开启辅助访问      

英语家园

 找回密码
 注册

QQ登录

只需一步,快速开始

搜索

你的出身,决定了你的命运?

发布者: 千缘 | 发布时间: 2020-7-28 01:33| 查看数: 117| 评论数: 1|

身体构造是否决定了我们的命运?男人和女人,其差别绝不仅仅只是生理上的不同。而关于男人和女人这个永恒的话题,TED演讲者们从生理、心理、社会等等各个维度切入,向我们诠释了性别带给我们的思考,挑战你对性别的看法。



I want you to imagine two couples in the middle of 1979 on the exact same day, at the exact same moment, each conceiving a baby, OK? So two couples each conceiving one baby. Now I don't want you to spend too much time imagining the conception, because if you do, you're not going to listen to me, so just imagine that for a moment.

我希望大家设想一下,两对夫妇在1979年同日同时各怀上了一个孩子。好,那么两对夫妇各自都怀上了一个孩子。现在,我不希望大家花太多的时间去想象怀孕的过程,因为如果你花太多时间去想它,你就不会听我说了,所以稍微想一下就好了。

And in this scenario, I want to imagine that, in one case, the sperm is carrying a Y chromosome, meeting that X chromosome of the egg. And in the other case, the sperm is carrying an X chromosome, meeting the X chromosome of the egg. Both are viable; both take off. We'll come back to these people later.

那么在这种情况下我来设想一下,一个个例是携带着Y染色体的精子遇到携带着X染色体的卵子,另一个是携带着X染色体的精子遇到携带着X染色体的卵子,两个都存活下来了,两个都开始发育。我们之后再来看这两对夫妇。

So I wear two hats in most of what I do. As the one hat, I do history of anatomy. I'm a historian by training, and what I study in that case is the way that people have dealt with anatomy -- meaning human bodies, animal bodies -- how they dealt with bodily fluids, concepts of bodies; how have they thought about bodies. The other hat that I've worn in my work is as an activist, as a patient advocate -- or, as I sometimes say, as an impatient advocate -- for people who are patients of doctors.

在我所从事的领域我担任两个角色,一个角色是我做解剖学历史研究,我是个史学工作者,我所研究的是人类是怎么对待解剖学的——对无论是人类躯体,或是动物躯体——研究他们如何处理体液、抽象的躯体以及他们是如何看待躯体的,另一个角色是一名社会活动家,作为一个为病人的辩护者的角色——或者说,像我有时候说的,作为一个没耐心的律师——为医生的病人们。

In that case, what I've worked with is people who have body types that challenge social norms. So some of what I've worked on, for example, is people who are conjoined twins -- two people within one body. Some of what I've worked on is people who have dwarfism -- so people who are much shorter than typical. And a lot of what I've worked on is people who have atypical sex -- so people who don't have the standard male or the standard female body types. And as a general term, we can use the term "intersex" for this.

那样的话,在我工作中所接触到的大多是一些挑战着社会规范的人。比如,我接触到的一些人 是连体婴儿,两个人共用一个身体。还有一些是侏儒症患者,他们比一般人要矮小的多。另外,许多我接触的人他们的性别与众不同——即他们没有很标准的男性特征或者女性特有的身体特征 。总的来说,这个症状可以被叫做双性人。

Intersex comes in a lot of different forms. I'll just give you a few examples of the types of ways you can have sex that isn't standard for male or female. So in one instance, you can have somebody who has an XY chromosomal basis, and that SRY gene on the Y chromosome tells the proto-gonads, which we all have in the fetal life, to become testes. So in the fetal life, those testes are pumping out testosterone. But because this individual lacks receptors to hear that testosterone, the body doesn't react to the testosterone.

双性可以有多种的形式。我来举几个例子来说明,你可以具有既不是标准的男性特征也不是标准的女性特征的类型。例子之一是,一个人可以拥有XY染色体,并且,在Y染色体上的SRY基因(雄性性别决定基因) 刺激我们在胎儿时期都有的原始性腺,使其变成睾丸。因此在胎儿时期,睾丸分泌睾丸激素。但是这个个体缺少受体来接收睾丸激素,身体不能对睾丸激素做出反应。

And this is a syndrome called androgen insensitivity syndrome. So lots of levels of testosterone, but no reaction to it. As a consequence, the body develops more along the female typical path. When the child is born, she looks like a girl. She is a girl, she is raised as a girl.

