扮演“洛丽塔”

44890081. sy475

书评
My Dark Vanessa》by Kate Elizabeth Russell


作者说她十六七岁时就开始筹划写这本书了,书里Vanessa在高中时的经历、想法都用的是那个时候积累下的素材。高中Vanessa的烦恼给人感觉太真实了:青少年时期,和最好的朋友闹翻就是天大的事,那个时候还定不清自我的边界,朋友就是自己的一部分,朋友要离开就像生生地把自己剖筋挖骨一样;那个时期对成人世界的感观充满了矛盾,既有向往,又有不屑,对自己的认知也混乱矛盾,一方面鄙视、厌倦成年人制定的规则,觉得他们的规矩毫无意义、荒谬可笑,但又感到无力去改变、对抗这些规则。这些矛盾的情感作者都非常忠实地表现出来了,我个人觉得这其实极难做到的,青少年时期的想法太纷杂、太混乱、太狂放,过了那个时期往往这些混乱的状态都会如云烟般从记忆里消散了,如果不是作者在自己还是个高中生时就把这些情绪记录下来,十年之后再写作时几乎不可能这么忠实地复现一个青少年的心理状态。

但也因为这样,少年Vanessa和成年Vanessa叙事交替时会有些不协调感。从一个虽然暗有创伤,但大多数时候能管理情绪的成年人,跳到每天脑子里充斥着一万个怪想法的心绪大起大落的高中生,作为一个和成年Vanessa年龄接近的读者,我很容易共情成年Vanessa的想法,而少年Vanessa会给我一种过于幼稚、幼稚到不合逻辑的格格不入感。我必须要努力地回忆自己十几岁时的状态,那个动不动”发疯“的自己,那个现在回忆起来充满了距离感,甚至更像在看他人电影的自己,一边对比这些脑子里的”旧电影“,一边才能勉强接受这种状态对于青少年是真实的。即使这样,从情感上来说,还是有种隔膜感。——我觉得这种隔膜感也是成年Vanessa难以接受,在变化了的道德语境下,重新叙述她少年经历的原因之一,因为想要客观地回忆起少年时代究竟发生了什么,实在是太难了。我觉得这种回忆上的困难性很可能和大脑发育的机制有关。

我们的社会在过去十年间,对成年男性和未成年女性的恋爱叙述,经历了从完全的”亨伯特“视角,到部分地引入”多罗莉丝“的声音和她的视角的这样一个变化。对此的道德判断,也不再是过去的看似”中立“,其实是”共情“施害者,——而是明确这个关系是恋童癖利用权力不对等进行的性剥削行为,”亨伯特“是一个故意伤害他人的罪犯,”多罗莉丝“则是本质的受害者。她可能对亨伯特的性侵行为有回应,甚至有些小动作看起来有些挑逗,但这些并不能改变她和亨伯特的关系本质。这段性关系的本质就是她在被恋童癖亨伯特性剥削。恋童癖用”爱情“神话来美化自己的行为,但是他们淫荡无耻、看到儿童就会出手勾引,跟倡导”专一“的”爱情“没有半毛钱关系。剥掉文学美化外衣后的赤裸裸的现实:——恋童癖面对成年女性就是个阳痿男。书里面,三十岁Vanessa试图再次和老师做爱,来回忆他们“过去”那种在她记忆里浪漫的感觉,但是老师完全硬不起来,因为”我对他而言太老了“。

少年Vanessa笨拙地模仿“诱惑的少女“,因为她以为“洛丽塔”有真正的权力。她模仿着少女明星在大众媒体里被塑造出来的样子。Britney Spears穿着露腰裙,表情叛逆,一边跳着暗示性的舞蹈,一边唱着”Baby baby one more time“。 Fiona Apple穿着白色小背心,透出瘦骨嶙峋的肩膀,她撩起裙子,露出同样青春期抽条时特有的骨节鲜明的腿。她躺在浴缸里,明显属于成年男人的、深色皮肤的、充满暴力感的脚踩在她脸侧,但是她却在唱

