If You Can Moan in Bed, You Can Call for a Gigolo!
2006/6/25 14:15:34
This title can also be expressed in this tone: "Since you can moan in bed, on what grounds can't you call for a gigolo?" Indeed, on what grounds? Since both involve calling followed by an object — though those who moan in bed don't necessarily call for gigolos, and those who call for gigolos don't necessarily moan in bed — on what grounds is a bed more special than a gigolo? On what grounds can the bed be modified by such an un-special verb as "call" in a special way?
Clearly, to prove that moaning in bed is more special than calling for a gigolo can be entirely reduced to proving that a bed is more special than a gigolo. Beds and gigolos both belong to the same category of consumer goods. This shared aspect obviously cannot constitute the former's specialness over the latter. What must be investigated is what distinguishes the two. Martians might not know, but at least Earthlings should: a bed is an inanimate object, while a gigolo, at least under the premise of being callable, is alive.
The biggest distinction between inanimate and animate objects obviously cannot be demonstrated by whether they can move. Beds frequently move in un-bed-like ways — this requires no particularly professional exertion. But a gigolo's movements are not taken for granted. Whether a gigolo can maintain sufficient movement is undoubtedly closely related to professional ethics. In other words, a bed is most bed-like when it is un-bed-like — the commonly used special function of a bed can only be fully manifested in this special un-bed-like form. And a gigolo is most gigolo-like when he is un-gigolo-like — after all, a gigolo is a professional, and even at his most professionally dutiful, he cannot conceal that un-gigolo-yet-gigolo aspect.
From this we can see that no matter how many superficial differences exist between beds and gigolos, they are essentially the same thing — a bed is no more special than a gigolo. Therefore, the commonly assumed distinction between moaning in bed and calling for a gigolo is baseless — a commonsense fallacy. And from the perspective of the one doing the calling, the indistinguishability of bed and gigolo needs even less discussion. Whether moaning in bed or calling for a gigolo, from the caller's perspective, both are a release of subjective agency. Actually, what you call doesn't matter. What matters is calling. What matters more is being able to call. What matters most is not being the one called.
With the above discussion, anyone with an active demand for calling can henceforth boldly declare to the world: moaning in bed is justified, calling for gigolos is no crime, being able to call is a blessing — don't eat, don't sleep!
Chán Zhōng Shuō Chán 2006/6/25 14:53:43
Without a sense of humor, things get dull.