第2章迷思与实情

CHAPTER TWO Myths and Realities

Those who set off down the path of exploring new kinds of relationships and new lifestyles often find themselves blocked by beliefs—about the way society should be, the way people should be—that they both deeply rooted and examined.

针对亲密关系、人生模式，那些试图探索不同道路的人，往往会被自己的一些观念所阻挠，由此自我设限。这些观念，涵盖了“社会形态应该如何”、“亲密关系应该如何”、“每个人应该如何”。没有人对此追问缘由，处处无理可讲，却又在众人心中根深蒂固。

We have all been taught of one way of relating—lifelong monogamous heterosexual marriage—is the only right way. We are told that monogamy is “normal” and “natural”; if our desires do not fit that constraints, we are morally deficient, psychologically disturbed, and going against nature.

我们从小到大，都被反反复复地灌输：“一男一女、终身不渝、坚决排斥第三者的亲密关系，才是唯一的正道。”大家都反复对我们讲：“性独占是理所当然、天经地义的。”如果我们的欲望，和专偶制的约束发生冲突，那就意味着，是我们“缺德”，是我们“失心疯”，是我们“悖逆天理”。

Many of us feel instinctively that something is wrong with this picture. But how can you dig up and and examine a belief that you don’t even know you hold? The idea of lifelong monogamy as the only proper goal for relationships is so deeply buried in our culture that is almost invisible: we operate on these beliefs without even knowing we believe them. They are under our feet all the time, the foundation for our assumptions, our values, our desires, our myths, our expectations. We don’t notice them until we trip over them.

一般来说，我们大都会凭借直觉地感到，上述的“人生图纸”，分明有些不对劲儿。然而，如果你明明一直都在抱着某个观念不放，却对这种状态浑然不觉，那么，你又如何能够把那个观念“挖出来”，进行审视？“一对一、一辈子，这是爱情唯一的美好归宿”，这个执念深深埋藏在我们的文化之中，无处不在，却又无形无影——我们浑浑噩噩地遵照着这个执念行事，即使嘴上说“我不相信专偶制是宇宙真理”，也会在实际的言行举止上，处处践行之。我们的种种设想、种种价值观，种种欲望、迷思和期待，都以一对一的封闭爱情观作为基准，专偶、排他的执念，就像我们脚下的大地。除非因此碰了钉子、掉进沟里，否则我们很难对此有所警醒。

Where did these beliefs get started? Often, they evolved to meet conditions that no longer exist.

上述的执念，究竟源于何处？它们往往是为了适应一些特定的境况，由此演化而来，而那些与之相匹配的境况，如今已然不复存在。

Our beliefs about traditional marriage date from agrarian cultures, where you made everything you ate or wore or used, where large extended families helped get this huge amount of work done so nobody starved, and where marriage is a working proposition. When we talk about “traditional family values”, this is the family we are talking about: an extended family of grandparents and aunts and cousins, an organization to accomplish the work to staying alive. We see large families functioning a tradition ways in America today, often in cultures recently transplanted in other countries, or as a basic support system among economically vulnerable urban or rural populations.

我们关于传统婚姻的信条，源于农耕文化。在农业为主导的时代，你的日常饮食和生活用品都需要自己动手制造。如此庞大的物资需求，往往需要有个庞大的家族，众人通力合作，才能免受饥寒。而婚姻，是大家族共同劳作得以实现的一个要件。所谓的“传统的家庭价值”，就是祖孙几代人，包括七大姑八大姨等，为了协同劳作而组织起来，赖以维生。至今在美国，我们依然可以看到一些大家族，有着传统的结构和功能——通常而言，不是来自不同文化背景的晚近移民，就是城乡皆有存在、因经济过于薄弱而需要家人之间相互帮扶的群体。

Curiously, controlling sexual behavior didn’t seen to be that important outside the propertied class until the Industry Revolution, which launched a whole era of sex-negativity, perhaps because of the rising middle class and the limited space for children in urban cultures. Doctors and ministers in the late eighteenth century began to claim that masturbation was unhealthy and sinful, that this most innocent of sexual outlet was dangerous to society—nineteenth-century childrearing manuals show devices to prevent babies from touching their genitals in their sleep. So any desire for sex, even with yourself, became a sinful secret.

令人好奇的是，有产阶级之外的人群，自古以来并没有把针对性行为的控制，当作一件非常要紧的事——直到工业革命时期，才开启了一个彻头彻尾的反性时代，史无前例。之所以如此，或许是因为中产阶级的激增，以及城市空间太过狭小，容不下更多的儿童。从18世纪末起，众多医生和官员，声称手淫有害健康，是一种神憎鬼厌的罪孽，而且，这种按常理来说最为安全的性释放途径，竟然被视为危害社会。为此，19世纪的育儿手册，向家长兜售各种方法，来防止婴幼儿在睡觉时触碰到自己的阴部。在这种环境下，所有的性欲望，包括和自己发生的性行为，都变得鬼鬼祟祟、充满羞耻感。

But human nature will win out. We are horny creatures, and the more sexually repressive, the more outrageous its convert sexual thoughts and behaviors will become, as any fan of Victorian porn can attest.

但人的天性，终究是拦不住的。我们是充满各种性欲望的活物，社会文化对性的压制越多，那些和性有关的思想，会更加“出格”地反转，激进理念纷纷涌现；那些和性有关的行为，也会变得更加“出格”，性压抑的表象下，充满了性狂欢的暗流。每一个维多利亚时期色情品的粉丝，都是明摆着的例子。

In his lectures to young communists in Germany during the rise of Hitler and the Nazis, psychologist Wilhelm Reich theorized that the suppression of sexuality was essential to an authoritarian government. Without the imposition of antisexual morality, he believed, people would be free from shame and would trust their own sense of right and wrong. They would be unlikely to march to war against their wishes, or to operate death camps. Perhaps if we were raised without shame and guilt about our desires, we might be freer people in more ways than simply the sexual.

