Seriously, there is no such entity as "women" on whom to meaningfully bestow "trust" in the first place. I do not "trust women" for the same reason that I do not acknowledge any "duty" toward women -- because "women" simply does not exist in the sense implied here, and so cannot be the recipient of such actions as suggested.
Whosoever craves my trust must earn it, by demonstrating their fitness to be trusted. And a mental phantom such as "women" cannot demonstrate such fitness any more than demonstrate the reverse of it. Now, if you were to point your finger and say "those women, right over there", and I could vet those women one at a time to assay their trustworthiness, then we might have a deal. That is, assuming that at least some of them met my standards.
But just plain "women", with no allusion to anybody particular? Now, that's what I would call a null variable.
So again, I do not intend to "trust women", any more than I intend to "trust men" -- and this is on highly principled grounds! I mean, I don't take it kindly when people use hanky-panky semantics to impose a moral fraud upon me.
No comments:
Post a Comment