Sunday, May 19, 2019

墮胎的道德爭議──「生命權」是否比「身體自主權」更重要?



刊登於關鍵新聞網 2019/05/18
近日美國阿拉巴馬州議院通過一項墮胎禁令,除非對孕婦身體健康有直接危害,否則全面禁止醫生協助孕婦墮胎。不罰孕婦、只罰醫生,而且是重罪(felony),最高可判處99年的徒刑。被強暴、或與近親發生關係的的婦女也不例外。

這篇文章裡,我會摘要地分享一篇支持墮胎權利的文章: 湯普森(Judith Jarvis Thomson) 的「一個支持墮胎的論證」(A Defense of Abortion. )。[1][2] 這篇文章的重要性不只是在支持婦女墮胎權利,也對各種權利概念、以及日後哲學思想實驗的發展,有深遠的影響。對墮胎議題及政治哲學有興趣的讀者都可以參考。

墮胎的道德問題很廣──男性是否能墮胎 (不要負擔生養教育的責任)? 要生孩子時,要有多時金錢、時間上的資產準備,才夠資格生? 單親媽媽生產之後如何邊帶小孩、邊工作養小孩? 小孩沒錢上學要找誰? 政府或是納稅義務人是否有義務協助?──這邊我無法討論所有生小孩相關的道德問題。這篇短文裡,我只針對相關的公共政策/立法問題做出討論。

孕婦是否能墮胎,主要會直接影響到母親身體自主權(right to bodily autonomy) 以及胚胎的生命權(right to life)。

墮胎之所以會產生道德問題,主要是因為胚胎 (fetus) 是否為「人」(human/person) 的爭議。支持婦女墮胎權利者們主張,由於胚胎不能算是一個「人」,因此,墮胎與殺人無關,也就沒有道德問題。另一方面,反對者主張,不論哪一個階段的胚胎──24小時大的受精卵、還是九個月大、快出生的胚胎──都是人,因此,也都擁有生命權。由於墮胎會造成胚胎的死亡,因此,墮胎就是殺人,就是不道德的。

文章一開頭,湯普森就先說明,她並不完全同意反對者們的前提。她認為,一顆「受精卵」,顯然不能算是一個人。儘管如此,她還是願意先接受反對者的前提,先假設胚胎就是一個人。她考慮的問題是:假設胚胎可以算是一個人好了,這就表示女性就沒有墮胎的權利嗎?

反對者主張,因為胚胎是人,所以他/她有生命權。墮胎會影響胚胎的生命權,因此不應該墮胎。不能墮胎,並不會影響婦女的生命權,頂多影響到她們的身體自主權。生命權和身體自主權比起來,生命權更加重要。因此,我們應該禁止婦女墮胎。雖然會禁止婦女墮胎,會影響到她們的身體自主權,但是與生命權比起來,身體自主權並沒有那麼重要。

湯普森提出了幾個知名的思想實驗,來推翻「生命權比身體自主權重要」的這個論點。這邊介紹其中一個關於「知名小提琴家」(famous violinist)的思想實驗。請讀者們試著想像下面的情景:

有一位知名的小提琴家生病了,他需要輸血才能繼續活下去。但是,他血型特殊,不是每個人都能捐血救他。小提琴家的粉絲們不知從哪裡得知,你是唯一一個能輸血救他的人。於是,他們趁你熟睡的時候,綁架了你。醫生不知道事情的來龍去脈,就把你放在他旁邊,讓你輸血給他。你醒來時,發現你正在輸血給小提琴家,維持他的生命。這時候,你有權利可以離開,不要救小提琴家嗎? 

你一離開,小提琴家沒有你的血,他就會死。他有權利要求你留下來嗎? 

讀者可以先想一下自已的答案,再繼續看下去。

-----------------------------------------(五分鐘分隔線)--------------------------------------------------

一般來說,絕大多數讀者的反應是,你有權利離開。雖然小提琴家是個人、也有生命權,但是,他並沒有權利可以要求你不能離開。你有人身自由權,你沒有欠小提琴家什麼,你不願意留下來,大家不能說你違反小提琴家的權利。如果你願意留下來,那大家會稱讚你真是個慈悲的大善人。

換句話說,即使一個人有生命權、或是「活下去的權利」,這並不代表他就能限制他的人身體自主權。

如果你覺得你有權利可以離開、沒有義務要留下來,小提琴家沒有權利要求你留下來的話,這表示你並不相信「生命權大於身體自主權」。

也就是說,即使我們承認胚胎是一個人,這也不表示女性就不能墮胎,因為女性對自已的身體有自主權,而這個自主權,並不會因為我們承認胚胎是一個人,就可以剝奪走的。

這個論證適用於所有非自願情形下懷孕的孕婦,包括遭到性侵、或是節育失敗而懷孕的婦女。




[2] Judith Jarvis Thomson, “A Defense of Abortion,” Philosophy and Public Affairs, Vol. 1, No.1 (Autumn, 1971), pp. 47-66.