当希特勒和纳粹甚嚣尘上之时，德国心理学家威廉·赖希（1897~1957）在一次面向青年共产主义者的演说中，理论化地阐明“以公序良俗道德风化之名，对性的压制，是专制威权赖以植根的土壤”。赖希相信，那些反性仇性又无理可讲的所谓公序良俗，一旦被瓦解掉，民众就不再以性为耻，同时，人们也会遵从自己的内心来分辨是非善恶——这样，就很难发动违背民意的战争，死亡集中营也无法运行。看来，如果我们在毫无性羞耻感和性罪恶感的环境下长大，我们除了性爱本身，也会在其他的很多方面，都更加开明。

The nuclear family, which consists of parents and children relatively isolated from the extended family, is a relic of the nineteenth-century middle class. Children no longer work on the farm or in the family business; they are raised almost like pets. Modern marriage is no longer essential for survival. Now we marry in pursuit of comfort, security, sex, intimacy, and emotional connection. The increase in divorce, so deplored by today’s religious right, may simply reflect the economic reality that today most of us can afford to leave relationship in which we are not happy; nobody will starve.

核心家庭——由父母和孩子组成，和大家族的长辈尤其是旁支成员分开过日子——是20世纪中产阶级的标志，遗留、延续至今。孩子从小不再下田劳作或参与家族生意，而是几乎像宠物一样被养大。现代的婚姻，不再是生存的必需。如今，我们结婚的目的，是为了追求舒适、安全、性爱、亲密，和情感联结。备受当今宗教右翼所谴责的“离婚激增”，或许也只是经济现状的一种反映：我们当中的大多数人，和相看两厌的伴侣关系断舍离，没啥大不了的代价，独自生活不成问题，谁也不会因此挨饿。

And still modern puritans, perhaps not yet to deal with frightening prospect of truly free sexual and romantic choice, attempt to enforce the nuclear family and monogamous marriage by teaching sexual shame.

也有一些活在现代的清教徒冬烘先生，试图通过宣扬“性爱是可耻的”，来强化核心家庭和一对一的婚姻制度。或许，对于真正的自由——自由的性爱，和对浪漫关系的自由抉择——他们没有做好准备，对此前景感到恐惧。

We believe current set of “oughta-be’s” and any other set, are cultural artifacts. We believe that Nature is wondrously diverse, offering us infinite possibilities. We would like to live in a culture that respects the choices made by sluts as highly as we respect the couple celebrating their fiftieth anniversary. ( And, come to think of it, what makes us assume that such a couple is monogamous anyway? )

我们相信，自古至今那些“应当如何”的规范，和其他各种规训，都是人们基于特定文化的建构产物。我们相信，大自然充满了美妙的多样性，为我们提供了无限的可能。我们期待能够生活在这样一种文化之中：自愿成为婊子的人，和正在举行金婚庆典的忠诚伴侣，有着同样的尊严，都被社会所充分接纳。（再说，也需要反思一下，我们为啥会把持续五十年的婚姻，预设为一对一的封闭关系呢？）

We are paving new road across new territory. We have no culturally approved scripts for open sexual lifestyles; we need to write our own. To write our own script requires a lot of effort, and a lot of honesty, and is the kind of hard work that brings many rewards. You may find the right way for you, and three years from now you want to live a different way—and that’s fine. You write the script, you get to make the choices, and you get to change your mind, too.

我们正在为步入新的领域，铺就新的道路。在现有的文化体系中，缺乏能够为性开放的生活方式提供支持的“脚本”；这样的“脚本”，我们需要由自己来书写。书写属于自己的人生脚本，需要披荆斩棘的艰辛探索，需要直面现实的坦荡胸怀，同时，你也会从中获得丰厚的回报。你将有望找到真正适合自己的道路，并且下定决心为三年后的自己，开创一种前所未有的美好生活。你写下属于自己的“脚本”，作出属于自己的抉择，你的三观也会与之俱进。【“脚本”之喻，显然源自“性脚本”（sexual script）之说。此说由美国性社会学家盖格农（John H. Gagnon，1931-2016）及其合作者，于1972年首次提出。性脚本理论认为：每个人和性爱有关的种种行为（比如在什么时间、场合，怎样调情、做爱，等等），并不是天生的、“自然而然”的，而是基于由社会文化和个人境遇，所不断叠加生成（或曰建构）的“脚本”。不同的社会文化，往往有着截然不同的性脚本；社会文化的变迁，也会改变人们的性脚本。盖格农在1977年的Human Sexualities一书中，对性脚本理论详加阐述，此书在内地有李银河的译本：《性社会学：人类性行为》。——译者注】

练习题：我们所知与所爱的婊子

EXERCISE Slut We Know and Love

Make a list of people you can think of who are not monogamous, including characters on TV, movies, book, and so on. How do you feel about each of them? What can you learn (positive or negative) from him or her?

关于“非专偶”的爱情，你能想到哪些人？包括在书中或者影视作品里看到的。把你能想到的人（可以是任何性别），列出一个清单吧。对其中的每一个人，你分别是怎样的感受？从ta们之中的每个人身上，你能够得到那些启迪？（可以是正面的，也可以是负面的。）

对婊子的评判

Judgment about Sluts

As you try to figure out your own path, you may encounter a lot of hash judgments about the ways different people live. We are sure you don’t need us to tell you that the world does not, for the most part, honor sluthood, or think well of those of us who are sexually explorative.

当你试图对自己的人生道路进行明确的思考和抉择，你难免会听到外人种种尖刻的风言风语，对“与众不同”的生活方式严厉谴责。当今的世界，绝大多数的场合，都对自甘淫荡之人很不友善，对勇于探索“性事”之人，没啥好脸色：这个事实即使我们不说，大家心里也都明白。

We will probably find some of these judgments in our own brain, burrowed in deeper than you ever realized. We believe that they say a lot more about the culture that promotes them than they do about any actual person, include you.

或许你会发觉，其中的一些评判言辞，已经内化在你的脑海中，其根深蒂固之甚，远远超出了你的理性感知。我们相信，包括你在内，每个人所说的话，往往都会有意无意地遵循社会文化的期待标准，但说出来的东西，和实际上的行为，则是“两张皮”，二者无法等同。

评判1：“淫乱纵欲” “PROMISCUOUS”

This means we enjoy too many sexual partners. We’ve also been called “indiscriminate” in our sexuality, which we resent: we can always tell our lovers apart.

这个评判性的词汇，指的是我们和太多的人，享受过床笫之欢。我们由此被描述为“不分是谁，人尽可夫”。这样的评判，令我们愤慨，因为我们一直能将每一个性伴侣，都辨认得非常清楚。

We do not believe that there is such a thing as too much sex, except perhaps on certain happy occasions when our options exceed our abilities. Nor do we believe that the ethics we are talking about here have anything to do with moderation or abstinence. Kinsey once defined a “nymphomaniac” as “someone who have more sex than you” and, scientist that he was, demonstrated his point with statistics.

在笔者看来，所谓的“性爱纵欲过度”，纯属瞎扯淡，除非是——也许存在这样一种美好的情形——我们所选择的目标，超过了我们当下的实际能力。此外，笔者也并不认为，我们字典里的“伦理道德”，或曰理直气壮做个婊子的心理支持因素，和禁欲，以及所谓的“性节制”，有半毛钱的关系。性学家金赛（1894~1956）曾把心理学中的“慕男狂”或曰“女色情狂”一词，定义为“那些性经历比你更丰富的讨厌鬼”。须知，作为一个科学家，他在说那番话时，列举了相关的统计数据。

Is having less sex somehow more virtuous than having more? We think not. We measure the ethics of good sluts not by the number of their partners, but by the respect and care with which they treat them.

难道性爱越少，人品越好？我们无法苟同。在笔者看来，婊子的人品，不在于性伴侣数量多寡，而在于能否与性伴侣相互尊重、相互关爱。

评判2： “道德败坏” “AMORAL”

Our culture also tell us that slut are evil, uncaring, amoral, and destructive：Jezebel, Casanova, Don Juan. The mythological evil slut is grasping and manipulative, seeking to steal something—virtue, money, self-esteem—from his partners. In some ways, this archetype is based on the idea that sex is a commodity, a coin you trade for something else—stability, children, a wedding ring—and that any other transaction constitutes being cheated and betrayed.

我们所处的文化氛围，总在对我们如此洗脑：万恶淫为首；没有专一的性，就没有真正的情感关爱；生活作风问题就是道德问题、人品问题；纵欲伤身，色是刮骨钢刀，强撸灰飞烟灭。文学作品中，如《圣经》中心肠恶毒、信奉多神异教的以色列王后耶洗别——最终被反对者掷出窗外活活摔死（见《旧约·列王纪》）；如欧洲传说中的西班牙登徒子唐璜——各种版本的故事，都往往以悲剧告终：这些都仿佛成了“淫荡者道德败坏、害人害己”的例证。事实上，这些纯属虚构的登徒子，承载着社会文化对性爱开放者的偏见——故事中，那些背负着类似“婊子”、“骚货”骂名之人，往往性格贪婪，并且充满对别人的操控欲望，试图通过自己的伴侣，来牟取性爱之外的种种名利，如美名、财富，乃至自尊心或曰自我成就感。这类虚构的艺术形象，其原型在某种意义上讲，植根于这样的社会观念：性是一种商品，是交换其他物品的货币；通过性，可以换来稳定关系、子嗣儿孙，和象征着婚姻关系的戒指。除此之外，其他类型的与性相关的社会交换，则被视为欺骗和不忠。

We have rarely observed any Jezebels or Casanovas in our community, but perhaps it is not very satisfying for a thief to steal what is freely given. We do not worry about being robbed of our sexual value by the people we share pleasure with.

就笔者所知，像耶洗别这样的贪财恶女，或者像意大利传奇风流才子卡萨诺瓦（1725~1798）那样，从混迹上流社会玩弄贵族妇女牟取自身利益，到众叛亲离、性病缠身而孤独终老，这种品行的烂人，在现实中的婊子社群中，反而极其罕见。或许是因为，窃贼一旦面对不求回报的给予，反而会觉得自己“走了空”，什么赃物也没得到，或者说，在这种场合根本没有油水可捞。我们从不担心自己对性的珍爱，会被与我们共享快感之人所“盗走”。

评判3： “逆天悖理” “Sinful”

Some people base their sense of ethics on what they’ve been told that God, or their church, or their parents, or their culture, believes to be okay or not okay. They believe that being good consists of obedience to laws set down by a power greater than themselves.

所谓的伦理，对很多人而言，无非是根据长期以来被灌输的宗教观念，或者家庭教育，及社会文化，来确定“什么可以做，什么不可以做”。这类人真正信仰的，是自己打不过、惹不起的强权；对这类人而言，行善包含着对强权的服从。无论强权者制定什么王法，他们都会遵旨照办。

Religion, we think, has a great deal to offer to many people—the comfort of faith and the security of community among them. But believing that God doesn’t like sex, as many religions seem to, is like believing that God doesn’t like you. Because of this belief, a tremendous number of people carry great shame for their own perfectly natural sexual desires and activities.

我们晓得，宗教对于很多人而言，有着举足轻重的影响：在信仰中得到身心安宁，维系着信徒社团的安定。很多信徒认定上帝不喜欢性爱，这无异于认定：上帝不喜欢你。照此观念，数量庞大的人群，都对自己自然而然产生的（或曰上帝赐予的）性欲望和性行为，背负着沉重的羞耻感。

We prefer the beliefs of a woman we met, a devoted churchgoer in a fundamentalist faith. She told us that when she was about five years old, she discovered the joys of masturbation in the seat of the family car, tucked under a warm blanket on a long trip. It felt so wonderful that she concluded that the existence of her clitoris was proof positive that God loved her.

笔者遇到过一个虔诚的教堂常客，一个逐字逐句笃信圣经“原典”的女人，她的某些观点，令笔者击节赞叹。这个女人曾告诉笔者，5岁那年，在一次乘坐自家汽车的旅途中，她盖着保暖的毯子，发觉在椅子背上自慰，能带来美妙的快乐。她由此得出的牛逼结论是：我拥有阴蒂，是上帝爱我的如山铁证。

评判4： “精神疾病” “PATHOLOGICAL”

When psychological studies of human behavior came into vague in the late nineteenth century, Krafft-Ebing and Freud attempted to create more tolerance theorizing that sluts are not bad but sick, suffering from psychopathology that is not their fault, since their neurosis derives them from having their sexuality warped by their parents during their toilet training. So, they said, we should no longer burn the sluts at the stake but instead send them to mental hospitals to be cured, in an environment that permits no sexual expression at all, healthy or otherwise.

19世纪晚期，针对人类行为的心理学，成为时髦的显学，克拉夫特-埃宾（1840~~1902，性学创始人，奥地利精神病学家），和稍后的弗洛伊德（1856~~1939），都试图创立一套理论，把对性有“出格欲求”之人，也就是本书中广义的婊子，从“坏人”中剔除，代之以“病人”的帽子——“被病拿的”，这不是病人的罪错；而他们的“神经症”，则是源于小时候，父母没有对他们做好上厕所的训练，从而导致“性扭曲”。为此，性学先驱们呼吁，对婊子，不要把ta们绑在木桩上烧死了，或者说，不要以刑法处罚ta们了；替代方案是，把他们送到精神病院里进行治疗：在针对ta们的精神病院里，任何涉及到“性”的表达——无论是“健全的性”，还是“变态的性”——都被决然禁止。

During your authors’ childhood and adolescence in the early 1960s, it was common practice to certify or incarcerate adolescents for “treatment” of the “illness” of being sexual, especially if they were gay or lesbian, or female and in danger of damaging their market value as virgins. This sort of thing still takes place more often than you might think. More recently we hear about sex addicts, avoidance of intimacy, commitment-phobia, and attachment disorders. These terms were created to describe genuine problems, but they are far too often used as weapons in a moral war against all sexual freedom.

在本书作者的童年和青春期，也就是1960年代之初，常有这样的操作：将因“性反常”而被认定“有精神病”的青少年禁闭起来，以此作为“治疗”方式。那些男同性恋、女同性恋，被认为有问题的女生，以及挑战“处女是婚姻市场的嫁妆”这一主流价值观的人，更容易被认定为有病，遭到禁闭。时至今日，这种情况依然时有发生，比你所预想的更为严重。时至今日，我们依然会听到诸如“性成瘾”（sex addicts）、“对亲密关系的逃避”（avoidance of intimacy）、“恐惧责任承诺”（commitment-phobia）和“依恋障碍”（attachment disorder）等说法。上述词汇的产生，是为了描述真实的问题，但是在更多情况下，它们被用作反对性自由的“道德战争”杀器。

The whole idea of sex addiction is a controversial one: many people feel that word “addiction” is not well suited to discussing behavioral issues like sex. However, everybody seems to agree that substituting sex for fulfillment of other needs—to allay anxiety, for instance, or bolster sagging self-esteem—represents a problem.

关于“性成瘾”的全部说法都备受争议：不少人觉得，用“成瘾”一词来描述任何一种行为——包括但不限于性爱——都不甚适合。不过，大概人人都同意，如果把性爱，作为填补另一些欲求不满的替代品，非此不足以缓解焦虑、重振自尊，那就确实是个问题了。

Only you can decide whether your sexual behaviors have become compulsive and whether you wish to change them. Some people try to validate their sexual attractiveness over and over, using sex as constant reassurance because they do not see themselves as inherently attractive or lovable. Sex can be used as a substitute for connection. Sex can be the only coin valuable enough to attract attention and approval.

你的性行为，是否已经变成了一种自我强迫，以及，你是否想要改变上述状况，都是只有你本人才能确定的。有些人一而再、再而三地试图确认自己的性魅力，把性爱用作一种无休止的确认方式，因为他们从骨子里就缺乏“我生而可爱”的自信。性爱会被用作情感连接的代替品。性爱可以沦为唯一一种用来换取别人关注和赞赏的“货币”。

Some twelve-step groups and therapists who subscribe to the addiction model may try to tell you that anything but the most conservative of sexual behaviors is wrong, or unhealthy, or “into your addiction”; we encourage you to trust your own beliefs and find yourself a supportive environment. Sexual Compulsive Anonymous and Sex Addicts Anonymous encourage you to define the healthy sex life you want for yourself. If your goal is monogamy, that’s fine, and if your goal is to stop seeking sex in the place of friendship, or any other behavior pattern that you wish to resculpt , that’s fine too. We do not believe that successfully recovering sex addicts have to be monogamous unless they want to be.

一些（针对成瘾戒断的）十二步疗法小组及其治疗师，关于成瘾模型的理念，和所能给你的建议，都无非是劝你遵循最为保守的性爱方式，除此之外的其他性行为，都是错误的、病态的，以及“令你成瘾的陷阱”。我们鼓励你遵从内心的呼唤，为自己找到一个支持性的环境。“性强迫者的匿名互助社区”和“性成瘾者的匿名互助社区”都会鼓励你：为你真正想要的“健康的性”，作出个性化的定义。如果你的目标是建立专偶制的亲密关系，这没有任何问题；如果你的目标是不再从朋友圈里寻求性伴侣，或者是你想要重新塑造的其他行为模式，这些也同样没有任何问题。笔者从不认为只有步入一对一的亲密关系，才算是戒断“性瘾”成功，除非这是你自己想要的结果。

评判5：“为人轻浮” “EASY”

Is there, we wonder, some virtue in being difficult?

轻浮又咋啦，难道有啥好德性，非要以负重前行、举步维艰，作为前提吗？

关于婊子的迷思

Myths about Sluts

One of the challenges facing to the ethical sluts is our culture’s insistence that, simply because “everybody knows” something, it must obviously be true. We urge you to regard with great skepticism any sentences begins “Everybody knows that…” or “Common sense tells us that…” or “It’s common knowledge that…” Often, these phrases are signposts for cultural belief systems that may be antisexual, monogamy-centrist, and/or codependent. Questioning “what everybody does” can be difficult and disorienting, but we have found it to be rewarding: questioning is the first step toward generating a new paradigm, your own paradigm of how you ought to be.

想要理直气壮地做个婊子，摆在面前的一大挑战，是我们的文化氛围，都在顽固地坚持“大家普遍认可的东西才是对的”。对此，我们强烈建议你，对一切带有“众所周知”、“普遍认定”的句子，都不妨在心里多打几个问号。这样的句子，往往会把你引领到社会主流文化所生成的信念系统中：反黄反色情之类的性压制、坚持一对一的封闭关系，才是正路；乃至，两口子任凭怎样的恩怨纠葛、相爱相杀，都坚决不要分手。质疑“所有人都这样做”的事，难免困难重重，并且令你感到迷失、惶惑。但是，上述质疑所能够带来的收获，却更加丰厚：唯有迈出“质疑”这一步，才能开创一个全新的生活范式，建立一个属于你自己的价值坐标。

Cultural belief system can be very deeply rooted in literature, law, and archetypes, which means that shaking them from your personal ethos can be difficult. But the first step in exploring them is, of course, recognizing them. Here,then, are some of the pervasive myths that we have heard all our lives and have come to understand are most often untrue and destructive to our relationships and our lives.

社会主流文化所生成的信念系统，往往在文艺作品、法律法规，以及真假杂糅的典型人物形象中，都有深入骨髓的植入。这意味着，将其从我们的三观中甩掉，难度实在不小。针对于此，我们重新谱写自身新篇章的第一步，莫过于先要辨识出社会文化信念系统的“雷区”。下面是一些典型的“雷区”或曰迷思：它们遍布社会的各个角落，我们从小到大都会无数次听到看到，但笔者晓得，在绝大多数情况下，这些话语不但充满谬误，而且足以毁坏我们的亲密关系，乃至我们的人生。

迷思1：只有长期的专属，才是真正的亲密关系或曰爱情，除此之外都是虚情假意

MYTH #1: LONG-TERM MONOGAMOUS RELATIONSHIPS ARE THE ONLY REAL RELATIONSHIPS

Lifelong monogamy as an ideal is a relatively new concept in human history and makes us unique among primates. There is nothing that can be achieved within a long-term monogamous relationship that can not be achieved without one. Business partnership, deep attachment, stable parenting, personal growth, care and companionship in old age are all well within the abilities of the slut.

“理想之爱，就是一生一世、两情专属”，这个理念在人类历史上，是非常晚近的，也让我们成为所有灵长目动物中独一无二的奇葩。事实上，你在一对一封闭关系中有望得到的一切美好，在其他类型的亲密关系中，也同样可以得到。或者说，一对一的相互专属，并非获得一种任何美好成果的先决条件。婊子也能够在自己的关系模式下，获得事业的相互支持，情感的深厚融合，也能让子女得到稳定的抚养，个人从中不断成长，以及在年老之时，和所爱之人相依为命、相互照料。

People who believe this myth may feel that something is wrong with them if they aren’t in a committed twosome—if they prefer to remain free agents, if the discover themselves loving more than one person at a time, if they have tried one or more traditional relationship that didn’t work out. Instead of questioning the myth, they question themselves: Am I incomplete? Where is my other half? The myth teaches them that they are not good enough in and out themselves. Often people develop a very unrealistic view of couplehood—Mr.or Ms. Right will automatically solve all their problems, fill all the gaps, make their life complete.

那些信奉这一迷思的人，一旦处于并非一对一专属的爱情关系之中，就会感到迷乱、陷入纠结。也许，他们其实更向往无拘无束的日子，而非被捆绑在一段封闭关系中；也许，他们猛然发觉，自己同时爱上了不止一个人；也许，他们曾为遵循传统的婚姻模式而徒劳无功。但是，他们没有质疑“只有一对一才是真爱”的迷思，却反而会质疑自己：没有专属爱人的我，是不是“不完整”？我的“另一半”究竟在哪？这种迷思回荡在心头，毁人不倦地“教导”他们：“之所以会这样，是因为你自己不够好。”他们还会经常对伴侣关系，产生一种不现实的期待——只要两个真正般配的人走到一起，就自然能够让各种难题都变得容易，任何沟沟坎坎都会被填平，生活处处完满无缺。

A subset of this myth is the belief that if you’re really in love, you will automatically lose all interest in others; thus, if you’re having sexual or romantic feelings toward anyone but your partner, you’re not really in love. This belief has cost many people a great deal of happiness through the centuries yet is untrue to the point of absurdity: a ring around the finger does not cause a nerve block to the genitals.

该迷思所衍生的另一个谬论是：只要你真心爱上一个人，自然就会对其ta任何人都失去性趣——照此看来，如果你对伴侣之外的其ta人，还有性欲望或浪漫幻想，那么你就根本没有真正爱上谁。百余年来，这个错误到荒谬的理念，让很多人白白牺牲了很多本该享有的性福：只要把戒指戴在手上，就能阻断和性器官相连的神经吗？

And, we must ask, if monogamy is the only acceptable option, the only true form of love, than are these agreements genuinely consensual? We have many friends who have chosen to be monogamous, and we applaud them. But how many people in our society consciously make that choice?

此外，我们必须发出疑问：所谓的真爱，凭什么只能是一对一的专属？除此之外，其他类型的爱情共识契约，难道不香吗？在我们周围，有很多朋友都选择了一对一的专偶关系，我们自当为之祝福；然而，在我们这个社会，又有多少一对一关系的践行者，是真正出于理性思考和自主选择呢？

迷思2：只有浪漫的爱情，才是真正的爱情

MYTH #2: ROMANTIC LOVE IS THE ONLY REAL LOVE

Look at the lyrics of popular songs, or read some classical poetry: the phrases we choose to describe romantic love don’t really sound all that pleasant. Crazy in love, love hurts, obsession, heartbreak…these are all descriptions of mental and physical illness.

看看流行歌曲的歌词，或者经典诗篇：我们用来描述浪漫爱情的词句，并非都是美好的场景。为爱痴狂、爱得受伤、爱得偏执、爱到心破碎……这些常见内容所描述的，可以说，是身心的病态。

The thing that gets called romantic love in this culture seems to be a heady cocktail of lust and adrenaline, sparked by uncertainty, insecurity, perhaps even anger or danger. The chills up the spine that we recognize as passion are, in fact, the same physical phenomenon as hair rising up on a cat’s back and are caused by the fight-or-flight response.

这也似乎表明，主流文化之下的浪漫爱情，就像特别容易上头的鸡尾酒，混杂着对性爱的渴慕，和令人心跳加快的肾上腺素；酒中闪烁着不确定和不安全，甚至可能是怒火万丈、险象横生。细想之下，令人脊背发凉。从中我们可以看出，现实中的激情，其实就像猫咪炸毛时的状态，或者说，源于“战或逃”的身心反应。

This kind of love can be thrilling and overwhelming and sometimes a hell lot of fan, but it is not the only “real” kind of love, nor is it always a good basis for an ongoing relationship. Yet as George Bernard Shaw famously remarked, “When two people are under the influence of the most violent, most insane, most delusive, and most transient of passions, they are required to swear that they will remain in that excited, abnormal, and exhausting condition continuously until death do them apart.”

这样的爱，或许非常刺激，令人为之不顾一切，有时也满载着欲仙欲死的乐趣。但是，现实中的真爱，不一定非要搞成这样。此外，浪漫的激情对于亲密关系的长期持续，也并非必须，却反而可能败事有余。萧伯纳有这样一段名言：“当两个人处于如火如荼、如痴如醉、如梦如幻并且转瞬即逝的激情之中，他们彼此渴求这样的承诺：哪怕超出常理，哪怕再多内耗，也要一直如此嗨下去，不死不休。”

迷思3 性欲望是一种破坏力

MYTH #3: SEXUAL DESIRE IS A DESTRUCTIVE FORCE

This one goes all the way back to the Garden of Eden and leads to a lot of crazy-making double standards. Some religions appear to believe that women’s sexuality is evil and dangerous, and exists only to lure men to their doom. From the Victorian era, we get the idea that men are hopelessly voracious and predatory when it come to sex, and women are supposed to control and civilize them by being pure, asexual, and withholding—men are the gas pedal and women are brakes, which is, we think, pretty hard on the engine. Neither of these works for us.

这个迷思的源头，是圣经中的伊甸园故事。它把人们忽悠得半疯半傻，而且造成了很多双重标准。一些宗教似乎坚信，女人和性有关的一切，都既恶毒又危险，专为把男人诱惑到万劫不复之境。从维多利亚时期起，社会大众就开始认定：男人一旦起了性欲，便不能自已，仿佛化作贪狼，拥有无限的胃口和捕食欲望；而女人的价值，是通过圣洁、贞操和自我克制，来约束和驯服男人——男人是油门，女人是刹车。这在我们看来很狗血，油门和刹车如此相互掣肘，这辆车的引擎更会进退维谷、动辄得咎；车体的所有部件，都无法为我们正常运转。

Many people also believe that unashamed sexual desire, particularly desire for more than one person, inevitably destroy the family—yet we suspect that far more families have been destroyed by bitter divorces over adultery than have ever been disturbed by ethical consensual nonmonogamy.

还有不少人认为，性欲望如果大大方方、没有羞耻感，尤其是，同时对不止一个人有性欲望，就难免会导致家庭破裂。然而笔者认为，那些令人痛苦的离婚，很多是因为欺瞒配偶的婚外情，相比之下，因为协商一致的开放关系，而导致家庭被破坏，极其罕见。

迷思4 爱上一个人，就具备了约束其行为的合理性

MYTH #4: LOVING SOMEONE MAKE IT OKAY TO CONTROL HIS OR HER BEHAVIOR

This kind of territorial reasoning is designed, we guess, to make people feel secure, but we don’t believe that anybody has the right, much less the obligation, to control the behavior of another functioning adult. Being treated according to this myth doesn’t make us feel secure, it makes us feel furious. The old “awww, she’s jealous—she must really care about me” reasoning, or the scene in which a girl falls in love with the boy when he punches out a rival suitor, are symptomatic of a very disturbed set of personal boundaries that can lead to a great deal of unhappiness.

这无非是宣称“我的领地，专属于我”，这种理念之所以形成，据笔者猜想，是为了获得对在这段关系中的安全稳定感。然而笔者认为，无论是谁，都没有对其ta身心健全的成年人，进行控制的“权利”。何况这种所谓的“权利”，根本没有对等的义务。被这个迷思所操控，非但不能得到内在的安全感，相反会让我们变得狂暴易怒。“她对我吃醋，说明她真正在乎我”的陈词滥调，以及“男孩战胜情敌，得到女孩专属之爱”的剧情桥段，一旦在现实中付诸实行，随之而来的，就是人际关系的各种边界都陷入混乱，进而导致灾难性后果。

This myth also lead to the belief, so often promulgated in Hollywood films and popular literature, that sleeping with someone else is something you do to your partner, not yourself, and is, moreover, the very worst thing you can do to someone. For many years, in New York State, adultery is the only legally acceptable grounds for divorce, leaving those who had unfortunately married batterers or drinkers in a very difficult position. And the legal punishment for “cheating” could be to lose one’s job, home, money, and kids, because of the wounding to the “betrayed” partner—that is, if you got caught. So one was supposed to cheat in secrecy to protect one’s partner’s dignity and keep the family together.

“迷思4”也会导向这样一种经常被好莱坞和流行文学宣扬的理念：“有了伴侣的人，一旦和别人上床，就并非自己的事，而是一种针对其不在场的伴侣的所为——明确地讲，这是针对其伴侣，所做的最坏之事。”在昔日的纽约州，曾有法律规定，离婚的唯一正当理由，就是通奸，或曰婚外性、婚外情；而那些不幸和家暴者或者酒疯子结了婚的人，只要伴侣没有劈腿，就无法提出离婚，其艰难处境可想而知。同时，上述法律还有针对出轨者“欺诈罪”的惩罚措施，包括让ta们失去工作、家宅、财产和子女，因为ta们的“背叛”，对伴侣造成了伤害（如果你的劈腿，被伴侣逮住的话）。但事实上，ta们对伴侣隐瞒劈腿的实情，是为了继续维持这个家庭，也是在当时的情境下，对伴侣尊严的保护——这究竟算是哪门子“欺诈”呢？

迷思5：嫉妒或曰醋意是不可避免的，也是不可战胜的

MYTH #5: JEALOUSY IS INEVITABLE AND IMPOSSIBLE TO OVERCOME

Jealousy is, without a doubt, a very common experience, so much so that a person who doesn’t experience jealousy is looked at as a bit odd, or in denial. But often a situation that would cause intense jealousy for one person can be no big deal for another. Some people get jealous when their honey takes a sip out of someone else’s Coke, others happily watch their beloved wave bye-bye for a month amorous sporting with a friend at the far end of the country.

醋意十足的嫉妒，无疑是一种极其普遍的体验，以至于，如果一个人从未嫉妒过谁，就会显得有些古怪，或者是，此人在刻意掩饰自己也是个醋坛子的实情。不过，足以令张三妒火中烧的情形，或许在李四眼里，根本不是啥大不了的事儿。有些人会为情侣喝了口别人的可乐而吃醋；也有的人，会欣然望着所爱之人和自己挥手暂别——而在接下来的一个月里，爱人将和朋友一起到遥远的外乡，共享旖旎春光。

Some people also believe that is such a shattering emotion that they have no choice but to succumb to it. People who believe this often believe that any form of nonmonogamy should be nonconsensual and complete secret, in order to protect the “betrayed” partner from having to feel such an impossibly difficult emotion.

有人还会认为，嫉妒是一种无法化解的情绪，我们别无选择，唯有顺从这个现实。持有这个观点的人，认定所有并非一对一专属的亲密关系，都不可能是伴侣之间协商一致、两全其美的；婚外情注定要鬼鬼祟祟、瞒住伴侣——这也是对伴侣的保护，让伴侣免受嫉妒所带来的巨大痛苦。

On the contrary, we have found that jealousy is an emotion like any other: it feels bad (sometimes very bad), but it is not intolerable. We have also found that many of the “oughta be’s” that lead to jealousy can be unlearned and that unlearning them is often a useful process. Later in this book, we will spend a lot of time talking about jealousy and the strategies many people have successfully employed to cope with it.

笔者与上述种种都截然不同，我们已经发觉，嫉妒并不是一种特殊的情绪，而是和其他各种情绪一样，即使有时感觉非常糟糕，也并非不可承受。我们同时也发现，那些引发嫉妒情绪的“爱情应该怎样”的教条，虽有很多，但都可以被瓦解掉。我们确有一套行之有效的方法，可以将其全盘解构。在后面的章节里，我们会深入探讨关于嫉妒的话题，以及，已经被很多人验证有效的“嫉妒瓦解攻略”。

迷思6 外遇会降低和现有伴侣之间的亲密度

MYTH #6: OUTSIDE INVOLVEMENTS REDUCE INTIMACY IN THE PRIMARY RELATIONSHIP

Most marriage counselors, and certain popular TV psychologists, believe when a member of an otherwise happy couple has an “affair”, this must be a symptom of unsolved conflict or unfulfilled needs that should be dealt with in the primary relationship. Of course, this is occasionally true, but not nearly as often as many “relationship gurus” would like us to believe. Moreover, this myth leaves no room for the possibility of growthful and constructive open sexual lifestyles.

大多数的婚姻咨询师，和相当一批经常上电视的“心理专家”，都坚持认为: 如果一个人处在一段不那么美好的婚姻关系中，这个人有了外遇，究其“症结”，要么是和现有的伴侣之间，存在无法调和的冲突，要么就是现有伴侣无法满足自己的欲求，二者至少必居其一；如果这两个“症结”能被妥善解决，外遇之“病”就能被“治愈”。诚然，那两个因素，有时的确可能导致外遇。然而，按照那些“亲密关系大师”的高论，几乎所有的外遇，都要硬往那两个因素上挂靠，这就未免太扯，严重夸大了事实。尤其是，这个迷思，会将主动构建开放关系、并且从中得到共同成长的希望，全盘否定、堵死。

It is cruel and intensive to interpret an affair as a symptom of sickness in the relationship, as it leaves “cheated on” partners—who may already be feeling insecure—to wonder what wrong with them. Meanwhile, “cheating” partners get told that they are only trying to get back at their primary partners and don’t really want, need, or even like their loves.

把外遇当作亲密关系中的一种“病变”，不但是残忍的，也缺乏将心比心的共情：这会让“一直被蒙在鼓里”的伴侣（ta可能已经对此感到不安），陷入“我自己究竟做错了什么？”这一伪问题。另一方面，劈腿者对其伴侣的“欺瞒行为”，也会常被误认为是“对其伴侣心怀不满，所导致的报复行为”——按照这种错误看法，劈腿者对新结交的情人，也并无真情实意，甚至连喜欢都未必谈得上。

Many people have sex outside their primary relationships for reasons that have nothing to do with any inadequacy in their partner or in the relationship. The new relationship may simply be a natural extension of an emotion and/or physical attraction to someone besides the primary partner. Or perhaps this outside relationship allows a particular kind of intimacy that the primary partner doesn’t even want ( such as kinky sex or going to football games ) and thus constitutes a solution for an otherwise insoluble conflict. Or perhaps it meets anther needs—like a need for uncomplicated physical sex without the trappings of relationship, or for sex with someone of a gender other than one’s partner’s, or for sex at a time when it is otherwise not available ( during travel or a partner’s illness, for example ).

很多人对已有的伴侣并无任何不满，但也会和外面的人劈腿。这样的性关系，无非是情感的自然延伸，或许，是对外面的某些人产生了肉欲性趣；也可能，是有些性口味、有些爱好，现有的伴侣并不喜欢，于是劈腿找其ta人，来填补这个需求缺口：这反而能够避免“伴侣关系变成一种无解的困局”。此外还有一些情况，是通过劈腿，尝到其他不同的性口味：比如单纯基于肉体、没有亲密关系羁绊的性爱；比如和性别表达不同于自己伴侣之人做爱；比如在伴侣无法和自己做爱时（独自出行、伴侣生病等情况），临时找些其ta人上。

An outside involvement doesn’t have to subtract in any way from the intimacy you share with your primary partner unless you let it. And we sincerely hope you won’t.

外遇不会拉低你和现有伴侣之间的亲密程度，除非是你刻意而为之。笔者真心希望你不会刻意如此。

迷思7 爱情战胜一切

MYTH #7: LOVE CONQUERS ALL

Hollywood tells us that “love means never having to say you’re sorry”, and we, fools that we are, believe it. This myth has it that if you’re really in love with someone, you never have to argue, disagree, communicate, negotiate, or do any other kind of work. It also tells us that love means we automatically get turned on by our beloved and that we never have to lift a finger or make any effort to deliberately to kindle passion. Those who believe the myth may find themselves feeling that their love has failed every time they need to schedule a discussion or to have a courteous ( or not-so-courteous ) disagreement. They may also believe that any sexual behavior that doesn’t fit their criteria for “normal” sex—from fantasies to vibrators—is “artificial” and indicates that something is lacking in the quality of their love.

好莱坞影片经常对我们讲，“爱一个人，就意味着能满足此人的一切，永远不会对ta说抱歉”。而我们经常傻乎乎地相信了。这个迷思等同于：只要你真心爱上一个人，就永远不会与之争吵，不会产生分歧，彼此无须沟通协商，任何时候都有默契；甚至无须为点燃激情之火而花费一指之力，爱情本身就是搞定一切的永动机。持有这个迷思的人，每当和伴侣因为一些事情争论、扯皮，或者有些不同意见，不得不拐弯抹角（也可能很直率）地对伴侣说出来时，就会感到：这场爱情已经搞黄了、凉凉了。此外，他们还会误认为：那些“不正常”或曰不符合自己标准的性行为——从性幻想，到使用振动棒——都是“反常”的，“没有真实感”的，并且意味着“这场爱情质量低劣，情不真，爱不浓”。

练习题做个婊子需要理由吗？有啥顾虑吗？

EXERCISE Why Sluthood? Why Not?

Write a list of every reason you can think of that any person anywhere might want to be a slut. You can do this on your own, or with a friend or a lover. Which of these tell you what kind of slut you don’t want to be? Which of these are your very good and valid reasons?

穷尽你所能想到的一切，将“任何人在任何情况下，有可能成为一名婊子”的理由，列举成清单。你可以独自完成，也可以找个朋友或者爱人，和你一起来做这份作业。其中的哪些理由，令你不希望自己成为哪些类型的婊子？又有哪些成为婊子的理由，让你心动，觉得自己也可以试试看？

通往更自由的生活模式

Step to a Freer Paradigm

So in this slightly disorienting world of sluthood, in which everything your mom, your minister, your spouse, and your television ever told you is probably wrong, how do you find new beliefs that support your new lifestyle? Letting go of your old paradigms can leave you in a scary emptiness, your stomach churning as if you were in free fall. You don’t need the old myths, but what will you have instead? We encourage you to seek your own truths on your way to slutty bliss, but just in case you could see a hint or two, here are some of the ones that have worked well for us.

所以，在这个令人有些迷茫的婊子世界——这里的一切，基本都是你的长辈、上司、配偶，以及电视里的内容，在绝大概率下都不会赞同、只会反对的——你又将如何为自己的全新的生活方式，找到全新的支持力量呢？摒弃旧有的一切，会让你遍体鳞伤、陷入虚无，你会像正在从高空中自由落体一般，感到无比惶恐。你不需要旧有的迷思或曰谬见，但是，你的替代方案是什么？我们期待你，在成为婊子的性福之路上不断求索，获取属于你自己的真知灼见。接下来的章节，是对于笔者而言非常有用的干货，或许也能为你提供一点参考。

第2章 迷思与实情