為什麼性不是解決健全主義的方法?

為什麼性不是解決健全主義(Ableism)的方法?
Why Getting Laid Isn’t the Answer to Ableism

◎◎感謝手天使翻譯志工 L-N Chen 翻譯◎◎

January 28, 2014 by Erin Tatum     Erin Taturm寫於2014.1.28.

 

Representations of disability in the media are unfortunately few and far between. What little exposure we do receive usually comes in the form of fluff pieces – tragic tales and inspirational stories.
很不幸地,新聞媒體對身心障礙者的相關報導不只數量稀少、內容亦不中立。我們所獲得的媒體關注,總以不怎麼重要的軟性方式展現─像是悲慘遭遇和勵志故事。

It goes without saying that our lives are a lot more complicated than that.
可是,毫無疑問地,我們的人生遠比那些軟性報導的關注來得複雜。

We face many issues that can’t be glossed over with a swell of uplifting music.
振奮人心的激勵樂曲無法掩蓋我們所面臨的困境。 

Growing Up into Infantilism
長大了,卻陷入幼兒症(Infantilism

 As a woman with cerebral palsy who uses a wheelchair, coming of age was…disappointing, to say the least.
身為患上腦性麻痺(cerebral palsy)、使用輪椅的一名女性,我的成長過程─退一步來說─是十分令人沮喪的。 

Like most teenagers, I was excited by the prospect of my first relationship. I had a lot of crushes and enjoyed flirting.
我跟大多數青少年一樣,對人生中的第一段愛情感到興奮;也迷戀過不少人、同時享受調情的過程。

Unbeknownst to me, I was expected never to move beyond the emotional and social needs of a young child. Accordingly, hardly anyone outside of the disabled community has ever taken me seriously as a potential romantic or sexual partner.
但我所不知道的是,人們不期待我能跳脫出一個幼小孩童的情感與社會需求。也因為這種不言明的期待,身心障礙社群外的健全人們從未認真地視我為潛在的戀愛或慾求對象。 

Able people often deal with their discomfort or lack of awareness about disability by imagining us as perpetual children, thereby claiming to shield us from harsh realities that our circumstances allegedly leave us ill-equipped to handle.
身心健全的人們往往想像我們是長不大的小孩,並以此種想像來處理自己對身心障礙人士的不自在感、或認知缺乏;進一步地,他們宣稱這是保護我們免於殘酷現實的傷害,因為─從他們的角度來看─我們殘缺的身心狀態使我們無法自我保護。

Since people with disabilities are routinely infantilized, we have an applied universal asexuality assigned to us by the status quo that never really disappears.
在這種情況下,身心障礙人士往往被幼兒化(infantilized);而我們無法擺脫的身心現狀,使得一套宇宙通用的無性(asexuality)概念套用在我們身上。 

(Note: I fully acknowledge and respect those in the disabled community who do identify as asexual. I am commenting on the sexual erasure of disabled people of other orientations who are falsely presumed to be asexual.)
(作者附註:我完全意識到、並尊敬那些自認為無性的身心障礙人士。我是針對有其他性傾向、但被誤認為無性的身心障礙人士的’情慾去除'(sexual erasure)一事,來做評論。)

The “intimacy gap” only widened as I got older.
隨著我逐漸長大,”親密關係隔閡”(intimacy gap)卻不斷加劇

By the time I was in college, it seemed like everyone who wanted to have sex was having sex. Or at least, they were recognized as having the freedom to make their own choices about their relationships and their bodies.
等到我上大學,所有想要有性行為的人似乎都能獲得滿足。或者,至少一般觀點認為他們能對自身的親密關係與身體做出自由選擇。 

I didn’t even know what I wanted, but what I resented most was the complete degradation of my own agency. Everyone laughs at the idea that disabled people could have any desire.
我不確定我想要什麼,但我非常厭惡人們對我的自主代理能力(agency)的全然貶抑。每個人都嘲弄著”身心障礙人士會有任何慾望”此一想法。 