这是一种叫做睾丸不敏感(睾丸女性化)综合征。所以,睾丸激素的量很大,但是不能引起反应 。因此,身体就会朝着女性化的趋势发展。当婴儿诞生时,她看起来像个女孩儿,她就是女孩儿,并且被当作小姑娘来抚养。

And it's often not until she hits puberty and she's growing and developing breasts, but she's not getting her period, that somebody figures out something's up here. And they do some tests and figure out that, instead of having ovaries inside and a uterus, she has testes inside, and she has a Y chromosome.

大多数情况,直到青春期她的胸部开始发育,她却没有女性周期,这时我们才会开始怀疑有什么差错。于是他们检查发现她并没有卵巢和子宫,实际上,在她身体内有睾丸,并且她携带着Y染色体。

Now what's important to understand is you may think of this person as really being male, but they're really not. Females, like males, have in our bodies something called the adrenal glands. They're in the back of our body. And the adrenal glands make androgens, which are a masculinizing hormone. Most females like me -- I believe myself to be a typical female -- I don't actually know my chromosomal make-up,

现在,有一个重要问题需要说明的是,大家一定认为这个人实际上是个男孩儿,其实并非如此。女性,和男性一样体内有一个器官叫做肾上腺。它在我们身体的后端,并且肾上腺负责分泌雄性激素,即一种雄性荷尔蒙。像我一样的大多数女性——我相信我自己是个典型的女性——我其实不太清楚我的染色体的组成,

but I think I'm probably typical -- most females like me are actually androgen-sensitive. We're making androgen, and we're responding to androgens. The consequence is that somebody like me has actually had a brain exposed to more androgens than the woman born with testes who has androgen insensitivity syndrome. So sex is really complicated -- it's not just that intersex people are in the middle of all the sex spectrum -- in some ways, they can be all over the place.

但是我想我应该是典型的女性——大多数像我一样的女性实际上是雄性激素敏感的。我们分泌雄性激素,并且对它有反应。结果是,有的像我一样女性,大脑暴露在过多的雄性激素下比那个出生时有睾丸的女孩,那个雄性激素不敏感综合征的女孩所有的雄性激素还多。所以说性别是个非常复杂的东西;并不是说那些双性的人就处在男性和女性之间——在某些方面,他们可以覆盖整个性特征的范围。

Another example: a few years ago I got a call from a man who was 19 years old, who was born a boy, raised a boy, had a girlfriend, had sex with his girlfriend, had a life as a guy, and had just found out that he had ovaries and a uterus inside. What he had was an extreme form of a condition called congenital adrenal hyperplasia. He had XX chromosomes, and in the womb, his adrenal glands were in such high gear that it created, essentially, a masculine hormonal environment.

还有一个例子:几年前,我接到一个十九岁的男孩打来的电话,他生下来是个男孩,也被当作男孩来养,后来有了女朋友,也和女友发生了性关系,一直过着男孩的生活。但是最近,他发现自己体内有卵巢和子宫,他所有的是一种很极端的病症,叫做类固醇21-羟化酶缺乏症。他携带XX染色体,并且在子宫内的时候他的肾上腺很活跃,从而形成了一个男性荷尔蒙的环境。

And as a consequence, his genitals were masculinized, his brain was subject to the more typical masculine component of hormones. And he was born looking like a boy -- nobody suspected anything. And it was only when he had reached the age of 19 that he began to have enough medical problems from menstruating internally, that doctors figured out that, in fact, he was female, internally.

结果就是,他发育了男性生殖器官,他的大脑接受了更多的典型的男性荷尔蒙。因此他生下来看起来像个男孩儿——根本没人怀疑,只有当他长到19岁的时候,当他开始遇到生理问题的时候,比如体内出现月经,医生发现,实际上他的内部是女性。

OK, so just one more quick example of a way you can have intersex. Some people who have XX chromosomes develop what are called ovotestis, which is when you have ovarian tissue with testicular tissue wrapped around it. And we're not exactly sure why that happens.