I’ve been a bad, bad girl

I’ve been careless with a delicate man

And it’s a sad, sad world

When a girl will break a boy

Just because she can

别人把脚踩在你脸边上,明显是个充满侮辱性的动作,但是女主人公摆出无所谓的表情,继续唱”When a girl will break a boy,Just because she can“,一副相信自己凭借”魅力“把男人玩弄于鼓掌中的样子,这明显属于认知失调。心怀鬼胎的人们跟着吹捧洛丽塔的魔力,”哦,她轻蔑一笑,男人都为之疯狂“。但也不见这些“为她疯狂的”男人把钱和房子都给她,也不见这些“为她疯狂的”男人为她洗衣做饭、忙前忙后。说白了,引发男人的强奸你的欲望算什么权力,”洛丽塔“根本没有任何权力,男人可以不负任何代价地把脚踩在她脸上侮辱她。

fiona apple criminal - video Dailymotion

少年Vanessa在表演她从小说、电影里学来的“爱情”。她把自己脑子里对爱情的想象投射在一个无耻的恋童癖身上,硬是把老师因为怕被人检举,偷偷摸摸做出的猥亵行为,想象成了”想触碰又收回手”的高尚爱情。老师称赞她的头发颜色像枫叶,老师摸了她的腿,她就觉得老师深深地爱上了她,她开始想象老师对自己“爱得小心翼翼”,想象自己是那个魔女般的洛丽塔,看似无害但实际有着引人毁灭的力量,然后又对老师产生了一种呵护的冲动,”老师不由自主地爱上一个学生,他内心该多么害怕啊”,“我应该(像个成年人一样)勇敢地承担起在这段关系里的责任”。来自于一个成年人的示爱,也激发起了她的虚荣心,她觉得这比被同龄男生追求更能证明自己的魅力。她以为自己有特别之处,才被成年男子爱上。到了后面,她才发现老师对高中生的她产生性欲,不是因为她魅力超群,而是因为老师是恋童癖。老师对她也没有什么”专一“的”爱情“,他性侵、诱奸过不止一个学生。

“Pathetically in love with you.” As soon as he says this, I become someone somebody else is in love with, and not just some dumb boy my own age but a man who has already lived an entire life, who has done and seen so much and still thinks I’m worthy of his love. I feel forced over a threshold, thrust out of my ordinary life into a place where it’s possible for grown men to be so pathetically in love with me they fall at my feet.

我发现这类老丑男勾引少女的故事里面,诱奸犯大都是语文老师,房思琪、《My Dark Vanessa》, 还有《Being Lolita》——我觉得一方面可能是因为语文老师比较擅长花言巧语吧,擅长child grooming,还有这和语文这门学科的特殊性也有些关系。语文呢,是个专注于做梦的学科,对于小女孩来讲,梦想在她的生活里是多么重要啊,与此相对的,这个社会给小女孩设定的“梦想”是多么狭隘无聊啊。Andrea Dworkin在自传里面回忆她遇到过的恋童癖老师,“他们厌女,他们是恋童癖”,但是“在这个大多数成年人大多数时候都对孩子撒谎的社会里,这个恋童癖老师看起来就像唯一一个诚实的,敢于说出世界的真相的人。就像撒旦用知识果引诱夏娃一样。”

在夏娃”堕落“之前,”正义“的上帝做了什么呢?他为了方便“管理”人类,禁止人类求知,只想让人类生活于蒙昧之中,但人就是有向往知识的、好奇的天性啊。男权社会打压少女的求知欲,打压她们探索世界的野心,但少女直觉性地感到这一切”安排“都不合理,都在违逆她的天性。Vanessa面对她妈提供的”恋爱咨询“,在内心反驳,”为什么女孩子就要永远等待(男孩子来爱她)?“。少女的不服气、不服输的心,被恋童癖利用,成为了引诱她、要挟她的筹码。

In my case I was Little Eva, and a snake offered knowledge and the promise of escape from the constriction of a dead world in which there were no poets or geniuses or visionaries. All the girls, after all, were expected to teach, nurse, do hair, or clean houses, or combinations as if from a Chinese menu. Because most adults lie to children most of the time, the pedophilic adult seems to be a truth-teller, the one adult ready and willing to know the world and not to lie about it. Lordy, lordy, I do still love that piece of shit. (from “Heartbreak: The Political Memoir of a Feminist Militant”)