Even sympathetic friends have repeatedly made it clear that how far I go in any relationship depends on the compassion and open-mindedness of the other person, as if my sexuality is grotesque to the point where only bleeding heart saints would dare tolerate it – and I would be forever indebted to them for doing so.
That didn’t exactly feel empowering.
每個同情我的朋友都反覆強調一個觀點:我的情感關係完全取決於對方的憐憫與開放心胸;彷彿我的情慾著麼畸形扭曲,唯有心腸過軟的聖人才敢容忍─而我永遠虧欠他們施捨的’寬容’。
這樣的感覺,遠遠無法讓人自我增能(empowering)。

 Portrayals of Disabled Sexuality in the Media
媒體對身心障礙者的情慾刻劃

 Sick of the condescension, I turned to documentaries and films to see how they handled the topic. Predictably, they reinforced many of the same attitudes.
受夠了屈遵俯就的態度,我轉向紀錄片與電影來看看此二類媒體型態如何處理身心障礙與情慾關係的議題。可以預料到的是,這兩類媒體同樣傾向強化上述的狹隘態度。

Yes, it’s a good thing that they show disabled people as sexual beings with (somewhat) natural desires.
當然,紀錄片和電影能把身心障礙人士視為是帶有(某種程度)自然渴望的情慾之人是很好的一件事。 

However, they use this guise of liberalism to reassert able superiority and reaffirm the deviance of disabled sexuality to the audience, confirming the very stigma that they claim to be breaking down.
只是,這類自由主義態度不過是種掩飾、他們重新向觀眾伸張健全者的優越性,以及身心障礙者之情慾的異常性。此種作法,反倒強化了他們宣稱企圖去打破的刻板印象。 

For examples, check out Scarlet Road and Sex on Wheels.
紀錄片型態的電影’Scarlet Road’與’Sex on Wheels’,便是這類代表。 

The Sessions is probably the most popular illustration of these themes, about the relationship between a provider of commercial sex and her virginal middle-aged client disabled from polio, but the reviews were so rife with ableism and glorification of the provider’s “selflessness” that I admittedly couldn’t bring myself to watch it.
除了上述兩片之外,’性福療程’(The Sessions)或許是闡述相關主旨中、最受歡迎的電影。該片主軸建立在一名性工作者與一名患有小兒痲痺症的中年處男客戶的關係之上;而影評中處處可見的健全主義,以及對該名性工作者的’無私’精神的歌頌,在在都使我不願去看那部電影。 

Any frank discussion of sex and disability will almost inevitably fall back on a certain narrative: The disabled person is tired of being a virgin and hires a provider of commercial sex, either as a defiant rebuff of social norms or out of sheer loneliness and a desire for physical contact.
顯而易見地,任何關於性和身心障礙者的坦率論述往往落入既定窠臼:身心障礙者想擺脫處子之身而選擇性交易,是出於對社會規範的反抗、或僅僅是因為孤獨、和渴望肢體接觸。

Bonus points if the person’s parent helps set up the exchange and the crew wastes no opportunity to underscore how creepy that is.
而如果該名身心障礙者的父母能幫助促成此一交易,則更為影片的一大亮點;與此同時,影片人員更抓緊機會、來強調這種交易的詭異程度。  

Expect heavy emphasis on how the disabled person will have all of their social problems disappear once they lose their virginity. We’re just bitter because we’re so horny!
除此之外,在這類型的影片裡,也可預期身心障礙者的所有社會問題,隨著他們失去處子之身而解決。彷彿我們的尖酸刻薄,全來自我們對性的飢渴!

The provider of commercial sex will be elevated to sainthood at every turn. Viewers just can’t seem to get enough of how they can bear to have sex with disabled people, instead of acknowledging them as merely having a good attitude towards their job.
與此同時,性工作者則躍升為聖人。觀眾似乎只關注這些性工作者竟然能忍受與身心障礙者發生性行為,而意識不到他們只是在做自己的工作罷了。