好,我们再来快速的看一个例子,另一个可能带来两性特征的情况。有XX染色体的一些人会发育一种叫做卵睾的器官,也就是当卵巢组织,被睾丸组织包裹起来的一种器官。我们还不能确定它的成因。

So sex can come in lots of different varieties. The reason that children with these kinds of bodies -- whether it's dwarfism, or it's conjoined twinning, or it's an intersex type -- are often "normalized" by surgeons is not because it actually leaves them better off in terms of physical health. In many cases, people are actually perfectly healthy. The reason they're often subject to various kinds of surgeries is because they threaten our social categories.

所以说性别可以是很多种形式。拥有这些身体特征的孩子们——不论是侏儒症、或者连体婴儿、或者是双性型的——常被外科医生手术纠正的原因,实际上并不是为了身体健康。因为很多情况下,他们的身体其实都很健康。他们之所以会接受各种外科手术,是因为他们受到我们社会上对人分类的威胁。

Our system has been based typically on the idea that a particular kind of anatomy comes with a particular identity. So we have the concept that what it means to be a woman is to have a female identity; what it means to be a black person is, allegedly, to have an African anatomy in terms of your history. And so we have this terribly simplistic idea. And when we're faced with a body that actually presents us something quite different, it startles us in terms of those categorizations.

或者说社会上已经有一个典型的认识,什么样的身体结构,有什么样的特征。因此,我们的概念就是作为一个女人就必须有女性的特性,以此类推,在你的认知中,一个黑人就得具有非洲人的身体结构特征。因此我们就有了这种过于简单的认识,当我们面对一个某些方面是与众不同的身体的时候,那些不能归类的想法让我们感到吃惊。

So we have a lot of very romantic ideas in our culture about individualism. And our nation's really founded on a very romantic concept of individualism. You can imagine how startling then it is when you have children who are born who are two people inside of one body. Where I ran into the most heat from this most recently was last year when South African runner, Caster Semenya, had her sex called into question at the International Games in Berlin.

因此我们的文化中有很多天真的想法是关于个人主义的,并且我们国家建立在一个非常不实际的个人主义的概念上的。好,你可以想象那多么令人震惊,当你的两个孩子出生的时候是在一个身体中的。我最近一次遇到这种情况是去年的时候,非洲田径运动员,卡斯特尔·塞门亚在柏林国际比赛中被质疑性别问题。

I had a lot of journalists calling me, asking me, "Which is the test they're going to run that will tell us whether or not Caster Semenya is male or female?" And I had to explain to the journalists there isn't such a test.

许多记者给我打电话,问我“他们会用哪种检测方法来向大家证明卡斯特尔·塞门亚是男还是女?”于是我不得不跟他们解释说,根本没有检测的方法。

In fact, we now know that sex is complicated enough that we have to admit: Nature doesn't draw the line for us between male and female, or between male and intersex and female and intersex; we actually draw that line on nature.

事实上,我们现在已经了解性别是非常复杂的,我们不得不承认:大自然根本就没有一个明确的分界线来区分男性或女性,或者男性和双性以及女性和双性,这条分界线实际上是我们自己画的。

So what we have is a sort of situation where the farther our science goes, the more we have to admit to ourselves that these categories that we thought of as stable anatomical categories, that mapped very simply to stable identity categories are a lot more fuzzy than we thought. And it's not just in terms of sex. It's also in terms of race, which turns out to be vastly more complicated than our terminology has allowed.

因此我们现在的情况是,科学越发展,我们越得承认,这些性别的分类形式也就是我们认为很理所当然的身体结构学上的分类,是过于简单地给特性分了类,实际情况要比我们想象的模糊的多。并且这不仅仅是关于性别的问题。也同样是关于种族的问题,这个复杂程度远不是我们的学术语言所能形容的。

As we look, we get into all sorts of uncomfortable areas. We look, for example, about the fact that we share at least 95 percent of our DNA with chimpanzees. What are we to make of the fact that we differ from them only, really, by a few nucleotides? And as we get farther and farther with our science, we get more and more into a discomforted zone, where we have to acknowledge that the simplistic categories we've had are probably overly simplistic.

