Rabbi Yoshiyah pushed the question of women in injury law even further. If men and women are truly equated, he argued, why does the Torah mention either gender at all? Let neither "a man" nor "a woman" be stated, and the law would apply universally by default.
He answered by pointing to (Exodus 21:33): "If a man open a pit." This verse mentions only "a man." From it alone, we would know only that a man who opens a pit and causes damage is liable. A woman would be excluded.
That is why (Exodus 21:29) had to specify "a man or a woman" — to establish the principle that women are equal to men in all Torah injury cases. Without that one verse, the multiple mentions of "a man" throughout the injury laws would have excluded women entirely.
Rabbi Yoshiyah's reasoning reveals the delicate architecture of Torah law. The default language of these passages uses "man" — which, without correction, would exclude women. The Torah provides that correction in one strategic location: the case of the goring ox. That single verse creates the legal basis for gender equality across the entire body of injury law. It is an elegant system. Rather than repeating "man or woman" in every paragraph, the Torah says it once and lets that statement radiate outward to cover all parallel cases.