It is reducto ad absurdum, though. Because the effeciency of absurdity lies not in the universality of it (if the origin was 1 in absurdity, you would push to 11), but in the subjectivity. So that everyone could surprisingly understand how absurd the original explanation is, "this would be just absurd!". Objectively, it doesn't require to raise the antics.
Kinda like Hindus could ask beef-eating Westerners if they would eat a horse. Or pork vs. dogs. Or to suggest that we should reverse the situation and let sole parenting of children given to the same percentage of men as is currently given to women.
All these are objectively on the same level, but would be described as absurd suggestions with a huge list of explanations of why "you are absurd, they are a totally different thing".
Kinda like Hindus could ask beef-eating Westerners if they would eat a horse. Or pork vs. dogs. Or to suggest that we should reverse the situation and let sole parenting of children given to the same percentage of men as is currently given to women.
All these are objectively on the same level, but would be described as absurd suggestions with a huge list of explanations of why "you are absurd, they are a totally different thing".