如我们所见,我们涉及各种各样艰难的领域。我们来看一个例子,现实情况是我们用95%的人类的DNA与大猩猩进行对比。得出的事实是人类和大猩猩的DNA只是在一些核苷酸上有所不同。我们该如何解释我们与他们的区别,真的,靠几个核苷酸?随着我们对科学的研究越来越深入,我们越来越陷入一个混乱的境地,在那里我们不得不承认我们所拥有的简单化的范畴可能过于简单化了。

So we're seeing this in all sorts of places in human life. One of the places we're seeing it, for example, in our culture, in the United States today, is battles over the beginning of life and the end of life. We have difficult conversations about at what point we decide a body becomes a human, such that it has a different right than a fetal life.

所以我们在人类生活的各个方面都看到了这一点。例如其中一个问题,在我们的文化中,在今天的美国,我们总能看到围绕生命的开始和终结的标准定义的争辩。我们在决定一个身体什么时候能成为人的问题上进行了艰难的对话,以至于它有不同于胎儿生命的权利。

We have very difficult conversations nowadays -- probably not out in the open as much as within medicine -- about the question of when somebody's dead. In the past, our ancestors never had to struggle so much with this question of when somebody was dead. At most, they'd stick a feather on somebody's nose, and if it twitched, they didn't bury them yet. If it stopped twitching, you bury them.

我们当今有一个非常有争议的话题——也许在外部不如在医学界内争论的激烈——是关于何时认定为人死亡的疑问。过去,人死的时候我们的祖先从来不会过多的纠结于此,最多也就是把一个羽毛粘在人的鼻子下,如果羽毛动了,旁人就不会把他们埋掉,如果羽毛不动,就会埋了他们。

But today, we have a situation where we want to take vital organs out of beings and give them to other beings. And as a consequence, we have to struggle with this really difficult question about who's dead, and this leads us to a really difficult situation where we don't have such simple categories as we've had before.

但是如今的情况都是我们希望把死者的器官移植到其他人的身体上。结果,我们开始纠结在上面所提到的难题中关于到底死了没有的问题,这导致我们进入一个很困难的情况,这个情况没有之前的分类简单了。

Now you might think that all this breaking-down of categories would make somebody like me really happy. I'm a political progressive, I defend people with unusual bodies, but I have to admit to you that it makes me nervous. Understanding that these categories are really much more unstable than we thought makes me tense. It makes me tense from the point of view of thinking about democracy.

现在你也许会想,所有的这些正面临崩溃的分类也许会让像我这样的人感到高兴。我是一个在ZZ观点上不断进步的人,我维护那些身体异于常人的人,但是我必须承认,这种改变让我感到不安。认识到这些分类制度比我们想象的还不稳定,这使我感到焦虑。但同时,我的焦虑也来自于民主的观点。

So in order to tell you about that tension, I have to first admit to you a huge fan of the Founding Fathers. I know they were racists, I know they were sexist, but they were great. I mean, they were so brave and so bold and so radical in what they did, that I find myself watching that cheesy musical "1776" every few years, and it's not because of the music, which is totally forgettable. It's because of what happened in 1776 with the Founding Fathers.

所以,为了告诉大家这种焦虑的程度,我首先要承认,我是国父们的忠实粉丝。我知道他们是种族主义者,他们是男性至上主义者,但是他们非常伟大。我的意思是,他们是如此的英勇、无畏并且积极地从事他们的事业,我自己每隔几年就要重新去欣赏那个挺土的音乐剧“1776”(美国建国史的音乐剧),并不是因为音乐好,音乐是完全可以被忽略的。那是因为1776年围绕着建国者们发生的事情。

The Founding Fathers were, for my point of view, the original anatomical activists, and this is why. What they rejected was an anatomical concept and replaced it with another one that was radical and beautiful and held us for 200 years. So as you all recall, what our Founding Fathers were rejecting was a concept of monarchy, and the monarchy was basically based on a very simplistic concept of anatomy.

