Dear Editor-

In her letter about the proposed national soda tax, Lauel Eckstrand notes that the tax will make soda drinkers "...financially responsible for the consequences of their actions" (Letters Make the soda drinkers pay January 17). She adds, "In essence this would make the rest of society more free, since it wouldn't be paying for the bad choices of others". Her concept here is intriguing, and begs the question whether women overall should be taxed at a lesser rate than men. 

Our social costs for law enforcement and criminal justice are almost entirely attributable to male transgressions (robbery, burglary, assault, arson, speeding, murder, and of course rape). And our enormous social costs for war are also almost entirely attributable to a male approach to problem solving (confrontation) versus a more typically female approach (collaboration). 

Is it purely fair and is there really social justice in making women pay equally for the bad habits and poor choices of the men? A more proportional tax plan might even inject a cultural component of behavioral correction into our national social structure. But I would not bet the farm on that of course, at least not initially. Because the old saw accurately captures our generally subversive and riotous habits: "boys will be boys". It's just what we do. But why make the ladies pay for our "fun"?