在实际中是危险的。