建国者们,我认为他们是最早的解剖学活动家,这是我爱他们的原因。他们反对了一个解剖学的概念,并且用另一个取而代之,这个新进的美好的概念保持了200年。大家回忆一下,我们的建国者们反对的是一个君主制度的概念,并且这个君主制是基于过于简单化的解剖学概念上的。

The monarchs of the old world didn't have a concept of DNA, but they did have a concept of birthright. They had a concept of blue blood. They had the idea that the people who would be in political power should be in political power because of the blood being passed down from grandfather to father to son and so forth.

旧体制下的帝王们没有DNA的概念,但是他们遵从的是“出身”的理念。他们有贵族的概念,他们认为,身在政治权力下的人就应该掌握权力,那是因为贵族血统要从祖父到父亲到儿子一代代传承。

The Founding Fathers rejected that idea, and they replaced it with a new anatomical concept, and that concept was "all men are created equal." They leveled that playing field and decided the anatomy that mattered was the commonality of anatomy, not the difference in anatomy, and that was a really radical thing to do.

建国者们反对这种观点,他们用一种新的解剖上的概念取而代之,那种概念就是,人人平等。他们消除了等级观念,并且确定解剖学的重要性在于全民平等而不是出身的贵贱。在当时那确实是一个很激进的改革。

Now they were doing it in part because they were part of an Enlightenment system where two things were growing up together. And that was democracy growing up, but it was also science growing up at the same time. And it's really clear, if you look at the history of the Founding Fathers, a lot of them were very interested in science, and they were interested in the concept of a naturalistic world.

某种程度上,这种改革现在仍然在进行,因为他们是启蒙运动系统的一部分。这里有两样东西一起成长。这是民主的成长,但同时也是科学的成长。非常明显的是,如果你注意一下建国者的历史,他们中的许多人都对科学很感兴趣,并且他们都对自然主义世界这个概念很感兴趣。

They were moving away from supernatural explanations, and they were rejecting things like a supernatural concept of power, where it transmitted because of a very vague concept of birthright.

他们摒弃超自然的说法,他们排斥那些关于超自然力量的说法,因为超自然力量的概念被传播是基于身世模糊的理念。

They were moving towards a naturalistic concept. And if you look, for example, in the Declaration of Independence, they talk about nature and nature's God. They don't talk about God and God's nature. They're talking about the power of nature to tell us who we are.

他们倡导自然主义的概念。如果你观察会发现,例如在独立宣言中他们提及到自然和自然之神。他们没有提到上帝和上帝的自然,他们用自然的力量来解释我们是谁。

So as part of that, they were coming to us with a concept that was about anatomical commonality. And in doing so, they were really setting up in a beautiful way the Civil Rights Movement of the future. They didn't think of it that way, but they did it for us, and it was great.

因此作为其中的一部分,他们为我们带来一个概念,那就是人人生来平等。为此他们确实为将来的民权运动铺垫了一个很美好的道路。他们想不到将来会怎样,但是他们为我们奠定了基础,这是非常伟大的。

So what happened years afterwards? What happened was women, for example, who wanted the right to vote, took the Founding Fathers' concept of anatomical commonality being more important than anatomical difference and said, "The fact that we have a uterus and ovaries is not significant enough in terms of a difference to mean that we shouldn't have the right to vote, the right to full citizenship, the right to own property, etc."

那么数年后发生了什么呢?例如在女性身上都发生了什么,她们渴望投票的权利,按照建国者的概念,人人平等要远重要于人的出身,她们说:“我们有子宫和卵巢是事实,这些不同不代表我们没有投票权,没有充分的公民权利,没有私人财产权等等”

And women successfully argued that. Next came the successful Civil Rights Movement, where we found people like Sojourner Truth talking about, "Ain't I a woman?" We find men on the marching lines of the Civil Rights Movement saying, "I am a man." Again, people of color appealing to a commonality of anatomy over a difference of anatomy, again, successfully. We see the same thing with the disability rights movement.

女性的主张获得了成效。接下来便是成功的民权运动,运动中出现了像索杰纳·特鲁思这样的人在谈论,“我就不是女人吗?”我们知道男人曾经在民权运动的发展路线上有句名言,“我是个男人。”此外,有色人群呼吁人人平等而不应种族歧视,再者,我们看到同样的成功案例发生在伤残人士的权利运动中。

The problem is, of course, that, as we begin to look at all that commonality, we have to begin to question why we maintain certain divisions. Mind you, I want to maintain some divisions, anatomically, in our culture.