So as not to appear callous, the narrative will milk the sympathy angle. The provider of commercial sex will talk at length about the extent of the inexperience of their disabled clients, however unintentionally framing themselves as the able savior who is going to free the disabled person from repression.
另外,為了避免表現得太過冷酷無情,影片的敘事手法總是從同情的角度出發;在片中,當性工作者大談特談他們的身心障礙客戶多麼缺乏經驗的同時,他們便不小心地把自身標榜成將身心障礙者從社會壓抑中拯救出來的健全者。

The Consequences of Spectacle
被當做奇觀的結果

 To be clear, I have nothing against a disabled person’s choice to work with a provider of commercial sex, nor do I think that the provider intends to come off as patronizing.
老實說,我對身心障礙者選擇性交易沒有意見,也不認為性工作者故意對此類客戶擺出高姿態。

A lot of ignorance exists around sex and disability, and the provider of commercial sex is(unfairly) looked to as the all-knowing expert.
對於性和身心障礙者間的關係,人們仍然相當無知;而在這種情況下,性工作者(不公平地)被視為是全知的專家。

The problem lies in the way it’s presented, encouraging the audience to gawk and giggle.
問題的根源在於這個議題是如何呈現在大眾面前:它往往是以讓觀眾瞠目結舌和咯咯傻笑的方式。

Providers of commercial sex face enough prejudice already without being made into a spectacle for their choice of clientele. There appears to be many similarities between the portrayals of providers who cater to particular fetishes and those who cater to disabled clients.
除卻其特殊顧客的選擇之外,性工作者已遭遇到相當多的偏見。即使是在描繪性工作者與戀物癖者、或和身心障礙客戶之間的關係時,兩類關係有許多相似之處。

The implication is that we are still supposed to understand their clients as abnormal and unworthy of the mainstream. The progressivism only comes into play when we build up an ambivalent tolerance rather than outright repulsion.
這兩類關係都隱含著我們仍視該類型客戶為異常、且不值得主流價值關注。唯有當我們真正建立對好惡衝突的寬容─而非公然表達嫌惡時─進步主義(progressivism)才能發揮作用。

We can breathe a sigh of relief that we don’t have to feel guilty for allowing our biases to facilitate the sexual repression of pitiful undesirables.
到這個程度時,我們才能鬆口氣,因為我們無需再為自身偏見所促成的、對令人同情的怪異份子的情慾壓抑感到罪惡。

By viewing providers of commercial sex who work with the disabled as essentially the garbage men of society’s cringe-inducing sexual underbelly, you degrade both the provider of commercial sex and the disabled person.
把與身心障礙者進行交易的性工作者當做處理社會上怪異情慾的清潔人員,只會同時貶低性工作者與身心障礙者。

Regardless of how anyone else perceives them, the provider’s professional relationships with their clients likely hold a great deal of significance. Labeling them as simply “taking one for the team” by working with disabled people glosses over the complexity of these bonds.
不管他人如何看待,性工作者與客戶間的專業關係自有其重要性。把他們與身心障礙者間的關係視做”為團隊犧牲”,只會掩蓋此一關係的複雜程度。

In addition, no matter how honestly the subject is handled, the disabled person’s sexuality usually remains disrespected. They may have gained street cred, but we are constantly reminded that they only achieved momentary sexual validation through elaborately orchestrated, almost painfully sterile circumstances.
除此之外,無論如何直率地處理這類議題,身心障礙者本身的性慾仍不受尊重。或許他們從中獲得某種程度的認可,但我們仍常常受到提醒:我們的情慾是透過刻意策劃、在無法生育的痛苦情況下,才獲得認可。

At the end of the day, no one is actually meant to start perceiving disabled people as desirable.
到頭來,沒人真心視身心障礙者為渴求的對象。

 The cultural stigmas go unquestioned and loom larger. We’re merely comforted and impressed by the fact that a few disabled people have the resources/privilege to achieve fleeting oppression transcendence.
文化污名仍然未受挑戰且持續增強。我們所感受到的單薄安慰與印象,全來自於少數幾名身心障礙者能有資源/特權、來暫時性地超越社會壓迫。

The ‘Radical’ Reinforcement of an Ableist Status Quo
健全主義現狀的’激進’強化

 Now you may be thinking, “Erin, why are you rambling on about a few obscure documentaries? Surely their messages can’t be getting much traction.”
現在,你或許在想:”Erin,為什麼你一直在談論少數幾部晦澀的紀錄片?他們的訊息不可能獲得太大迴響。”