这类作品里还有个常出现的桥段:受害者明明身体上很抵触老师,会嫌老师的肉体恶心,但是又拼命压抑自己去迎合老师,在压抑自己的过程中体会一种自虐式的快感。我觉得受害者压抑自己对老丑男的肉体的厌恶的情节也对应着受害者黑暗人格毁灭自我的共谋,她体内那个暴虐的部分,本来是应该用来保护心灵里脆弱的部分,比如在被老JB冒犯到的时候奋起剁掉老JB,但是却在男权社会的洗脑下,和老JB合谋去压制、去侵犯那个天真脆弱的人格,在毁灭另一个人格的过程中获得一种战胜自己的快感,然而这种战胜自己并非是成长式的,而是摧毁式的,会导致人格的解离。她躺在床上,感到自己“灵魂出窍”,正是PTSD的解离症状。

这里面还有一段“强制性异性恋”的故事。一开始,她为最好的朋友Jenny亲近男友Tom,忽视了她而歇斯底里,她跟Jenny大吵,Jenny暗示她有同性恋倾向,被指出这点,她大为恐惧。她轻易地滑向Strane,也有一部分是为了向外界、向自己,证明自己不是同性恋。这一段真令我心碎。

But it killed me that Jenny deemed it something worth repeating: “too attached.” The implication of what being too attached to another girl might mean made my hair stand on end.

大学时第一次读《Lolita》,也是唯一一次,把我恶心坏了——同样恶心到我的还有《霍乱时期的爱情》——其实回想起来应该太多了,以至于我觉得所谓的名著之所以成为名著,不是despite misogyny,而是because of misogyny。纳博科夫在《Lolita》结语里把亨伯特痛骂了一顿,说自己从亨伯特的角度来写,是要忠实地表现恋童癖是怎么美化自己的犯罪行为的,亨伯特这个人物内心本质就是虚伪无耻,没有为他辩解的意思——但是他给自己找补的这些从小说里完全看不出来就是了。我觉得《My Dark Vanessa》的格局比《Lolita》高得多,因为这本书着重讨论了性化少女的社会文化对少女自我认知的扭曲,是如何便利性侵犯罪的。少年Vanessa看似是被Strane这一个人诱奸了,其实是被整个社会的恋童文化围猎了,而且因为Vanessa本人就成长在这种恋童文化里,吸收了种种毒素,导致她自己都参与了对自己的绞杀。

成年男人利用自己的权威诱奸少女的这一类犯罪,具有整个社会参与的复杂性,而受害者本身也是男权社会的产物,受到有毒文化的浸染,让她往往显得不那么像一个完美受害者。她做出性感的姿势、挑逗的表情,去表演一个她从杂志里、电视上学来的诱惑的“洛丽塔”,同时,又不由自主地为此感到屈辱,因为这种表演,不论怎么样被男权社会美化,对表演者本身而言就是屈辱的。受害者的一部分和加害者共谋,一起迫害她自己,这是事实,没有必要为了维持受害者的“纯洁形象”,去否认这种共谋。这只能说明她不止受害于加害者,还受害于把性化少女、意淫少女当做正常的男权社会洗脑。事实上,如果我们想要阻止更多的少女受害,就必须先认清了这种共谋和它的成因链条,而不是否认它的存在。认清了成因,才能切断链条,彻底根除滋生它的土壤。

A Great Gardner’s Book As Always

35106781

The Book Review of 
Look For Me” by Lisa Gardner


I always learn something from reading Gardner’s books. It is apparent from her works that she conducts a great deal of research in forensic science and legal procedures, filters through a large amount of informative details and weaves the most interesting parts into her plot lines. I was initially drawn to her books by her characterization of strong, determined and resourceful female leads. As my reading journey continued, I found her books also opened a gateway of knowledge into a line of work I barely knew in real life. She introduced me to the life of a child psych ward nurse, a 911 dispatcher, a police trooper and even a female prisoner. The last, I know, is not a profession, but no less interesting to read about.

There are two recurring themes in Gardner’s writing: troubled childhood and trauma recovery.

Gardner on Child Welfare

In her D.D. Warren series, Gardner directs a spotlight at troubled children, calling attention to this particularly vulnerable group. This book “Look for Me” tells a story of foster kids, and severals other books in the same series also revolve around children born with or into difficult situations, such as children with physical disabilities (“Fear Nothing”), children with mental illnesses (“Live To Tell”), children of narcissistic parents (“Never Tell”) and children sexually abused by pedophilic predators (“Catch Me”).