问题是,当然,当我们开始去审视所有的公民,我们不得不开始质疑,为什么我们要维护一个固定的界限。请注意,我想在我们的文化中,在解剖学上保持一些分歧。

For example, I don't want to give a fish the same rights as a human. I don't want to say we give up entirely on anatomy. I don't want to say a five-year-old should be allowed to consent to sex or consent to marry. So there are some anatomical divisions that make sense to me and that I think we should retain. But the challenge is trying to figure out which ones they are and why do we retain them, and do they have meaning.

举个例子,我不希望给予鱼和人类一样的权利。我不希望我们放弃一切在解剖学上的区分界限。我不希望,一个五岁的孩子可以被允许有性行为或者说允许结婚。所以说,有一些在解剖学上的界限对我们来说是有意义的,我想那些应该被保留。但是,艰巨的任务是试着去找出哪些是应该保留的,为什么我们要保留它们,它们有什么意义。

So let's go back to those two beings conceived at the beginning of this talk. We have two beings, both conceived in the middle of 1979 on the exact same day. Let's imagine one of them, Mary, is born three months prematurely, so she's born on June 1, 1980. Henry, by contrast, is born at term, so he's born on March 1, 1980. Simply by virtue of the fact that Mary was born prematurely three months, she comes into all sorts of rights three months earlier than Henry does -- the right to consent to sex, the right to vote, the right to drink. Henry has to wait for all of that, not because he's actually any different in age, biologically, except in terms of when he was born.

所以,让我们回到刚才说到的那两人,就是演讲一开始所虚构的那两个人。我们有两对夫妇,都在1979年年中的同一天怀孕了。让我们设想一下,玛丽提前三个月出生了,因此她出生于1980年6月1日。亨利,相反的,足月出生,他出生于1980年3月1日。仅仅是由于玛丽早出生了三个月这个事实,她获得各种权利的时间要比亨利早三个月,允许有性行为的权利、选举的权利、喝酒的权利,亨利就不得不等待。他的生理学年龄没有任何不同,只是因为他出生的时间不同。

We find other kinds of weirdness in terms of what their rights are. Henry, by virtue of being assumed to be male -- although I haven't told you that he's the XY one -- by virtue of being assumed to be male is now liable to be drafted, which Mary does not need to worry about. Mary, meanwhile, cannot in all the states have the same right that Henry has in all the states, namely, the right to marry. Henry can marry, in every state, a woman, but Mary can only marry today in a few states, a woman.

我们还发现其他一些离奇的权利问题。亨利,由于被假定为男性——尽管我没有告诉过大家他是XY型染色体——由于被假定为男性,所以现在要应征入伍。玛丽就不需要去担心这些,与此同时,玛丽不能在所有的州像亨利一样享受同样权利,也就是,结婚的权利。亨利可以在任何一个州结婚,但是玛丽如今只能在少数几个州娶一位女性。

So we have these anatomical categories that persist, that are in many ways problematic and questionable. And the question to me becomes: What do we do, as our science gets to be so good in looking at anatomy, that we reach the point where we have to admit that a democracy that's been based on anatomy might start falling apart?

因此我们所坚持的一些结构上的生物分类,它们在很多方面是有问题并且需要质疑的。对我来说,问题就变成了:当我们的科学在解剖学上如此先进的时候,我们要做什么。我们已经到了不得不承认,基于解剖学上的人的民主也许正面临崩溃。

I don't want to give up the science, but at the same time, it feels sometimes like the science is coming out from under us. So where do we go? It seems like what happens in our culture is a sort of pragmatic attitude: "We have to draw the line somewhere, so we will draw the line somewhere." But a lot of people get stuck in a very strange position.