What’s scary is that these pieces are supposed to be the cutting edge of gritty disability exposé, finally cutting to the heart of the genuine social struggles faced by people with disabilities.
但問題是:這些紀錄片本該勇於揭露、真誠探討身心障礙者面臨的社會掙扎及議題本質。

Even in these alleged moments of radicalism, the idea persists that we just can’t have a sexuality without it being distorted or misappropriated through an ableist lens.
即便是紀錄片中所謂的激進時刻,身心障礙者的性慾也跳脫不出健全主義觀點的扭曲或濫用。

If we’re virgins, we’re sad. If we seek providers of commercial sex, we’re desperate. If we pursue casual sexual conquests and succeed, we’re delusional caricatures of sluts and womanizers.
如果我們保持處子之身,我們便是悲傷的一群。如果我們求助性工作者,我們是如此孤注一擲。若我們追求一般的流連花叢之中、並成功的話,我們是浪蕩女和花花公子的狂想諷刺版本。 

It’s true that able people face the same sex-related stereotypes to an extent, but with nowhere near the same level of snide mockery.
的確,健全的人也面對某種程度的性刻板印象,但遠不及我們所遭受到的惡意嘲弄。

Adding insult to injury, this tongue-in-cheek skepticism is rendered benign because remember, we’re children, and children apparently have no grasp of the reality of social interactions. But it sure is hilariously adorable when we think we do!
在傷口上灑鹽的是,那些言不由衷的懷疑主義被當做是從善意的角度出發。因為─記得嗎─我們是一群不能長大的小孩;而且小孩不會了解社會互動的真諦。只是,如果我們真的這麼想的話,才真的是荒謬可笑!

That’s the core of the issue. The most intimate portrayals of our lives and desires do nothing to dispel the myth that disabled people are socially inferior.
這正是問題所在:即使(媒體)詳細描繪我們的生活和慾望,那並未解除身心障礙者是低等社交層級的迷思。

They naturalize these biases as not only correct but harmless since the able community is gracious enough to provide us with an outlet.
當健全社群自認為仁慈地提供身心障礙者這樣一個發洩管道時,他們將上述偏見自然化成一件正確且無害的事。

Sex is all we need, right?
畢竟,性就是我們所有人都需要的,不是嗎?

If people want to hire a provider of commercial sex, that’s their decision.
如果人們決定進行性交易,那是他們的選擇。

However, that shouldn’t be viewed as our only option.
但是,這個選擇不該是我們的唯一選項。

What if we don’t want just sex? What if we want conversation? dating? a spouse? What if we just want to flirt with some attractive people and have them be flattered instead of disgusted or amused?
如果我們想要的不只是性愛呢?如果我們想要的是親密對話?約會?另一半?如果,我們只是想要和有魅力的人調情,且對方會覺得高興、而非噁心或發笑?

You can’t selectively ignore all the other social prejudices that disabled people face just because you think you found a one-size-fits-all solution to one aspect of one problem.
你不能選擇性地忽視身心障礙者所面對的其他社會偏見,只因為你以為你找到了針對單一問題、單一面向的通解。

Orgasms can’t erase ableism.
身體高潮無法抹去健全主義的存在。

Ableism exists on an institutional, social, cultural, and everyday level.
健全主義制度化地存在於社會、文化、和日常生活之中。

While sex can be perceived as a fundamental human experience, helping someone get laid as a means to assuage collective guilt from the mainstream and “allow” disabled people to believe that they’ve achieved social equality is (no pun intended) fucking ridiculous.
當性被視為人類基本經驗的同時,把幫助某人獲得這類經驗、當做減緩主流團體的集體罪惡感的手段,來”允許”身心障礙者相信他們取得社會平等,(沒有雙關語意涵)乃是一件該死地滑稽之事。

By fixating on sexual experience as the Holy Grail of basic humanity, the able community lazily sweeps ableism under the rug to avoid critiquing their own privilege.
把性經驗當做基本人性的聖杯,健全社群以為能就此對健全主義視而不見,以避免其特權遭受批判。