Tuesday, April 2, 2019

與孩子們討論約會強暴

孩子在長大,社會在進步。

2019/04/02刊登於關鍵評論網與孩子們討論約會強暴

我想與關心性別平等、擔心孩子被騷擾、霸凌的朋友們,分享一下這一個禮拜我上課時,觀察到的一些正面的改變。

我在台灣找不到工作,所以這幾年來一直在國外工作。我自己本身並沒有研究女性主義或是性別平等。但是平常看電視新聞,聽到不管是台灣還是美國,孩子們上學,或是年輕人求職,居然會受到各種欺凌、甚至約會強暴。本來我以為性別歧視、騷擾,是我這個年代的女人才會碰到的問題。但是實在太常在公開或是私下的場合,聽到學生被同學或是老師欺負。因此我開始意識到,應該要想辦法教導孩子們正確的觀念、學習尊重他人,保護自已。

2018年我在通識課上第一次和學生討論關於約會強暴的主題,關於課程內容,有興趣的朋友可以參考我這篇文章: 約會強暴的舉證責任[1]。想瞭解課程內容的朋友也歡迎與我交流經驗,交換意見。

我第一次論討約會強暴就被驚嚇到了,因為我一切換到這個主題的投影片,講沒多久,就有一兩個女生突然匆忙地離開教室。上課之前,已經有一位女學生跟我說她有創傷後症侯群,希望那兩堂課可以不要去教室,在家裡看錄影就好。我也答應她。我班上也不到七十個學生,居然有三個人明顯地感到不舒服。還不知道有沒有人直接不來,只是沒跟我說。

我當時使用的教材,包括兩篇學術論文[2],以及網路上一篇匿名投稿、關於約會強暴的第一人稱敘述故事,[3] 作者是一位自稱是受害者的Grace。故事中的「加害人」是一位美國知名喜劇演員Aziz Ansari。故事大致描述兩人如何在頒獎典禮上認識,然後第一次約會,男方就急著對對女方上下其手。女方委婉地表達希望可以慢慢認識交往,男方還是繼續不停的肢體觸碰。

有些人可能會質疑,這個故事只表達了女方單方面的說法,而女方可能是想紅,所以鬼扯自已被知名影星性侵。但事實並非如此。首先,女方想紅的話,應該會出面。Grace至今仍然沒有出面。此外,關於故事內容的真實性,男方是有回應的。男方並沒有否認女方對他們約會經過的任何描述,他只否認他有性侵Grace。

也就是說,相同的行為、動作,女方覺得十分不舒服,而男方卻認為她是願意的。

我讓學生讀這個網路上沒有學術性、甚至有點八卦性質的文章,不是要他們去從事道德審判,而是要讓他們看看在實際生活中,約會強暴那麼常發生,就是因為約會雙方對彼此意願的認知上,可能有相當大的差距。

我請學生針對這個故事,回答兩個問題。

問題一:故事中,女方是否有表達過她的同意? 如果有的話,請把不管是行為上或語言上她表達同意的證據列出來。

問題二:女方是否被強暴或性侵了?

理論上,答案一和答案二其實應該要有直接關聯,答案一決定答案二:如果女方同意,那麼就是合意性交、不是性侵。如果女方不同意,那麼就是不是合意性交、而是性侵。就這麼簡單,幹嘛分成兩個問題呢?

因為我們有一個很奇怪的社會文化,答案一不一定決定答案二。

由於受到社會文化的影響,很多同學的答案一和答案二是無關的。大多數同學們讀完故事後,都認為女主角並沒有同意。那麼,同學們的答案二,應該就是要回答說,女主角被性侵了。

比較奇怪的是,有不少同學主張,女方雖然沒有同意與男方發生關係,但她並沒有被性侵。

如果她沒有同意與對方發生關係,卻被對方發生關係,那怎麼會不算性侵呢?