我不想对科学失去希望,但是同时,有的时候隐约觉得,科学的发展是受到我们影响的,因此我们将走向何方?看起来我们的社会有着一种实用主义的态度:“好,我必须在某处画一条界限,那么我就在那画一条界限。”但是很多人会因此陷在一个非常尴尬的位置。

So for example, Texas has at one point decided that what it means to marry a man is to mean that you don't have a Y chromosome, and what it means to marry a woman means you have a Y chromosome. In practice they don't test people for their chromosomes. But this is also very bizarre, because of the story I told you at the beginning about androgen insensitivity syndrome.

举个例子,德克萨斯州有一个决定,能嫁给一个男人意味着你没有Y染色体,同时如果你能娶一个女人意味着你有Y染色体。现实中,他们实际上不会去检测染色体,但是这也非常奇怪,因为我一开始告诉了大家那个关于雄激素不敏感综合征的故事。

If we look at one of the Founding Fathers of modern democracy, Dr. Martin Luther King, he offers us something of a solution in his "I have a dream" speech. He says we should judge people "based not on the color of their skin, but on the content of their character," moving beyond anatomy. And I want to say, "Yeah, that sounds like a really good idea." But in practice, how do you do it? How do you judge people based on the content of character?

如有我们看一下现代民主制度的奠基人之一,马丁·路德·金博士在他的“我有一个梦想”的演讲中,为我们提供了一个解决方法。他认为我们“不应该根据一个人的肤色而是应该根据他的品格”去评判一个人,摒弃人种差异。我想说,“是的,那听起来确实是个好方法。”但实际操作中,你怎么去做?你如何根据他的品德去评判他?

I also want to point out that I'm not sure that is how we should distribute rights in terms of humans, because, I have to admit, that there are some golden retrievers I know that are probably more deserving of social services than some humans I know. I also want to say there are probably also some yellow Labradors that I know that are more capable of informed, intelligent, mature decisions about sexual relations than some 40-year-olds that I know.

我还想指出,我不太确定我们应该如何分配人类的权利,因为,我不得不承认,有些黄金猎犬比起我知道的一些人似乎更应该得到社会的帮助。我还想说,我知道有些拉布拉多似乎比有些40岁左右的人在性关系问题上更慎重,更聪明,更能作出成熟的决定。

So how do we operationalize the question of content of character? It turns out to be really difficult. And part of me also wonders, what if content of character turns out to be something that's scannable in the future -- able to be seen with an fMRI? Do we really want to go there? I'm not sure where we go.

因此我们如何去衡量品德的问题?结果证明是非常困难的,我还想知道如果品德的好坏在未来可以被扫描出来——也许可以用核磁共振成像看见?我们真的愿意走到那一步吗?我不确定我们将走向何方。

What I do know is that it seems to be really important to think about the idea of the United States being in the lead of thinking about this issue of democracy. We've done a really good job struggling with democracy, and I think we would do a good job in the future. We don't have a situation that Iran has, for example, where a man who's sexually attracted to other men is liable to be murdered, unless he's willing to submit to a sex change, in which case he's allowed to live.

我知道的是应该思考一下米国所引领的民主存在的问题,这看起来是非常重要的,我们在争取民主的问题上已经做得非常好了,我认为今后同样会做的更好。我们情况和伊朗不同,比如,一个男人在性方面对其他男人有吸引力,那么他是可以被杀的,除非他愿意改变自己的性取向,那么他将可以活下来。

We don't have that kind of situation. I'm glad to say we don't have the kind of situation with -- a surgeon I talked to a few years ago who had brought over a set of conjoined twins in order to separate them, partly to make a name for himself. But when I was on the phone with him, asking why he'll do this surgery -- this was a very high-risk surgery -- his answer was that, in this other nation, these children were going to be treated very badly, and so he had to do this.

我们没有那样的情况,我非常高兴我们没有那样的情况——对一位外科医生说,那是在数年之前,他带来一个连体婴儿希望可以帮助他们进行分离手术,某种程度上也想让自己出名。但是当我跟他通电话时,我问他为什么希望做这个手术——因为这是个危险性很高的手术——他答道,在这个国家,这样的孩子将会被残忍的对待,因此他必须要帮助他们这么做。

My response to him was, "Well, have you considered political asylum instead of a separation surgery?" The United States has offered tremendous possibility for allowing people to be the way they are, without having them have to be changed for the sake of the state. So I think we have to be in the lead.