We are repeatedly called upon to beg for breadcrumbs of legitimacy.
我們不停地反覆懇求健全社群給予我們一點點正當性。

I’ve had numerous crushes delight in “humoring” me by asking me to make a case for why I think they should find me attractive, with the forgone conclusion that they never would.
許多人試圖透過問我:”為何他們應該覺得我是有魅力的?”此一方式來讓我感到”幽默”的同時,卻抱持著”不會覺得我有魅力”的既定結論。

I’m a sexy, strong woman regardless of ability.
無論我身心健全與否,我就是個性感、強壯的女人。

No one should ever be expected to prove their desirability. If your partner ever acts like they’re doing you a favor by tolerating being with you, head for the hills.
人們不應該期許他人去證明自身是值得渴求的。若你的另一半表現出”忍受跟你在一起,是在施捨你恩惠”的話,趕快閃遠遠的吧!

Not to mention the countless other deeply entrenched inequalities impacting people with disabilities  – difficulties with poverty, unemployment, and housing to name a few – that easily eclipse matters of the heart, but that’s another article for another day.
更不用說其他圍繞在身心障礙者身上、無數根深蒂固的不平等─舉例來說,貧窮、失業、和居住問題─在在都讓人心碎,而這需要另一篇文章來做討論。

 The media attempts to raise awareness of disability, albeit misguidedly. For that, I am grateful. But it doesn’t mean we can wash our hands of a marginalized community after a few minutes of education.
儘管有誤導的嫌疑,我仍然感謝媒體企圖提高人們對身心障礙者的認知。但這不表示:在少少幾分鐘的教育之後,就可以不再理睬一個被邊緣化的群體。

Don’t let yourself get wrapped up in the feel-good story.
別讓你自己沈溺於那些讓自身感覺良好的、關於身心障礙者的故事上。

Look for the subtle implications of the message. In lieu of passively indulging in the spectacle to remain within your comfort zone, turn that same level of scrutiny on the social norms themselves.
看看隱藏在那些訊息之下的社會意涵。相較於關注社會奇觀、讓自己處在自身的舒適圈之中,還不如把同等的關注轉移到質疑社會規範上。

People with disabilities deserve to determine their own relationships. Intimacy, whether sexual or otherwise, is an essential human craving that shouldn’t be policed or allocated in degrees according to an arbitrary social hierarchy. It’s about communication, closeness, and just the pure joy of sharing an experience with someone.
人們應該要讓身心障礙者決定自己的人際關係。親密感─無論關乎情慾與否─是基本的人性渴求,不應該受到獨斷的社會層級的監督或配給。它是關乎溝通、接近程度、和某人分享一段經驗的純粹喜悅。

Getting laid is awesome, but it isn’t the end-all, be-all for everyone.
性是很棒的一件事。只是,對每個人來說,性不是最重要的事。

Erin Tatum is a Contributing Writer at Everyday Feminism. She’s a feminist, queer theory lover, and television enthusiast living in Pennsylvania. She is particularly interested in examining the representation of marginalized identities in media. In addition to Everyday Feminism, she’s also a weekly contributor to Bitch Flicks.  Follow her on Twitter @ErinTatum91 and read her articles here.
Erin Tatum是Everyday Feminism的特約作家,住在美國賓州的女性主義者、同志理論支持者、和電視愛好者;特別喜愛檢視媒體如何呈現邊緣化身分。除了Everyday Feminism之外,她也每週投稿於Bitch Flicks.

註明:文章引用自http://everydayfeminism.com/2014/01/getting-laid-isnt-answer-to-ableism/?utm_content=buffer279f5&utm_medium=social&utm_source=facebook.com&utm_campaign=buffer

您可能也會喜歡…

2 個回應

  1. admin表示:

    這是來自國外的影片~可以看看不一樣的聲音。

  1. 2014-06-18

    sacs longchamp soldes

    為什麼性不是解決健全主義的方法? – 手天使

留言

%d 位部落客按了讚: