原创译文｜有没有一种叫做女权主义整容的东西？
↑ 点击上方“21D会客厅”关注我们
本文大概
1500
字
读完共需
3
分钟
有没有一种叫做女权主义整容的东西？
原作者：Dave Taylor
►我们生活在一个开明的时代，我们都知道不应该随意通过表面上的东西（例如外貌）去评价别人－－特别是女人。我们也知道，在这个充斥着警报, 微型歧视（micro-aggression）以及女权反抗的时代，我们更绝对不应该去谈论一个女人的外在。在今天，即使是经典的丑小鸭故事也变得越发可疑了，因为它的主题似乎是关于身体羞耻的。
►尽管如此，流行文化则传递着别的信号。电视台教人穿衣打扮的真人秀(譬如，“不要穿什么What not to wear”）则仍然是基于评判女性的外貌－－并且在那基础上去把她们从丑小鸭变身成白天鹅的。名人杂志也不停地分析着明星们哪个部位动了刀子，他们甚至请来整容医生去诊断某些明星是否做了整容，而大部分答案当然是肯定的。
☝Style by Jury 也是一档教人穿衣打扮的电视节目
►最近争议整容这件事的一个新的导火索是之前出演过《欢乐合唱团》的娜雅里维拉小姐。在她即将出版的自传《道歉不道歉》中，她透露自己在18岁之前进行了隆胸手术，并把这个决定归类为“我花过的最值得的8000美金。”她甚至还透露她兴奋地把这件事告诉了高中老师。没想到我的艺术老师也特别兴奋，她说她的胸也是假的,她为我激动。
☝《欢乐合唱团》明星娜雅里维拉
►里维拉小姐可没有把她自己当作父权文化标志的消极受害者。“我的新乳房是关于自信的，不是关于性的。”她如此写道，当然当她留意到学校里的男生们在她做了隆胸手术回到学校后，“争先恐后地关注着是谁帮我开门，” 这件事她也并不介意。
►不过一对假胸真的可以使得女性赋权么？卫报上几年前的一篇文章认为可以。“你可以是一个隆了胸的女权主义者吗？反正我是。”这就是乔迪阿普尔顿那篇文章的题目。她在文中提到她在怀孕后对自己的胸部特别不满意，她写道她的乳房再也没有那种“沐浴在神圣的光与空灵天使们的背景乐合唱着他们的可爱了“。结果她就去隆了胸。不仅如此，她还希望她作为女权的姐妹们能赞成她的做法：“我们这些经过手术改变的女性可以加入身体自主者协会吗？还是我们偶然触碰了女权意识形态的障碍,并且让女权们失望了呢。”她如此问道。
►如果通过她这篇文章下面的留言做评判的话，根本没有一个清晰的答案。“把自己放在一个手术之下去实现身体的美让我觉得是完全悖离女权的理念的，因为它表明这个人没有能力超越认同及遵守性别方面的社会压力。”一个评论者如此抨击到。“你可以是一个隆了胸的女权主义者，就像你可以是一个拥有二套房的社会主义者，或者是一个狠狠打死了苍蝇的佛教徒。是，我们都不一定能活成理想中的样子－－但也别指望着还能被表扬。”另一条如此评论。
►胸部提升和隆胸仍然目前在我国还是最受欢迎的整形项目。我们也能知道这是为什么。莎拉米勒在给男性健康杂志撰稿时提到了她本人拥有天然大胸女人的经历，她认为男性把女性的胸部看作“整个世界的焦点。男性的注视掠过我所有塑造个人风格的尝试，迫不及待得直奔乳房。”科学研究也表明她是对的；今日心理学报告说，“法国的一群研究者们安排了胸部不同size的女性，并且让她们去咖啡馆里独自坐着。实验表明和女性搭讪的男士的数量是伴随着胸衣的尺码的上升而上升的。”另一个在新西兰实施的研究也用了眼神追踪科技，发现呢，男性确实在讲话的时候更关注女人的胸部而不是她的脸。
►当然，如果和多数女权主义者一样，你拥护一项惩罚对女性美的欣赏的这样一种世界观却还隆胸，这确实是让人有点惊讶，或者只是一个文化现象罢了。隆胸手术是不是一个女权的行为？谁在乎呢？让女性自己做关于他们外貌的选择（以及她们愿意在上面花多少的时间和精力）。或者使用莎拉米勒给全世界男性提供的那些简单的建议：“让我们做笔交易吧！我们会穿上低领口衬衫...如果你们能保证认真听取我们穿着低胸衣时所说的每一句话。”
➜原文：Is There Such a Thing as Feminist Plastic Surgery?
We live in enlightened times and we know we’re not supposed to judge people—especially women—by superficial thing such as their appearance. We know, in an age of trigger warnings, micro-aggressions, and feminist protests, that we’re never supposed to discuss how a woman looks. Today, even classic fairy tales, such as “The Ugly Duckling,” are suspect—the theme is body-shaming, after all!
And yet, pop culture often serves up a different message, with reality TVmakeover showssuch asWhat Not to WearandStyle by Jury, that judge people (mostly women) for what they look like—and promise to transform them from ugly ducklings into swans. Celebrity magazines frequently dissectstars’ appearancesfor signs of cosmetic enhancement, even calling on plastic surgeons to offer their opinions about whether or not someone had work done (short answer: Usually, yes).
The latest entrant in the debate over plastic surgery is formerGleestar Naya Rivera, who clarifies what’s truly important to her in her soon-to-be-releasedbiography,Sorry Not Sorry.In what is sure to be a literary masterpiece, Rivera reveals in the book that she had breast enhancement surgery when she turned 18. Sheclassifiedthe decision as “the best $8000 I’ve ever spent.” She even tells readers that she was excited to tell her teachers at her high school about her plans for enhancement: “’I’m getting plastic surgery!’ I’d tell them gleefully. . . . My art teacher was stoked—when I told her she said that she too had fake tits and that she was very excited for me.”
Ms. Rivera didn’t see herself as the victim of oppressive patriarchal cultural standards. “My new boobs were a confidence thing, not a sexual thing,” she writes, although she also notes that she didn’t mind that the boys at her school “practically fell over themselves rushing to see who could hold the door open for me” when she returned to school, post-boob job (See? Chivalry isn’t dead!)
But can fake boobs really lead to female empowerment? Writing in theGuardiana few years ago, Jody Appletonarguedthat they could. “Can you be a feminist with a boob job? I am,” was the title of her essay, which explored how unhappy she was with her breasts after pregnancy; evidently they were no longer “bathed in divine light with a background song of ethereal angels chorusing at their loveliness,” so she had them enhanced. And she wants her feminist sisters to endorse her choice: “Can we surgically altered ladies join in with or body autonomy? Or have we stumbled at an ideological hurdle, and let down the cause?” she asked.
Judging by the comments on her essay, there isn’t a clear answer. “Putting oneself through an operation to achieve the body beautiful strikes me as being contrary to the idea of being a feminist, since it shows an inability to rise above societal pressure to identify and conform to one’s gender,” one commenter sniped. “You can be a feminist with a boob job, just as you can be a Socialist with a second home or a Buddhist who swats flies. We all fall short of our ideals—but don’t expect a pat on the back,” another wrote.
Breast lifts and breast augmentation remain themost popularcosmetic procedures. And one can see why. Writing forMen’s Healthabout her experience as a (naturally) large-breasted woman, Sarah Millerarguedthat men view women’s breasts as “the very focal point of the entire world. The male gaze flies past all my attempts to craft an individual style and makes a beeline for the breasts.” Science shows she’s right; asPsychology Todayreported, “French researchers fitted women with various size padded bras and then sent them to cafés where they sat alone. As bra size increased, so did the number of men who approached them.” Another study conducted by researchers in New Zealand used eye-tracking technology to show that men do, in fact, often talk to a woman’s breasts rather than to her face.
Of course, this is only a surprise—or a cultural problem—if, like many feminists, you subscribe to a worldview that punishes the appreciation of female beauty. Is breast enhancement a feminist act? Who cares? Let women make their own choices about what they want to look like (and how much they want to spend on their appearance). Or just take the approach Sara Miller did when she offered some simple advice to the world’s men: “Let’s cut a deal. We’ll wear nothing but low-cut shirts . . . if you promise to listen to everything we say when we’re wearing them.”
释义：
micro-aggression, 中文翻译为微侵略或微冒犯，意思是在语言或肢体方面对特定对象轻视排挤，这个词最早在1970年代由哈佛大学非裔教授皮尔斯所提出。