我对他的回答是,“恩,你为他们考虑过ZZ避难而不是进行手术吗?”米国为像这样的孩子保持他们自己的特征提供了很大的可能,他们从不用为了国家改变自己的身体,因此我认为我们应该要引领这种思想。

Well, just to close, I want to suggest to you that I've been talking a lot about the Fathers. And I want to think about the possibilities of what democracy might look like, or might have looked like, if we had more involved the mothers. And I want to say something a little bit radical for a feminist, and that is that I think that there may be different kinds of insights that can come from different kinds of anatomies, particularly when we have people thinking in groups.

好,说到这里,我想提醒大家我已经谈论了很多前人的事情,我还想考虑一下民主会是什么样子,或者是已经是什么样子的可能性,如果我们可以让更多的母亲参与进来。我还想说对女权主义者有点激进的话,那就是,我认为不同的人也许可以带来不同的的观察视角,特别是当我们习惯于群体性思维的时候。

For years, because I've been interested in intersex, I've also been interested in sex-difference research. And one of the things that I've been interested in is looking at the differences between males and females in terms of the way they think and operate in the world.

我已经对双性人感兴趣很多年了,也对性别差异也进行了多年的研究。我非常感兴趣的事情之一,就是去观察世界范围内男性与女性之间在思考问题和解决问题上的差别。

And what we know from cross-cultural studies is that females, on average -- not everyone, but on average -- are more inclined to be very attentive to complex social relations and to taking care of people who are, basically, vulnerable within the group. And so if we think about that, we have an interesting situation in hands.

我们从跨文化研究中得知,女性,平均地看——当然不是每个人,而是平均地看——更倾向于关注复杂的社会关系和照顾基本上在群体中处于弱势的人。所以如果我们考虑一下,我们可以看到一个有趣的情况。

Years ago, when I was in graduate school, one of my graduate advisors who knew I was interested in feminism -- I considered myself a feminist, as I still do, asked a really strange question. He said, "Tell me what's feminine about feminism." And I thought, "Well, that's the dumbest question I've ever heard.

数年前,当我读研究生的时候我的一位指导教授知道我对女权运动很感兴趣——我自认是女权主义者,一直是——他问了我一个很怪的问题。他说:“告诉我女权主义女性化在哪里。”我想,“恩……这是我听过的最让我哑口无言的问题。

Feminism is all about undoing stereotypes about gender, so there's nothing feminine about feminism." But the more I thought about his question, the more I thought there might be something feminine about feminism. That is to say, there might be something, on average, different about female brains from male brains that makes us more attentive to deeply complex social relationships, and more attentive to taking care of the vulnerable.

女权主义是所有消除陈腐性别观念的一切活动的统称,因此,女权主义不存在女性化。”但是,进一步解读这个问题,我想的更多的是,也许女权主义存在着一些女性化。也就是说,也许有一些,总的说来女性的思维不同于男性的部分使得我们更加富有警惕性,对于复杂的社会关系更敏感,并且更加注意关心那些弱势群体。

So whereas the Fathers were extremely attentive to figuring out how to protect individuals from the state, it's possible that if we injected more mothers into this concept, what we would have is more of a concept of not just how to protect, but how to care for each other.

但是前人们已经细心地指出了如何保护个人不受国家的影响,但如果我们在这个概念中注入更多的母性,那也是可能的,那样我们将拥有的就不仅仅是如何保护,而是如何相互关心的概念。

And maybe that's where we need to go in the future, when we take democracy beyond anatomy, is to think less about the individual body in terms of the identity, and think more about those relationships. So that as we the people try to create a more perfect union, we're thinking about what we do for each other.

也许这就是我们未来要走的路,当我们抛开人种的分别来讲民主——也就是较少地考虑到人的个体关于人的身份特性,而是更多地考虑人们之间的关系。因此,当人们试图创造一个更加美好的联合体的时候,我们需要考虑的是我们为他人都做了什么。

Thank you.

谢谢。



最新评论

yuanbolero 发表于 2020-7-28 11:57:38
学习了
快速回复 返回顶部 返回列表