這些同學的看法是,如果女方不想要與男方發生關係的話,她不應該期待男方要去揣測、推敲她的想法、或是徵得她的同意。她應該要鄭重地跟對方大聲說「不」、或是趕快逃離現場、或是趕快拿手機起來報警。

也就是說,有不少人認為,如果想要與他人發生性行為,不需要先詢問對方的意見,直接開始就好。對方不想的話,讓對方來想辦法拒絕你即可。

我為什麼要叫學生讀一個八卦網站上的小道消息呢? 因為所有的約會強暴故事,都是這樣的故事。性別不平等的社會裡,社會期待男性要積極地展開攻勢,而女性若不願意發生性行為,有義務要極力掙扎。你如果因為傻了、楞住了、呆掉了,嚇死了,害怕激怒對方,因而沒有極力掙扎,大聲呼救,那麼,男士沒注意到你不願意發生性行為,也不能怪他們,因為男性的天性就是要到處打獵追逐。男人就是要強硬才夠man,有禮貌的男人會被視為娘娘腔。女人說不要你就停止就不夠man。女人喜歡說謊,說「不」就是「要」的意思。

就是這樣的信念,造成許多約會強暴。那些受害者唯一的問題,就是不知道要怎麼樣說「不」。由於當時沒有反應過來,不知道怎麼樣才能不要搞的很難看,所以他們不敢大聲說不。

不敢大聲說「不」,就應該被性侵嗎?

老實說,除非已經準備好要這個人翻臉,不然正常應該沒有人會直接大聲說「不」吧?搞的好像對方是強暴犯,而我們需要喝斥他?

因此,不少人們在不情願的情況下,由於一時想不出要怎麼樣才能拒絕對方,又不讓對方感到不舒服,因此,只好忍一忍,被迫與對方發生關係。

而大家完全不覺得對方應該先問他的意見,看他是否同意。

在討論完這故事後,我再介紹那兩篇學術論文的論點,都主張在發生性行為之前,應該要徵得對方的同意。有興趣的朋友可以參考先前提到的文章。

當然,社會上仍然有不少人覺得這樣的論點很荒謬。哪有人發生性行為之前,還要問對方意見的?

做為老師,我的工作,是把正反意見擺在桌上,讓你自已決定誰的意見比較合理。你要怎麼過你的人生,是你自已決定的。

但我希望我的學生可以懂得尊重他人、保護自已。

接下來的那個學期,我另一個班上有個女孩,平時表現良好,但是有一陣子開始沒來上課。後來有一天,她寫電郵給她的授課老師們,說明她沒來上課,不是因為她很懶,而是因為那幾天是她受暴一週年,對她來說不太好受。接下來她好一陣子沒來上課,有天我又收到她email,說雖然學校懲罰了她的施暴者,但是檢察官決定不起訴。她沒有怨天尤人,而是呼籲我們這些老師,請我們想辦法,看能不能做些什麼,讓這樣的事不要再發生。

本來我只在通識課裡加這段關於約會強暴的討論,但因為這女孩的呼籲,我開始覺得有必要每堂課都要討論。這學期倫理學課,我把我用的教材做成精簡版,在上課的時候與同學們討論。

這次上課的時候,發現很多孩子已經有這個觀念了: 要接觸他/她人身體之前,應該要先詢問,徵得對方的同意,不應該自己想做什麼,就做什麼。

當然這也不是我教他/她們的。應該是其它也關心孩子安全的老師、家長們教的。

這個觀念是我們這些上一個世代的人所沒有的。很多人的觀念仍然停留在男生就積極主動、窮追不捨,女生說「不」的真實意義是其實是「你要再積極一點」。女生也只能百口莫辯。

我覺得看到孩子們自已說出,要做什麼之前,要先問對方的意見。我覺得他們好棒,他們懂得尊重別人。

孩子們,因為你們懂得尊重別人,這個世界變的更安全、更美好了。




[2] Nicholas Dixon, “Alcohol and Rape” Public Affairs Quarterly, Vol. 15, No. 4 (Oct., 2001), pp. 341-54. https://www.jstor.org/stable/40441305?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents
 Lois Pineau, “Date Rape: A Feminist Analysis,” Law and Philosophy, Vol. 8, Nol. 2, (Aug., 1989), pp. 217-43. https://www.jstor.org/stable/3504696?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents

Saturday, March 2, 2019

Teaching Sensitive Issues to a Sensitive Audience

Teaching Sensitive Issues to a Sensitive Audience

I want to share a story about an email that I once received from an unknown colleague. The email depicted me as a conservative, judgmental, and biased instructor. Naturally, it caused a lot of stress in my life. What is shocking is, although he has never met me, the colleague described in vivid detail what he believes was going on in my mind.
The incident happened on a Friday during the second week of the semester. My colleague, Professor A, had come to visit my class at noon. As a member of my bi-annual review committee, he had a duty to produce a report on my performance, including my teaching performance. Originally, I was worried that, because the lecture took place on a Friday, students may be eager to leave the classroom and not pay attention to my lecture. Luckily, students were very interested in the topic and many raised interesting questions and comments during the lecture. They were not in a hurry to leave after class ended because they became so interested in the topic. I felt very good about my class and felt relaxed because I expected that I would have a good report on my teaching.
I was not wrong. Below are two paragraphs taken from my report; I received this report a couple of months later after that Friday lecture. (I didn’t know that I would receive the report. But because of a recent change, the report has become available among colleagues in my department.)

The three members of the committee each visited a different class session. One faculty member reported the following:
Students were initially reticent but Lee adapted, eliciting a show of hands on a basic question that served as a springboard for a lively discussion. Lee engaged productively: seeking clarification from students where needed, challenging them to defend their views, and encouraging expression of a range of views. Even as students warmed to their themes, Lee managed to keep the increasingly lively conversation on track, both topically and in terms of ensuring a range of students were heard. By the time Lee moved on to another case study, students were pushing to join in the discussion rather than having to be pushed. It is not at all easy to elicit and manage such lively and productive discussion in a large class; especially in the traditional fixed seat, amphitheater style venue of [classroom/building]. That Lee was able to get a discussion going at all is impressive, and her ability to tease such productive debate out of an initially reluctant crowd is outstanding.
Another reported:
Professor Lee started with a recap of the previous class, and questions were asked and answered before moving on. What was particularly impressive was that Lee got students to talk to each other, not just to her. She managed the discussion sensitively and efficiently, even when dealing with issues such as abortion and capital punishment. The class went over time, but not because of mismanagement on Lee’s part. It was because the students didn’t want to end the discussion.


The first paragraph is written by a colleague, Professor B, who observed my other class, and the second one is written by Professor A, who attended the said Friday lecture. From the report, you can see that my colleagues see positive value in my Socratic midwifery—I try to help students examine their views by challenging them to respond to possible objections and consider their opponent’s views. Some assume that, in the humanities, professors just give lectures and indoctrinate students. No, that is not what we do. My job is not to tell students what is right and wrong. My job is to train them to evaluate the pros and cons of any theory and become independent critical thinkers. This means I raise questions frequently, not because I intend to question my students, but because I want to help them to reflect on the merits and problems of their views. Also, a lot of times, I ask questions simply because I don’t understand a view and need some clarification.  
Later that day, I received an email from a colleague at a different department. I’ll call this colleague Professor M. Below is the email from Professor M.

Dear [My title and full name],

One of my advisees, Student A, is in your [arts and humanities] class. We were talking about how he feels like he is treated differently from other students in the class and I thought I would write to you to help him feel more comfortable in the class and explain why he is feeling this way. 
Student A has told me how he participates and shares ideas in class, having prepared and understood the material, but has been consistently misunderstood by you.  He feels that he is asked to clarify more often than other students and has also had his comments taken out of context.  He is feeling like he is being criticized or not valued while other students do not seem to get such treatment. 
As an example, when discussing Cultural Relativism and the issue of infanticide among Eskimos, someone had asserted that it was wrong because women could have less children by refraining from sex.  He had commented that according to the book, women did not have such choice because men had power in their society, including over sex, however it was taken out of context and the reaction was as if he had said women could not control themselves. 
When I suggested that [Student A] talk with you about this, he told me how he did try to explain how he was feeling and was misunderstood. He felt that instead of addressing the reaction to his participation, the conversation became about whether or not he understood the material.
[Student A] has social anxiety and is feeling discouraged from participating in class. As he does not see this treatment occurring with other students' comments, he feels targeted. He has not felt this way in his other classes before including other Philosophy courses.
I am hoping you have some ideas of how [Student A] can feel comfortable sharing ideas in class without feeling like he is treated differently from other students or that you are regularly assuming he means something different from what he is trying to express.
I'd like to hear your ideas or if you feel more comfortable calling, my extension is [00000] and I will be in the office [from time to time]   

[Professor M]

I was shocked to hear all these descriptions about my mental state from a total stranger. That is not how I felt at all. All these descriptions make assumptions about my mental content, which he has no way of knowing. I know how I felt and that simply is not how I felt.
I was entirely clueless as to what it was that I did that made Student A think that I had all these feelings. I am perfectly sure that I didn’t make any comment about his view of women. I am also perfectly sure that I didn’t feel that way because I simply don’t feel that way. When I teach, my focus is on the arguments of both sides and I try to keep the discussion focused on the argument so that we don’t deviate to unrelated issues. In any case, the lecture was not about women’s sexual desire at all.
I received this email on the same day Professor A visited my class. As I mentioned earlier, I thought it was quite a good lecture, so I was shocked to hear these comments. However, I was eager to learn why Student A felt this way because I thought everything went well—he participated in the discussion as usual and I did not feel that anything was wrong. I emailed Professor M back and asked to meet him in person. Readers might wonder why I said that I have never met him. Long story short, after my request, Student A was concerned that he had upset me and requested that Professor M call off the meeting. Student A wanted to talk to me before I talked to Professor M. I emailed them both to say that I could meet them individually or together.  
The following Monday, I saw student A before I entered the classroom. He was probably waiting for me outside the classroom. When I saw him, I smiled at him and said hi. Immediately he asked, “Are you mad at me?” I was puzzled by this question because I just saw him two seconds ago and nothing happened during those two seconds. Why would I be mad at him? I said “No, what do you mean? Why would I be mad at you?” He seemed relieved. Then he told me that he wasn’t feeling well and would like to take a break on that day. I told him that it was okay. I remind him to watch the lecture video recording and submit the writing assignment as soon as he can. I also told him that I hope he feels better soon.
Later that day, after I was done with my lectures, I realized that when Student A asked: “Are you mad at me?” He was not concerned about what he did that day but about Professor M’s email to me. He was worried that I’d be mad at him because he talked to his mentor about me.
Actually, I don’t blame him for suspecting that I was targeting him. There are two reasons. First, I have a friend who also suffers from anxiety. She can no longer work because she believes that everyone is targeting her. My understanding is that (and I might be wrong) some people are very sensitive about other people’s feelings and this may affect how they view people’s comments, tending to interpret comments and responses in a negative light. Second, I can see why he may feel targeted because I ask lots of questions. I never counted, but I probably did ask him more questions. However, that is not because I was targeting him. I probably just didn’t understand his view and was asking him to clarify, or I was again practicing the Socratic Method. If you read Plato, then you know why people say Socrates was like a gadfly.
More than a week later I saw Student A sitting in the back of the classroom. I smiled and waved at him. After setting up the projector, I walked to him and asked if I could speak with him briefly outside. He nodded. We walked out of the door. I told him: I understand that I might have asked you a lot of questions, but it’s because I don’t understand your view. It is just my teaching method. I ask a lot of questions. And I’m likely to ask you a lot of questions again in the future, so try to get used to it.
He nodded. And he really understands. It was as simple as that. From that day on, life goes back to normal. He would walk with me after the lecture to discuss his views on the reading and share what he feels are funny comments in the lecture. He also emails me and shares with the class things he finds interesting. He was enjoying the class. Once in a while, he would email me and tell me that he was not feeling well because of his anxiety. However, overall, he seems to enjoy the class. He got an A, as I expected.
Three things I did right. First, I record all my lectures. Some might think that I probably did make judgmental comments to my students. Otherwise, why would he say all these things about me? For those who do not believe that I can conduct a fair lecture, I invited you to watch my lecture recording. They are both educational and entertaining.
I know that many colleagues are concerned that, if lectures are recorded, then students will stop showing up to class meetings. This is a valid concern. My solution to the attendance problem is to give students in-class assignments. They can submit these assignments only when they are in class or have valid excuses.
Second, I have colleagues in my field to observe my teaching. You can tell from the report that they see educational value in my challenging my students. I teach controversial issues and it is not uncommon for professors to get into trouble because students simply misunderstand the lecture. Some believe they heard the professor saying something politically incorrect when the professor was only giving an example of a possible objection without endorsing that view. In teaching controversial topics, one must present the views of all sides. Students sometimes take the view of one side to be ours, which is a misunderstanding that can ruin one’s career.
Most importantly, I talked to the student. He’s new to my classroom, so he did not know anything about me or my Socratic midwifery. I do raise a lot of questions and objections in my classes because this is how we train critical thinkers. I challenge students not because I disagree with them, but because I want to train them to become critical thinkers who know all sides of the story.
At the end of the day, the most important thing in my life is not a stranger’s comment about me, but my student’s well-being and my career. I love teaching, and just like most colleagues in higher education, I love my students. Most of the time when I got out of the classroom, I was smiling because some students had made funny comments and I realized they had learned something. I felt very blessed to have a job that brings me satisfaction and a sense of achievement. It is a privilege to be in a position to help young minds grow. I hope that my experience can be useful to colleagues who also teach controversial topics.