Gardner’s thrillers are not only exciting reads, but also offer a kaleidoscopic view into various public facilities and services. The crime plots may be fictitious, but the story setting is built on solid research. Schools, hospitals, law enforcement, government agencies, social volunteer groups —— there seems to be no corner of the society that Gardner’s antenna have not reached, investigated and reported.

Reading her books, you can see the tremendous efforts put forth by all the honorable people in our society to protect the younger generation from perils, to nurture deprived children with public resources, to reconnect challenged children, and sometimes their desperate parents, into a social support network. But at the same time, you also see the devil of human nature rearing its ugly head in the depravity of abusive parents, pedophilic criminals and callous bystanders.

All adults were once children. When children grow up, they gain power. Some of them wield this power to protect and guard the younger generation, whereas some pour their anger and frustration onto the defenseless young, and some exploit the curiosity and dependency of children to act out their depraved fantasies. Generations after generations, the war between child protectors and child abusers goes on and children’s welfare depends on the adults on their side winning the war.

A central character of this book is a high school teenage girl who spent several years in foster care, and as the story unfolds, it touches on various aspects and working stages of the US foster care system. Foster kids usually have problematic biological parents, whose custodial rights are terminated by the state on the account of negligence or abuse. Only after the biological parents prove in court that they are mentally, physically and financially stable enough to provide responsible child care, could they win back the custody of their kids. Before that, the children would be placed in foster homes for the sake of their safety and welfare.

However, when put into practice, these laws and policies to protect children may not live up to same ideal by which they were drafted. If the foster home lacks monitoring and supervision, these children, already under distress, become even more susceptible to exploitation and abuse. During the challenging times of parent-child separation, if the foster home fails to provide solace and support, some of children would break down or go astray. Feeling undeserved and unloved, they use drugs, alcohol, unprotected sex to sabotage their physical and mental well-being. Feeling lost in a hostile, estranged world, they join criminal activities to find a sense of community and belonging.

Gardner on Feminism

Another thing I always like about Gardner’s books is how she features strong female characters. In this book, Flora Dane, an abduction survivor (first introduced in “Find Her ”), trains herself to be a vigilante and organizes a support group to offer consultation for other victims. Sara, another survivor from a killing spree, joins Flora’s support group and uses her computer knowledge to help locate a missing girl.

It’s really refreshing to read stories of how female survivors of rape, kidnap and violence regain the control of their life and start to feel strong and powerful again. The survivors study self-defense skills from lock-picking to chemical burning, take on training courses in shooting, kick-boxing and running, bond with other determined survivors, and together form a formidable combat force to destroy the bad guys.

I always like the stories of victims turning into revengers. In a world where all women face constant threats of male violence, these stories tell women that they are not passive and powerless. The stories say that for those who are disgraced, tortured and brutalized, there is a way out of victimhood, and it is not by waiting, begging and praying. Her inner peace is not gifted to her by an omnipotent God, neither does it come back to her spontaneously as time goes by. To reclaim her control of life, she has to believe in her own strength and shrewdness. She has to plan, prepare, strategize, and take revenge on the offenders, rapists and kidnappers. She has to rack her brain to outsmart those who wronged her and hold on to a determination to fight till winning.

An Honest and Heartbreaking Memoir

the_kissA Book Review of
The Kiss, by Kathryn Harrison

I’m surprised to see the precision and coolness with which the author recounts her childhood trauma. Usually people do not remember traumatic experiences as clearly as they do good ones, since first, trauma does not make sense and thereby defies logical memory, and second, the brain shuts down when hurt too badly as a form of self-protection. In the archive of subconsciousness traumatic memories are scattered all over the place, in bits and pieces, and when they are recalled into consciousness they are often shrouded in a dreamy fog.

Not in the case of this book.

The author has a style that is literary, but not literary in a distant, unapproachable way, but intimate and human. Her words carry a poetic rhythm, but the picture they draw is never bleary nor drifting. Her language is precise, with the certainty and calmness a surgical knife could use to slice open a festering wound. Her voice is honest and sincere. The words weigh down on readers’ mind with tangible horror.

My appreciation of the style left aside, the book also discusses a very important topic. It tells a child abuse story from the victim’s perspective, and demonstrates how much lasting damage parental abuse can do to a trusting, loving child. The author’s abusive mother uses the unconditional trust of her child to encroach on the child’s mental and bodily boundaries, forces her to ignore her own feelings, to submit and comply. Her mother manipulates her through insults, physical violence and deliberate neglect. The abuse suffocates and poisons a child’s mind. Suffocated, the child turns to self-destructive thoughts and behavior. Poisoned, the child is led to believe the abuse was done because of love. Horror, weariness and humiliation are what love ought to feel like.

Such a child then becomes an easy prey for sexual predators, like an immunosuppressed host for hungry parasites. In this case the author falls into the trap of her perverted biological father, but her falling starts way before the re-union with her estranged father. It starts when she watches her sleeping mom in craving, when she is forced to learn subjects in a way more of torture than education, when she is not able to slap away the hand that shoves a diaphragm into her vagina, during a medical check authorized by her mother. She has been violated, again and again, by her mother, long before her father takes advantage of her wounded state.

The mother is always the first one to cut a hole into a girl’s heart. Easily done when she is too young and too inexperienced to put up any defense, when her body is small, her knowledge is scarce and her strength is undeveloped, when she has no choice but to give out all her trust to people she has no choice but to depend on. Once a hole is left open, anyone with a malicious intent can insert a straw into her heart and party on her blood for food and pleasure.

Ancient Specters Linger In a Contemporary Archive

dreamhouseThe Book Review of
In the Dream House, by Carmen Maria Machado

In the process of recounting her experience in an abusive lesbian relationship, the author occasionally cites a folklore motif in the footnote, suggesting a particular episode of her story has overlap with a common folkloric paradigm. The book is an authentic account of the author’s real-life experience in a chronological flow, yet from time to time in the margin of the narration it strays into the mystical kingdoms of fairy tales.

The injection of folklore motifs makes the autobiographic story read transpersonal. Folklores are unrealistic, loaded with fantastical elements (fairies, witches, mystic beasts, et al.), yet also hyperrealistic: their allusions to social taboos and moral values are such truthful reflections of real life that they are often used as the first guide into adult society for the young and innocent. The repeated digressions to folkloric references add a surreal feeling to the retelling of a realistic past, and imply this personal story has myriad dimensions of universality.

Dworkin’s Defection From the Liberal Left

A Book Review of
Heartbreak: The Political Memoir of a Feminist Militant” by Andrea Dworkin


Learning about Dworkin’s early political life as an impassioned leftist really surprised me, for she had left an imprint on my mind with her poignant accusation of leftist men using and degrading women in a way no better than their conservative counterparts. In her other works, Dworkin called the whole sexual liberation movement, initiated and propelled by leftist men, another covert attack to violate and abuse female bodies and a blow to women’s autonomy and dignity, no less painful and humiliating than what was imposed by traditional values on right-wing women. The women on the left who had been coaxed into conforming to men’s version of liberation, only later had to swallow the bitter consequences of unwanted pregnancies, abortions and mental trauma, as well as their dismal situation of being used as mere sexual objects to serve and entertain.

Dworkin understands the chaotic nature of political activism. At college she was a student leader. She organized a student protest against the parietal hour rule. Under this rule female students were not allowed to have male visitors (lovers) between 2am and 6am, but it is to everyone’s knowledge that male faculty snuck in and out student dorms at any time, had sex with female students and impregnated several, who had to undergo illegal abortions. Dworkin believed that the parietal hour rule violated students’ personal freedom and was fundamentally unfair and hypocritical. At this time she was not as acutely aware of the sexual exploitation in the name of sexual freedom, which would come as a realization years later in her life.

Her plan of protest had a brief success: out of a whole student body of a few hundred students, only 6 refused. But soon the situation reversed. Some authority figure threatened to expel students if they stuck to the movement. Almost all the participating students, under the pressure of their parents, signed an oath to quit from the movement. Dworkin didn’t sign the oath and left the school. The experience revealed the complexities of mass politics to her. She learned how difficult it is for the powerless to maintain a political advantage over the powerful and how fragile a mass union is when being struck by draconian measures.

One can organize a large number of people to strike once, twice, but it’s hard to maintain the momentum in a longer period. The establishment has a tendency to degenerate into tyranny when feeling threatened, and most of the participating masses are weak-minded under prolonged pressure. When the battle of rebellion requests the individuals to endure more inconvenience, take higher risks and make more sacrifices, people refuse to go on. Yes, real power is with the people and they have the potential to overpower the despot when united, but the power of the masses is often released in the form of explosive passion. After a violent release, people return to their older norms and few have the determination to fight till winning. I think her observation resonates with many of the recent events. I find it hard to rephrase her words into a form of delivery as effective as the original so I just directly cite a paragraph down here.

In order to go back to school, students had to betray themselves and each other, and most did. I learned never to ignore the reality of power pure and simple. I also learned that one could get a bunch of people to do something brave or new or rebellious, but if it didn’t come from their deepest hearts they could not maintain the honor of their commitment. I learned that one does not overwhelm people by persuading them to do something basically antagonistic to their own sense of self; nor can rhetoric create in people a sustained determination to win.

I think Dworkin’s ability to dissect leftist hypocrisy with such precision and depth has a lot to do with the earnest belief she once held in liberal values. The once true believer, who has gone down the path of faith deep, sees the real deal behind propaganda. Underneath the beautiful covers of liberal ideals lies the same old cruelty of men, the same old subjugation of women. During years of fighting a political struggle with leftist men, Anti Vietnam War protests being one part of it, she witnessed first-hand the same men she initially admired as political visionaries and trusted as battle comrades who shared her belief in equality and freedom, reveal themselves as wife-batters, pedophiles and sexual offenders. She had wholeheartedly dedicated her young adult life to the liberation of all men, only to realize later that the liberation of all men didn’t include women. The realization of the ugly sides of left politics transformed her from a zealous disciple into a disillusioned defector, and luckily for the feminist movement, her militancy only increased.

Radical feminists across the world look up to Dworkin, inspired by her unflinching spirit to fight. Dworkin gives a voice to the invisible, the mute, the downtrodden. Her feminist analysis is cold to the heart, realistic to the essence. She understands not only the weaknesses and illusions of traditional women, but also the naive fantasies harbored by the liberal ones. She gained knowledge, experience and wisdom from a shattered dream. Then she stopped pleading for men’s chivalry and sympathy. She knows that women cannot rely on men to fight for women’s rights. She knows that women have to speak the truth for themselves and fight for a revolution by themselves.

身体自主与身份选择

书评
Irreversible Damage : The Transgender Craze Seducing Our Daughters”, by Abigail Shrier


我不是trans-activist,我也不认为每个自认是trans的青少年都是天生trans,都会在过去现在未来永远坚定地自认trans,甚至我相信其中很多人最终的性别认知会变回生理性别。我认同作者的部分说法,但是有很多地方我与她分歧巨大。我赞同她在第四章提到的,也是radfem常说的,整个trans文化建立在生理性别和传统社会性别角色有着对应关系的假设上,而这个假设正是女权主义者要打破的。尽管我和她都赞同这一理论的抽象表述,但是我发现,一旦涉及到理论落地,就是需要她分析一个现实的具体的人的时候,她立马显露出牢固的性别刻板观念。而且,我也十分厌恶她每次提到青少年的那种轻视、不屑的态度。她的采访稿信息量很丰富,采访对象包括了trans的父母,支持和反对affrimative care的专家,transitioned和detransitioned的亲历者,她梳理了对这些不同视角的意见,让我学到很多。但她的个人见解常常充斥着傲慢和肤浅。

这本书看似反trans,其实很多地方作者表露的观念体现出的深层文化,正是孕育了trans运动的环境动因。她自己还意识不到这一点。书中多处展现出她陈腐的性别观念,而且是以一种非常随意的方式被说出来,可见这些观念都被她完全内化了。比如,她提到某FTM网红晒自己第一次购买束胸的经历,那人在视频里戴上束胸后兴奋地尖声说,这是她人生最棒的一天。作者评论说:

Breasts may be painful reminders of one’s birth sex, but apparently shrieking is not.

更直白地翻译一下,她的意思是,这个FTM,表面上说自己是男性,但是在情绪激动的时候,尖叫了起来,完全忘记了只有女性才会尖叫这件事。她的评论中很显然对尖叫这件事抱有轻蔑的态度,然后她又把尖叫限制为了女性专属的特点,也就是说,她暗示,某个只有女性才有的特点令人鄙视。首先,男性激动的时候也大喊大叫,音调多尖算尖有待商榷,第二,她轻蔑的态度让我愤怒。

除了性别观念落后,作者还有另一个社会通病:她认为女性身体的被使用性要高于住在身体里的灵魂对身体的主权。我认为,这种影响了包括作者在内的大多数人的文化观念,正是把年轻女孩推向trans的主要原因之一。例子就是,她讨论穿束胸对年轻女孩胸部发育的危害,延伸到以后有了孩子会影响喂奶,完全意识不到自己话语的猥琐。

But try convincing a teenager that something she wants to do carries risks. Imagine telling her that she might not want to damage her breast tissue; that she might one day want to have children and, having birthed those children, to nurse them. It’s a little like informing her the sun will burn out five billion years in the future.

作者完全不懂得一个道理,每个人都在自己的身体里过自己的生活,只有身体的主人有权选择怎样使用自己的身体。她觉得女性因为要做“未来的母亲”,所以身体应受他人的监管。只要监管的出发点貌似正当,比如“为了孩子”,监管人就理所当然地攫夺了控制年轻女性身体的权力。后面她举了自己的例子,大一时为了穿衣服好看,想做缩胸手术,被父母劝阻了,后面遇到了“那个正确的人”,生了三个孩子,体验到母乳喂养是最棒的和孩子建立连接的经历,于是庆幸年轻的时候没有做那个手术。翻译一下,她的心路历程就是,年轻的时候,觉得身体的被展示性(展示给男人看)最重要,年纪大了以后,觉得身体的被使用性(被孩子使用)更重要,这就叫从一个大坑走进另一个大坑,从展览品到营养品,哪个功能也无关身体独立存在的价值。

她自以为站在未来的孩子立场上,就高出了任性妄为的年轻女性一头。为了孕育”更健康的孩子“,女性就应当让渡身体主权吗?其实恰恰相反,驯服于这套权力话语,任由别人控制自己的身体的女性,会成为最差的母亲。连身体自主权都没有,作为人的精神已经残缺了,长几个乳房有什么用。说句不好听的,猪圈里的猪长了十几个乳房,生的小猪还不都是任人宰割吃肉。失权的母亲生下的孩子,必然重复她失权的命运。

作者认为许多trans-identified teenage girls并没有gender dysphoria,而是受到了社交圈子的影响,觉得成为trans很酷。很多人十几岁时接受了性别纠正治疗(束胸、荷尔蒙等等),几年以后想重回生理性别时,身体已经受到不可挽回的影响。我没有试图否认这个问题的严重性和悲剧性,也不否认现在的解决方案存在种种缺陷。我反感的是作者展示问题的方式,她评论的态度,少有站在青少年的角度。她轻视青春期的挣扎,把少年的困境都归结于浅薄和轻浮。在我看来,她自恃为他人生命健康的保护者,但是根本不了解生命的需求,生命不是提线木偶,不会沿着某条“正确”的路径行进。

在我理解中,青少年的性别迷惑,其实是她在经历自我主体性的确认。特别是这个社会,到处都是把僭越、侵犯年轻女性身体主权当成常态的人,女孩总是更多地面对这个困境:为什么所有人都在试图限制、规划、控制我的身体,我的身体真的属于我自己吗,我究竟要怎么做,才能完全拥有我的身体?她在和父母、和社会观念斗争的过程中,想要争得的是处置自己身体的权利。有些人认为,青春期女孩不该接受雄激素注射,因为“她们的子宫还要生孩子”,青春期女孩不该做乳房切除,因为“她们的乳房还要用来喂奶”,青春期女孩不能接受性别重置手术,因为她们长大以后才会懂得自己的身体并不完全属于自己,而是对“未来孩子”、“未来爱人”的欠账。正是这种把女性身体和她的精神相隔离的文化观念,把青春期女孩推向了trans阵营,正是这种观念,让trans-identified青少年觉得来自作者那一辈的父母“toxic”,甚至跟父母决裂。

如果你说,affirmative care不合理,是因为它完全依赖于未成年人的自我诊断,而未成年人没有足够的心智去评价手术风险、足够的能力去承担性别重置的后果,这我完全赞同。但是,一件坏事,比如affirmative care,也不能用错误的理由去阻止它。“女人的身体不能由自己处置,因为你的身体状况影响着你的亲密关系,影响着你的后代”,这就是错误的理由。

在几个desist的案例中,家长带着性别迷惑的女儿休学一年,四处旅行,还有一个母亲把女儿送到马场工作了一年。这些教育的成功,在于它们通过增加未成年人和环境的互动,通过让她参与有真实影响力的创造性活动,弥合了她的精神和身体间的裂痕,加强了她对身体的控制感。这种教育是有益的,滋养的,这才应该是教育的方向,而不是向青春期女孩重复关于性别和身体的陈词滥调,试图弱化、否认女性的主体意识。

未成年人终会有成年的一天,到那个时候,她将会获得完全的身体自主权,并且承担完全的责任。人将完全拥有自己的生命,而行使完全的权利代表着承担全部的风险。需要承认,这个时刻必将到来。对未成年人的种种培养和教育应该为这个时刻做准备,而不是否认这个时刻的存在。谁能决定在什么时候,为了什么值得赌上生命,生命就属于谁。压抑生命的冒险,必然导致生命的窒息。

我对FTM trans运动的同情之处在于,我感到,在很多时刻,这是年轻女孩对于企图控制她身体的社会压力的拼死抵抗。我保留意见的部分在于,首先,我不认可“喜欢画画、跳舞的是女性,喜欢运动、电子游戏的是男生”这种无理无脑的角色强加;第二,我感觉随便地设定自己的identity,其实是种心理健康上的高危行为,几乎类似于没有经过训练就去高空走钢丝,许多人还意识不到自己在高空走钢丝。作者其实短暂地触碰了这个观念。她提到,心理学观察早就发现,青春期的女孩很容易对同性萌发恋情,过了青春期许多人又变回异性恋【1】。上一代经历这些的时候,只把它当成一个阶段,而这一代则要把每一点情绪、每一次恋爱,都分类,诊断,变成标签贴在自己身上。

Were it not for this compulsion to categorize and diagnose, minor bouts of anxiety, depression, obsession, romantic impulse, sexual inclination, and all manner of good and bad feelings might be left to grow, develop, change course, or die off.

由此延展一下,为什么我认为,往自己身上贴标签“我是XX人”的行为背后蕴藏的风险,被大大低估了呢?因为,身份关系着你的从属,而从属关系着你的生存【2】。如果一个人把随便什么东西都加到自己的身份里面,“我是个素食主义者”,“我是马拉松跑者”,”我是个同/异/双性恋”,那他就把这些生活里大大小小的事,都变成了性命攸关的事。于是改变饮食、改变锻炼习惯,改变恋爱对象,全都变成了生死抉择,这会让生活变得非常艰难。这也是为什么自称是“XX者”的人,总给人一种好斗的印象。外人看来的一件小事,因为关系到了identity,变成了生死存亡的威胁。他表现得激动、愤怒、那么不顾一切地反击,其实是在捍卫自己的性命。

我不是说,人不能认同自己的任何身份,而是说,选择性地考量,把最有价值的东西加到自己的identity里面去。这个世界上傻X加扯淡的东西太多了,如果你要挨个斗争,几辈子都斗争不过来,而人的精力是有限的,生命是宝贵的,所以要精挑细选,哪一件事是我的使命,要把有限的精力投入到最有价值的事情中去,用只有一次的生命捍卫最值得捍卫的东西。其它的事情,就让它们停留在从心选择的层面,保持它的随意性:我今天选择了去训练长跑,过去的五年选择训练长跑,但是也许未来有一天我突然就选择不再长跑了。在什么时候,做出什么样的选择,这个自由我永远保留。我觉得这种心态,类似于作者说的“left to grow, develop, change course, or die off”,也是我赞成的心态。

我觉得,trans运动,能在十年左右获得如此巨大的政治动量,有其迎合父权制性别模板的原因,更有一部分原因是它触发的心理危机=身份危机=生存危机,而人在生存威胁下,爆发出的求生本能中蕴藏着的巨大能量。但辩证地来看,使人刚强者,也使人脆弱。人在保护自己的死穴的时候能爆发出超人的能量,但是这种爆发对生命力是一种透支,而且死穴的数目越多,人只会越来越脆弱,越来越难以生存。给自己贴的标签越少越好,不要自己给自己制造阿喀琉斯之踵。简装上阵,更散漫,更自由,更有活力远途旅行,更有闲情游游逛逛,观赏路边风景。


【1】Adrienne Rich begs to differ。她认为“变回异性恋”往往反映着女性屈服于父权制的洗脑和暴力。出自《Compulsory Heterosexuality》

【2】原文是Identity is key to inclusion, and inclusion is key to survival. 出自《Gift of Fear》。