9 界限 Boundaries

:::info 🤖 AI 生成声明 本文由人工智能（Gemini）生成，本人审阅后认为内容质量优良，但是未做人工修正，因此本人不为此内容的准确性和完整性做最终担保。AI 生成内容属于公有领域，您可以自由使用。 :::

Daring to set boundaries is about having the courage to love ourselves, even when we risk disappointing others.

BRENÉ BROWN¹

敢于设定界限是关于拥有爱自己的勇气，即使我们冒着让别人失望的风险。

布琳·布朗 (Brené Brown)¹

Many people use the terms rules, agreements and boundaries interchangeably. But these terms have subtly different meanings, and being unclear about those distinctions can create Gordian knots in relationships.

许多人交替使用规则、协议和界限这些术语。但这些术语有着微妙的不同含义，如果不清楚这些区别，就会在关系中制造难解的结。

Any discussion of these three words has to start with boundaries, because boundaries are about you and your self. Understanding boundaries is essential to understanding what kinds of agreements might maximize your satisfaction, empowerment and sense of well-being. Strong boundaries are vital to building healthy relationships, while having poor personal boundaries can be damaging to your self. The well-known quote by therapist, educator and organizer Prentis Hemphill sums up this importance succinctly: “Boundaries are the distance at which I can love you and me at the same time.” Boundaries are also essential to consent, and adult relationships are healthy only when they are consensual. This chapter is all about boundaries. We get into rules and agreements in the next chapter.

对这三个词的任何讨论都必须从界限开始，因为界限是关于你和你自己的。理解界限对于理解什么样的协议可以最大化你的满意度、赋权感和幸福感至关重要。强大的界限对于建立健康的关系至关重要，而个人界限薄弱则可能损害你自己。治疗师、教育家和组织者普伦蒂斯·亨普希尔 (Prentis Hemphill) 的这句名言简洁地总结了这一重要性：“界限是我可以同时爱你和爱我自己的距离。”界限对于知情同意也至关重要，只有当成人关系是双方同意的时候，它才是健康的。这一章完全是关于界限的。我们在下一章会讨论规则和协议。

Defining boundaries

定义界限

Boundaries concern your self: what is yours alone, which others may access only with your permission. Because boundaries are personal, people often don’t realize where they are until they are crossed. You can divide personal boundaries into two rough categories: physical (your body, your sexuality) and emotional (your intimacy, your emotions, your affection). These categories of course overlap to some extent.

界限涉及你自己：什么是你独自拥有的，别人只有在得到你的许可后才能接触。因为界限是个人的，人们往往直到界限被越过才意识到它们在哪里。你可以将个人界限大致分为两类：物理的（你的身体、你的性）和情感的（你的亲密、你的情感、你的喜爱）。当然，这些类别在某种程度上是重叠的。

Your physical boundaries begin where you feel physically affected by another person. For most people, they begin a little outside your physical edges, in your personal space. (As with so many things we’ve discussed, what different people consider personal space is heavily shaped by their culture and family.) When you set physical boundaries, you are exercising your right to decide if, how and when you want someone in your personal space or touching you. Capitalism, and modern life generally, in many ways erodes people’s ability to set boundaries and exercise consent on a daily basis, from the workplace to the medical system to public transportation. (See Kitty Stryker’s anthology Ask: Building Consent Culture for in-depth exploration of the many facets of consent.)

你的物理界限始于你感到身体受到另一个人影响的地方。对大多数人来说，它们始于你身体边缘之外一点点，在你的私人空间里。（正如我们讨论过的许多事情一样，不同人认为的私人空间深受其文化和家庭的影响。）当你设定物理界限时，你是在行使你的权利，决定你是否、如何以及何时希望某人进入你的私人空间或触碰你。资本主义，以及一般的现代生活，在许多方面侵蚀了人们在日常生活中设定界限和行使同意权的能力，从工作场所到医疗系统再到公共交通。（参见凯蒂·斯特赖克的选集《询问：建立知情同意文化》(Ask: Building Consent Culture)，深入探索知情同意的许多方面。）

In intimate relationships, you often negotiate shared physical space, especially when you live with a partner. So you may need to negotiate some space for yourself. For some people, this may be a room of their own. For some, it might be as simple as asking for quiet time on the couch. Or it might be saying, “I need to decompress by myself for a bit before I’m ready to cuddle.” A relationship is only healthy if you have the ability to negotiate for individual space when you need it. You may always set boundaries about your physical space and your body. If someone ever tells you it’s not okay to assert a physical boundary—especially regarding who you will have sex with or who is allowed to touch you—look out! There’s a problem.

在亲密关系中，你经常协商共享的物理空间，特别是当你与伴侣同居时。所以你可能需要为自己协商一些空间。对有些人来说，这可能是一个属于自己的房间。对有些人来说，这可能就像要求在沙发上安静一会儿那么简单。或者它可能是说，“在准备好拥抱之前，我需要自己减压一会儿。”只有当你能在需要时协商个人空间，关系才是健康的。你永远可以设定关于你的物理空间和身体的界限。如果有人告诉你主张物理界限是不可以的——特别是关于你会和谁发生性关系或谁被允许触碰你——小心！有问题了。

Your mind is your mental and emotional experience of the world, your memories, your reality and your values. When you engage with others, you let them into this mental space to a greater or lesser degree. Finding the edges of your mind is trickier than finding your physical edges. Humans are social animals, and even the most superficial interactions engage our mental faculties and our emotions.

你的思想是你对世界的心理和情感体验、你的记忆、你的现实和你的价值观。当你与他人互动时，你在不同程度上让他们进入这个心理空间。找到你思想的边缘比找到你身体的边缘更棘手。人类是群居动物，即使是最肤浅的互动也会调动我们的心理机能和情感。

When you engage in intimate relationships, you open up your emotional boundaries. You let a chosen few affect you deeply, allowing them in much further than you do a random stranger or a work colleague. This is beautiful and amazing, and one of the things that make life worth living. But your mind and your emotions always belong to you, and you alone. Your intimate partners, your family, your boss and the clerk at the grocery store only ever get access to those on loan, and if that intimacy is damaging you, you have the right to refuse that access. Always.

当你参与亲密关系时，你打开了你的情感界限。你让少数被选中的人深刻地影响你，允许他们进入的程度远深于随机的陌生人或同事。这是美丽而神奇的，也是让生活变得值得的事情之一。但你的思想和情感永远属于你，且只属于你。你的亲密伴侣、家人、老板和杂货店店员只是借用访问权，如果那种亲密正在伤害你，你有权拒绝这种访问。永远。

That means people all have a fundamental, inalienable right not to extend themselves emotionally to anyone they don’t choose to. Every person has the absolute right to choose whom they will or will not be intimate with, for any reason or no reason.

这意味着所有人都有一个基本的、不可剥夺的权利，即不向任何他们没有选择的人在情感上延伸自己。每个人都有绝对的权利选择与谁亲密或不与谁亲密，无论出于任何原因或没有原因。

Setting emotional boundaries is different from setting physical boundaries. When you set a physical boundary, you are exerting clear control over what you do with your body. “Don’t touch me there,” for example. “Don’t move closer to me.” “Leave my home.” With emotional boundaries, you have to take care to not make others responsible for your mental state. That means you need to make it clear what you’re asking for; it’s the difference between “Never say anything that might upset me” and “It’s not acceptable for you to make fun of my hobbies. Even if you’re just joking, it really hurts my feelings.”

设定情感界限不同于设定物理界限。当你设定物理界限时，你是在对你如何处置自己的身体施加明确的控制。例如，“别碰我那里”。“别靠近我”。“离开我家”。对于情感界限，你必须注意不要让别人对你的精神状态负责。这意味着你需要清楚地表明你在要求什么；这是“永远不要说任何可能让我心烦的话”和“我不接受你取笑我的爱好。即使你只是在开玩笑，这也真的很伤我的感情”之间的区别。

It’s important, here, to point out that responsibility for emotions is tricky. On the extreme ends of the scale, it can be fairly clear: If you say a cheerful “How’s it going, sweetheart?” on an average day and your partner responds “Why would you say such a thing to me?!” and storms off, chances are high that you’re not responsible for making them feel upset. Something else is going on, and that reaction isn’t fair or kind to you. However, if you say the same thing in that same tone in the middle of a funeral, they might be more justifiably upset. The idea that nobody else can make you feel anything may be technically true, but the aim of a loving relationship is not to get away with being a jerk on technical grounds. People do have effects on one another’s emotions. Your words, tone and attitude do have the power to hurt. And that means that in loving relationships, you do need to take some responsibility for how your partners feel based on the way you speak to them and act toward them. Likewise, it is reasonable to ask that your partners take some responsibility for how they affect your emotions, without having to give them a detailed list of what words or facial expressions are and aren’t permitted. On some level, you have to assume positive intent, but you are also each responsible for being kind, and sometimes you fall short. The space between the extremes of behaviour—between obvious meanness and obvious kindness—is where you need to approach yourself and your partners with a balance of boundaries and compassion. The specifics are going to be different for every relationship.

在这里，重要的是要指出对情绪的责任是棘手的。在极端的另一端，情况可能相当清楚：如果你在平常的一天愉快地说“怎么样，亲爱的？”，而你的伴侣回答“你为什么要对我说这种话？！”然后气冲冲地走了，那么很有可能你不需要为让他们感到心烦负责。有别的事情正在发生，这种反应对你不公平也不友善。然而，如果你在葬礼中间用同样的语气说同样的话，他们生气可能更有理由。除了自己没人能让你感觉任何东西的想法在技术上可能是正确的，但充满爱的关系的目标不是在技术层面上逃避做一个混蛋。人们确实会相互影响情绪。你的话语、语气和态度确实有伤害的力量。这意味着在充满爱的关系中，你确实需要根据你对伴侣说话和行事的方式，对他们的感受承担一些责任。同样，要求你的伴侣对他们如何影响你的情绪承担一些责任也是合理的，而不必给他们一份详细的清单，列出什么词语或面部表情是被允许的，什么是不被允许的。在某种程度上，你必须假设积极的意图，但你们每个人也有责任保持善良，有时你们会做得不够好。在行为的极端之间——在明显的刻薄和明显的善良之间——你需要以界限和同情的平衡来对待你自己和你的伴侣。具体细节对每段关系都是不同的。

Healthy boundaries in an intimate relationship aren’t the same as boundaries at work or at a sex party. As author Nora Samaran writes:²

亲密关系中的健康界限与工作场所或性爱派对上的界限不同。正如作家诺拉·萨马兰 (Nora Samaran) 所写：²

Someone with healthy boundaries is confident enough in their own ability to say yes and no that they can act interdependent and responsive to others without losing themselves, either in the moment or in the long term. If it takes you a month to know that you did a thing you didn’t want to do, your boundaries may be overly porous and you may need work on doing deep inner listening in the moment to be able to know your own body’s cues. If you erect walls that are so rigid you cannot hear or see when someone you love needs you, your boundaries may be overly hard and you may need to develop responsiveness and receptivity … Ideally, someone with healthy boundaries can trust in live time their own capacity to listen to their body, needs, and feelings, and not need external permission to do so, while they also have the resilience and self-awareness that lets them empathize with and respond in the moment to those they care about without losing their own internal cues. Healthy boundaries let you assess your own needs and the needs of others, in a moment-by-moment way. They let you act responsive to others and responsive to yourself.

一个拥有健康界限的人对自己说“是”和“不”的能力足够自信，以至于他们可以表现得相互依赖并回应他人，而不会在当下或长远来看迷失自己。如果你花了一个月才知道你做了一件你不想做的事，你的界限可能过于多孔，你可能需要致力于在当下进行深度的内在倾听，以便能够知道你自己身体的线索。如果你竖起如此坚硬的高墙，以至于你看不到也听不到你爱的人何时需要你，你的界限可能过于坚硬，你可能需要培养反应能力和接受能力……理想情况下，一个拥有健康界限的人可以在即时相信自己倾听身体、需求和感受的能力，不需要外部许可就能做到，同时他们也拥有韧性和自我意识，让他们能够与他们关心的人共情并在当下做出回应，而不会失去自己的内部线索。健康界限让你以每时每刻的方式评估你自己的需求和他人的需求。它们让你对他人负责，也对自己负责。

When we talk about setting boundaries, we’re not talking about restrictions on another person’s behaviour, except as their behaviour concerns access to you. Of course, whether you choose to grant that access may in fact depend on how they are behaving in other circumstances. Examples of boundaries include:

当我们谈论设定界限时，我们并不是在谈论对另一个人行为的限制，除非他们的行为涉及对你的接触。当然，你是否选择允许这种接触实际上可能取决于他们在其他情况下的表现。界限的例子包括：

• I will not be involved with someone who is not open and honest with all their other partners about dating me.

• I will not have unbarriered sex with partners whose sexual behaviour does not fall within my level of acceptable sexual health risk.

• I will not become involved with someone who is not already committed to nonmonogamy.

• I will not remain in a relationship with a partner who threatens me or uses violence.

• I will choose the level of closeness I want with my partners’ other partners, subject to their consent.

• I will not be in a relationship with a partner who expects me to remain closeted.

• 我不会与一个不向所有其他伴侣公开和诚实地说明与我约会的人交往。

• 我不会与性行为不符合我可接受的性健康风险水平的伴侣进行无保护的性行为。

• 我不会与一个尚未致力于非单偶制的人交往。

• 我不会留在一个伴侣威胁我或使用暴力的关系中。

• 我将选择我想要的与伴侣的其他伴侣的亲密程度，但这取决于他们的同意。

• 我不会与一个期望我保持非公开（深柜）状态的伴侣建立关系。

The difference between “boundaries you set for yourself” and “rules you place on someone else” might just seem like one of semantics, but it is profound. Rules tend to come from the idea that it’s acceptable, or even desirable, for you to control someone else’s behaviour, or for someone else to control yours. Boundaries derive from the idea that the only person you really control is yourself.

“你为自己设定的界限”和“你强加给别人的规则”之间的区别可能看起来只是语义上的，但它是深刻的。规则往往源于这样一种观念：你控制别人的行为，或者别人控制你的行为，是可以接受的，甚至是可取的。界限源于这样一种观念：你真正能控制的只有你自己。

Sacrificing your self

牺牲你自己

One way to damage a relationship is to believe that your sense of self or self-worth comes from your partner, or from being in a relationship. If you constantly seek reinforcement of your worth from your partner, your partner becomes your source of worth, rather than your equal. This kind of dependency is exhausting for your partner and destructive for you.

破坏关系的一种方式是相信你的自我感或自我价值来自于你的伴侣，或来自于处于一段关系中。如果你不断地从伴侣那里寻求价值的强化，你的伴侣就成了你价值的来源，而不是你的平等伙伴。这种依赖对你的伴侣来说是令人筋疲力尽的，对你来说是毁灭性的。

This is especially likely to happen if you have trouble setting boundaries. Fuzzy boundaries can lead to a loss of self-identity and an inability to tell where your self (and your responsibility to set your own boundaries) ends and your partner begins. Losing your self-identity opens you up to being manipulated or losing your ethical integrity. And you must be true to yourself if you are to be true to those you love. When you feel that you “need” a relationship, you may become afraid to raise your voice and assert the other things you need. It’s hard to set boundaries in a relationship you feel you can’t live without, because setting boundaries means admitting there are things that might end your relationship.

如果你在设定界限方面有困难，这尤其可能发生。模糊的界限会导致自我认同的丧失，无法分辨你自己（以及你设定自己界限的责任）在哪里结束，你的伴侣从哪里开始。失去自我认同会让你容易受到操纵或失去伦理正直。如果你要对你爱的人真实，你就必须对自己真实。当你觉得你“需要”一段关系时，你可能会害怕提高声音并主张你需要得其他东西。在你觉得没有它就活不下去的关系中设定界限是很难的，因为设定界限意味着承认有些事情可能会结束你们的关系。

Many cultures worldwide are filled with stories of self-sacrifice, often framed as noble, dutiful or romantic. In Victor Hugo’s Les Misérables, the romantic heroine Éponine dies after taking a bullet for the man she loves. In Oscar Wilde’s short story “The Nightingale and the Rose,” a nightingale gives her life to help a boy woo the object of his adoration—who rejects him anyway. The children’s book The Giving Tree, by Shel Silverstein, is notorious for its portrayal of a tree that sacrifices everything, including her life, for a boy (and later man) who takes it all for granted. It’s been so heavily criticized in recent years that another writer, Topher Payne, created an entire alternate ending for the story and called it The Tree Who Set Healthy Boundaries.³ These stories mean something about our culture—among other things, notice how often characters coded as women or feminine do the sacrificing.

世界各地的许多文化都充满了自我牺牲的故事，通常被框架为高尚、尽责或浪漫。在维克多·雨果的《悲惨世界》中，浪漫女主角艾潘妮为她爱的男人挡子弹而死。在奥斯卡·王尔德的短篇小说《夜莺与玫瑰》中，一只夜莺献出了生命来帮助一个男孩追求他崇拜的对象——而那个对象无论如何都拒绝了他。谢尔·希尔弗斯坦 (Shel Silverstein) 的儿童读物《爱心树》(The Giving Tree) 因描绘了一棵树为一个把一切都视为理所当然的男孩（后来的男人）牺牲一切（包括生命）而臭名昭著。这在近年来受到了如此强烈的批评，以至于另一位作家托弗·佩恩 (Topher Payne) 为这个故事创作了一个完整的替代结局，并将其称为《设定健康界限的树》(The Tree Who Set Healthy Boundaries)。³ 这些故事对我们的文化意味着什么——除此之外，请注意被编码为女性或阴柔的角色进行牺牲的频率有多高。

If you’ve absorbed the idea that this kind of self-sacrifice is good and noble, it’s not your fault! But as an adult, you may need to learn a new concept on a deep emotional level: that relationships are actually supposed to be fulfilling for you, too, and that laying your needs (or your personality) at the feet of a partner is not actually a noble or desirable thing. Loving someone, or giving to someone, is not supposed to hurt and drain you all the time. And if it does, something is wrong. But drawing that line can be very hard. And on those occasions when you must do so, you might experience guilt and self-judgment. Self-sacrifice is conditioning that can go very, very deep. And it is still powerfully reinforced by the culture around us, and sometimes even by our partners—even when they have good intentions.

如果你吸收了这种自我牺牲是美好和高尚的观念，那不是你的错！但作为一个成年人，你可能需要在深刻的情感层面上学习一个新概念：关系实际上也应该让你感到满足，把你自己的需求（或个性）放在伴侣脚下实际上并不是一件高尚或可取的事情。爱一个人，或给予一个人，不应该一直伤害和消耗你。如果是这样，那就是出问题了。但划清这条线可能非常困难。在那些你必须这样做的时候，你可能会感到内疚和自我评判。自我牺牲是一种可能非常非常深刻的条件反射。它仍然被我们周围的文化强力强化，有时甚至被我们的伴侣强化——即使他们出于好意。

Sometimes your boundaries will cause your partners pain. And when you see someone you love in pain, you may feel an immediate urge to help them. This is a normal and healthy impulse in all relationships—you cannot have healthy relationships without empathy. But this impulse is also exploitable by those who may not share that empathy, or who consistently see their own desires as more important than the boundaries, emotional health or even safety of their partners (as we discussed on pages 82–84). Empathy must exist hand in hand with boundaries.

有时你的界限会给你的伴侣带来痛苦。当你看到你爱的人痛苦时，你可能会有一种想要帮助他们的直接冲动。这在所有关系中都是一种正常和健康的冲动——没有同理心就没有健康的关系。但这种冲动也可以被那些可能不分享这种同理心的人，或者那些始终认为自己的欲望比伴侣的界限、情感健康甚至安全更重要的人利用（正如我们在第 82-84 页所讨论的那样）。同理心必须与界限并存。

One form of sacrificing the self is embedded in many versions of the fairy tales many people know well. Mononormativity and amatonormativity teach many toxic myths about love, but perhaps the worst is that “love conquers all.” This myth hurts people in all kinds of ways—such as the untold zillions of hours spent and tears wasted by people trying to heal, reform or otherwise change a partner. Especially pernicious is the idea that you’re supposed to “give until it hurts”—in fact, for some people, that the measure of their worth is their ability to give, right down to the last drop of themselves. That is wrong. Love isn’t supposed to damage you, and you should not and do not need to sacrifice your self for good relationships.

牺牲自我的一种形式植根于许多人熟知的许多版本的童话故事中。单偶常态和恋爱常态教导了许多关于爱的有毒神话，但也许最糟糕的是“爱战胜一切”。这个神话以各种方式伤害人们——比如人们花了数不尽的时间和眼泪试图治愈、改造或以其他方式改变伴侣。特别有害的是你应该“给予直到心痛”的想法——事实上，对有些人来说，衡量他们价值的标准是他们给予的能力，直到他们自己的最后一滴。那是错的。爱不应该伤害你，你不应该也不需要为了良好的关系而牺牲你自己。

Boundaries vs. rules

界限与规则

For a person accustomed to indirect communication (see chapter 6), the difference between a boundary and a rule may not be clear. An indirect communicator may impose restrictions on a partner by stating the restriction as a boundary, using “I will” boundary language when they are actually applying “you will” restrictions. The difference is in what happens if the other person doesn’t behave as desired.

对于习惯于间接沟通的人来说（见第 6 章），界限和规则之间的区别可能不清楚。一个间接沟通者可能会通过将限制陈述为界限来对伴侣施加限制，使用“我将”的界限语言，而实际上他们在应用“你将”的限制。区别在于如果另一个人没有按照期望行事会发生什么。

For example, consider a situation in which you set this reasonable boundary: “You are free to do what you like with your body with other people. I am free to decide my level of acceptable risk to my sexual health. If you engage in behaviour that exceeds my level of risk, I reserve the right to use barriers with you, or perhaps not have sex with you at all.” If the other person has sex with other people that exceeds your level of risk, you can assess the situation and take appropriate action. You might, for instance, say “Since you are not choosing to use barriers with this other partner, I will use barriers with you,” and then do so.

例如，考虑这样一种情况，你设定了这个合理的界限：“你可以自由地用你的身体和其他人做你想做的事。我有自由决定我可接受的性健康风险水平。如果你从事的行为超过了我的风险水平，我保留与你使用屏障的权利，或者可能根本不与你发生性关系。”如果另一个人与其他人发生性关系超过了你的风险水平，你可以评估情况并采取适当行动。例如，你可能会说“既然你没有选择与这个伴侣使用屏障，我将与你使用屏障”，然后这样做。

On the other hand, if this is actually a rule being stated in the language of boundaries, you may feel the other person did something they shouldn’t have, or that you were entitled to make them always use safer-sex barriers with others. If you express recrimination or anger, or attempt punishment in response to your partner’s choices, then you were instituting a rule, regardless of the wording. Genuine boundaries recognize that others make their own choices, and you do not have the right (or ability) to control those choices. Rather, you have the right and ability to determine for yourself what intimacy you choose to be involved in.

另一方面，如果这实际上是一个用界限语言陈述的规则，你可能会觉得另一个人做了一些他们不应该做的事情，或者你有权让他们总是与其他人使用安全性行为屏障。如果你对伴侣的选择表达指责或愤怒，或试图进行惩罚，那么无论措辞如何，你都是在制定规则。真正的界限承认他人做出自己的选择，你没有权利（或能力）控制这些选择。相反，你有权利和能力为自己决定你选择参与什么样的亲密关系。

Speaking of punishment, however: Another grey area crops up here, because withdrawal of intimacy (physical and otherwise) can be used as a form of punishment, and this can be devastating for relationships (remember what we said on page 134 about stonewalling). You always have a right to whatever boundaries you need, but it’s reasonable to expect that some boundaries will have consequences for your relationships, especially if they dramatically change the level of intimacy you have with a partner over time. And if you are feeling particularly hurt, it might be worth taking some time to consider—later, when you’ve had a chance to process your emotions—whether your boundaries are indeed only self-protective, or whether there is a little part of you that does want to hurt your partner in return. Every person will be different, and what you do with this knowledge is up to you. But regardless, the solution is never ever ever for someone to push on or cross your boundaries—even if those boundaries feel like punishment to them.

说到惩罚：这里出现了另一个灰色地带，因为撤回亲密（身体上的或其他方面的）可以用作一种惩罚形式，这对关系可能是毁灭性的（还记得我们在第 134 页关于筑墙所说的吗）。你总是有权拥有你需要的任何界限，但合理预期某些界限会对你的关系产生后果，特别是如果它们随着时间的推移极大地改变了你与伴侣的亲密程度。如果你感到特别受伤，可能值得花点时间考虑——稍后，当你通过处理情绪的机会时——你的界限是否真的只是自我保护，或者是否有一小部分你想反过来伤害你的伴侣。每个人都是不同的，你如何利用这一认知取决于你。但无论如何，解决方案永远、永远、永远不是某人推挤或越过你的界限——即使这些界限对他们来说感觉像是惩罚。

Compromise and self-abandonment

妥协与自我抛弃

No two people have the same needs. Whenever you tie your life to others, especially in intimate relationships, there will be times when you can’t have everything you want. The ability to negotiate in good faith and to seek compromise when your needs and those of others conflict is a vital relationship skill. But when you deeply value a relationship (or fear losing it), it can be easy to give up too much of yourself in order to make the relationship work. When this happens, you are abandoning your self in favour of the relationship—crossing your own boundaries. Remember, the people in the relationship are more important than the relationship, and that includes you. To understand where you can make compromises and where you can’t, you must first know how to feel your own boundaries. Not all boundaries can be known in advance, but you can learn to recognize when they’re being approached or crossed.

没有两个人的需求是相同的。每当你将生活与他人联系在一起，尤其是在亲密关系中，总会有你无法得到想要的一切的时候。当你的需求与他人的需求发生冲突时，真诚谈判并寻求妥协的能力是一项至关重要的关系技能。但是，当你非常重视一段关系（或害怕失去它）时，为了让关系继续下去，很容易放弃太多的自己。当这种情况发生时，你是在为了关系而抛弃自己——越过了你自己的界限。记住，关系中的人比关系更重要，这包括你。要了解哪里可以妥协，哪里不能，你必须首先知道如何感受你自己的界限。并非所有界限都可以预先知道，但你可以学会识别它们何时被接近或越过。

The best compromises are those that allow everyone to have their needs met in ethical, compassionate ways. For example, say you want to go on a date, but your partner wants you to spend more time with your kids. A compromise might be to schedule the date for late in the evening, after you’ve had time to help your children with their homework and they’ve gone to bed. Both objectives can be met.

最好的妥协是那些允许每个人以道德、富有同情心的方式满足自己需求的妥协。例如，假设你想去约会，但你的伴侣希望你花更多时间陪孩子。妥协可能是把约会安排在深夜，在你帮孩子做完作业并且他们上床睡觉之后。两个目标都可以实现。

On the other hand, agreeing to a compromise such as not having any other relationships until the kids have left home might violate your boundaries. If nonmonogamy is important to your life satisfaction and part of your identity, this compromise would require you to give up a part of who you are. With such a compromise, it’s reasonable to question whether “spending time with the kids” is being used as a proxy for “I want a monogamous relationship, so I’m using concerns about the children as a pretext.”

另一方面，同意诸如在孩子离家之前不建立任何其他关系这样的妥协可能会违反你的界限。如果非单偶制对你的生活满意度很重要，并且是你身份的一部分，这种妥协将要求你放弃你的一部分。对于这样的妥协，有理由质疑“花时间陪孩子”是否被用作“我想要单偶制关系，所以我用对孩子的担忧作为借口”的代理。

When you are asked to compromise in ways that require you to give up your agency or your ability to advocate for your needs, these compromises also threaten to violate your boundaries. Many parts of your life are available for negotiation, but compromising away your agency or bodily integrity (for example, by agreeing to have sex with someone you might not want to, or agreeing to limits on what you are allowed to do with your body) means giving up control of your boundaries. See also our discussion of compromise as a collaborative rather than adversarial process on pages 145–146.

当你被要求以牺牲你的代理权或为你需求辩护的能力的方式妥协时，这些妥协也威胁要违反你的界限。你生活中的许多部分都可以协商，但牺牲你的代理权或身体完整性（例如，同意与你可能不想发生性关系的人发生性关系，或同意限制你被允许用身体做什么）意味着放弃对你界限的控制。另请参阅我们在第 145-146 页关于妥协作为协作而非对抗过程的讨论。

Boundaries and single or solo poly people

界限与单身或独身多边恋者

People who value autonomy highly and take a solo poly or free-agent approach to nonmonogamy face some special considerations around boundaries. Relationships that don’t ride the escalator are often perceived as less important, serious or legitimate than traditional relationships. So, unsurprisingly, these relationships are sometimes not treated seriously, even in the world of nonmonogamy.

高度重视自主权并采取独身多边恋或自由人方式进行非单偶制的人在界限方面面临一些特殊的考虑。不搭乘关系自动扶梯的关系通常被认为不如传统关系重要、严肃或合法。因此，毫不奇怪，这些关系有时不被认真对待，即使在非单偶制的世界里也是如此。

For these reasons, free agents must state their boundaries and advocate for their needs very early on. “I’m never likely to live with you, but I still consider this relationship significant, and I still want to feel free to express what I need and have you consider my needs” represents a reasonable boundary. As a single or solo person, you also need to be clear on the value your existing relationships have to you and what your commitment is to them, or they may be trivialized in the minds of potential partners or metamours who don’t understand what commitment looks like to you.

出于这些原因，自由人必须尽早陈述他们的界限并为他们的需求辩护。“我不太可能和你住在一起，但我仍然认为这段关系很重要，我仍然希望可以自由表达我的需求并让你考虑我的需求”，这代表了一个合理的界限。作为一个单身或独身的人，你也需要清楚现有关系对你的价值以及你对它们的承诺是什么，否则在不理解你承诺是什么样子的潜在伴侣或情敌的心目中，它们可能会被轻视。

A common complaint from solo poly folks is that many people assume they’re only looking for casual sex. Because society so tightly conflates sex, relationships and life interconnection, this can be an easy mistake to make. But not wanting to move in does not necessarily mean you only want casual sex. Negotiating boundaries around sex, particularly the expectations attached to it, is important to help you navigate the tangled thicket of assumptions that might pop up.

独身多边恋者的一个常见抱怨是，许多人认为他们只是在寻找随意的性行为。因为社会将性、关系和生活互联紧密地混为一谈，这可能是一个容易犯的错误。但不想同居并不一定意味着你只想要随意的性行为。协商关于性的界限，特别是附带的期望，对于帮助你驾驭可能出现的错综复杂的假设非常重要。

Because solo poly people place a high emphasis on personal autonomy, things such as veto arrangements, hierarchies and rules that constrain how the relationship is allowed to grow tend to be especially problematic for them. Most solo polyamorists will not agree to such arrangements. Ironically, people who do seek prescriptive hierarchies and look for “secondary” partners will often gravitate toward solo poly people, erroneously believing that if solo poly people don’t want the trappings of a conventional relationship, they don’t become seriously invested in their relationships. This misperception often leads to pain.

因为独身多边恋者高度重视个人自主权，诸如否决安排、等级制度和限制关系发展方式的规则对他们来说往往特别成问题。大多数独身多边恋者不会同意这样的安排。讽刺的是，那些寻求规定性等级制度并寻找“次要”伴侣的人往往会被独身多边恋者吸引，错误地认为如果独身多边恋者不想要传统关系的装饰，他们就不会认真投入到他们的关系中。这种误解经常导致痛苦。

The free-agent model can also have a dark side. Just as people who try to prescribe a specific relationship structure can misuse boundary language to control others, people who prefer a free-agent model can use boundaries around their personal decision-making as a way to avoid responsibility for the consequences of what they do. The choices you make belong to you, but so do their consequences. If you emphasize personal autonomy to the exclusion of listening to your partners’ needs, you’re not asserting boundaries, you’re being a jerk.

自由人模式也可能有阴暗面。就像试图规定特定关系结构的人可能会滥用界限语言来控制他人一样，喜欢自由人模式的人可能会利用围绕个人决策的界限来逃避对其行为后果的责任。你做出的选择属于你，但后果也属于你。如果你强调个人自主权而排斥倾听伴侣的需求，你不是在主张界限，你是在做一个混蛋。

Setting new boundaries

设定新界限

Early in your relationships, when everything is going well, you may be inclined to overlook faults and annoyances. Your hormones are telling you that you want to become one with your partners: share everything with them, love them forever. This is when setting boundaries is most important in order to lay a good long-term foundation—and also when you’re least likely to set them. Patterns laid down now can entrench over the years, your personalities can polarize in overfunctioning/underfunctioning dynamics (where one partner “takes care” of the other, removing their agency) or other unhealthy patterns, and the boundaries around your sense of self can blur. If you get stuck in a dysfunctional dynamic and want to reclaim your self and re-establish a healthy relationship balance, you need to learn how to set new boundaries in old relationships.

在你关系的早期，当一切顺利时，你可能倾向于忽视缺点和烦恼。你的荷尔蒙告诉你，你想与你的伴侣合二为一：与他们分享一切，永远爱他们。这是设定界限以奠定良好长期基础最重要的时候——也是你最不可能设定它们的时候。现在设定的模式可能会随着岁月的流逝而根深蒂固，你的个性可能会在过度运作/运作不足的动态中两极分化（其中一个伴侣“照顾”另一个，消除了他们的代理权）或其他不健康的模式，围绕你自我感的界限可能会变得模糊。如果你陷入功能失调的动态并想找回自己并重新建立健康的关系平衡，你需要学习如何在旧关系中设定新界限。

Even in perfectly healthy relationships, people can change. What was okay last year may not be okay today. When relationships are good, they make you better, they make your life bigger, and it’s easy to forget about your boundaries, because there is no reason to enforce them. Yet when communication erodes, when trust comes into question, when you feel out of control or deeply unhappy and then you try to set a boundary, the experience can be terrifying.

即使在完全健康的关系中，人也会改变。去年还可以的事情今天可能就不行了。当关系良好时，它们会让你变得更好，让你的生活变得更大，很容易忘记你的界限，因为没有理由执行它们。然而，当沟通受到侵蚀，当信任受到质疑，当你感到失控或极度不快乐，然后你试图设定界限时，这种体验可能是可怕的。

Setting a new boundary is a change, and change is rarely comfortable. To your partner, the change can feel nonconsensual. The key with boundaries is that you always set them around those things that are yours: your body, your mind, your emotions, your time, intimacy with you. You always have a right to regulate access to what is yours. But by the time the boundaries of your self have become blurred with those of your partner, setting boundaries and defining your self may feel like taking something away from your partner that they had come to regard as theirs.

设定新界限是一种改变，而改变很少是舒适的。对你的伴侣来说，这种改变可能会感觉是非自愿的。界限的关键在于你总是围绕那些属于你的东西设定它们：你的身体、你的思想、你的情感、你的时间、与你的亲密关系。你总是有权调节对属于你的东西的访问。但是，当你自我的界限已经与你伴侣的界限变得模糊时，设定界限和定义你自己可能会感觉像是从你伴侣那里拿走了一些他们已经视为己有的东西。

Harriet Lerner’s Dance of Intimacy (listed in the resources) is an excellent tool for anyone needing help with setting relationship boundaries. Lerner describes the “change back” responses that are common when a new boundary is set. When you establish a new way of doing things, your partner may work to re-establish the old, comfortable pattern. Countermoves take numerous forms, from outright denial to criticism to threats to end the relationship. The trick with countermoves is to not try to stop them, but to allow them to happen while holding firm in the change you have made.

哈丽特·勒纳的《亲密之舞》（列在资源中）对于任何需要帮助设定关系界限的人来说都是一个极好的工具。勒纳描述了设定新界限时常见的“改回来”反应。当你建立一种新的做事方式时，你的伴侣可能会努力恢复旧的、舒适的模式。反击采取多种形式，从直接否认到批评再到威胁结束关系。反击的诀窍不是试图阻止它们，而是允许它们发生，同时坚定地坚持你所做的改变。

If your partner is setting a new boundary, remember that they have a right to do so, even if it means they’re revoking consent to things they agreed to before. The change may hurt, but the solution is not to violate the boundaries or try to talk your partner out of them. No one should ever be punished for setting personal boundaries, or for withholding or revoking consent. Among other things, do not ever threaten the relationship if you are not prepared to follow through, including veiled or nonspecific threats. If there is any degree of attachment in play, bringing up the possibility of breaking up, whether directly or indirectly, is almost guaranteed to cause distress and fear of loss. If you really mean it, then of course it’s important to talk about, preferably from a place of honesty and vulnerability. If you’re using the threat because of its power to rattle and destabilize your partner and thus make them more likely to agree with whatever you’re asking for, that is a form of emotional blackmail and is devastating to trust and security. It’s like taking a wrecking ball to the foundations of the relationship you are, in theory, trying to preserve.

如果你的伴侣正在设定新界限，请记住他们有权这样做，即使这意味着他们撤销了以前同意的事情的许可。改变可能会很痛苦，但解决办法不是侵犯界限或试图说服你的伴侣放弃它们。任何人都不应该因为设定个人界限、拒绝或撤销同意而受到惩罚。除此之外，如果你没有准备好坚持到底，永远不要威胁关系，包括含蓄或非具体的威胁。如果有任何程度的依恋在起作用，提出分手的可能性，无论是直接还是间接，几乎肯定会引起痛苦和失去的恐惧。如果你真的是这个意思，那么谈论它是很重要的，最好是出于诚实和脆弱。如果你利用威胁是因为它有能力让你的伴侣感到不安和动摇，从而使他们更有可能同意你的任何要求，那就是一种情感勒索，对信任和安全感具有毁灭性。这就像是用铁球破坏你理论上试图保护的关系基础。

The way you can tell whether you’re holding to your own boundary or trying to emotionally blackmail the other person is to figure out whether you’re actually willing to walk away. “I won’t stay with you if you change career paths” is manipulative if the expected outcome is that your partner will stop pursuing their dreams; it’s genuine if you really don’t feel okay with their next steps and are willing to let them go if they want to pursue them. It’s the difference between “I want you to keep earning a six-figure salary even if you’re miserable because I like our lifestyle” and “I know you need to step out of your six-figure job for your own well-being, but your new plan to earn a living by selling bootleg booze that you make in the bathroom is illegal, and I’m not willing to be complicit in that, so I will leave if you intend to follow through on it.” If you find yourself repeatedly making threats that you don’t follow through on, or going hot and cold with a partner depending on how pleased or displeased you are with the partner’s behaviour (provided that behaviour isn’t abusive), there’s a good chance you’re using boundaries as a form of emotional blackmail.

你能分辨你是坚持自己的界限还是试图情感勒索对方的方法是弄清楚你是否真的愿意离开。“如果你改变职业道路，我就不会和你在一起”是操纵性的，如果预期的结果是你的伴侣会停止追求他们的梦想；如果对于他们的下一步你真的感觉不好，并且如果他们想追求梦想你愿意让他们走，这就是真诚的。这是“即使你很痛苦，我也希望你继续赚六位数的薪水，因为我喜欢我们的生活方式”和“我知道为了你自己的幸福你需要辞去六位数的工作，但你打算通过在浴室里制造私酒来谋生的新计划是非法的，我不愿同流合污，所以如果你打算坚持下去，我会离开”之间的区别。如果你发现自己反复做出不执行的威胁，或者根据你对伴侣行为的满意或不满意程度（假设该行为不是虐待性的）对伴侣忽冷忽热，那么你很有可能将界限用作一种情感勒索的形式。

That being said—if your partner sets a boundary that’s within their rights, but that feels unacceptable to you, then you are within your rights to opt out of the relationship. It’s never okay to coerce someone to do things the way you want. But it is always okay to say “I’m no longer going to participate under the current circumstances.”

话虽如此——如果你的伴侣设定了一个在其权利范围内的界限，但对你来说感觉不可接受，那么你有权选择退出这段关系。强迫别人按你想要的方式做事永远是不可以的。但说“在目前的情况下我不再参与”总是可以的。

Pushing back gently

温和地反击

People rarely cross your boundaries intentionally, unless you’re in an abusive situation. However, people sometimes cross them accidentally. Because of this, healthy boundaries need flexibility. They can’t be so brittle that the slightest touch threatens to end a relationship. You need to be able to accept a certain amount of push and reassert your boundaries by pushing back gently. You need to be able to say “Hey, I would prefer you not do this thing,” rather than “You monster! How dare you!” (A great resource for thinking about and communicating your boundaries is therapist Sander T. Jones’s book Cultivating Connection.)

除非你处于虐待环境中，否则人们很少故意越过你的界限。然而，人们有时会意外越过它们。正因为如此，健康的界限需要灵活性。它们不能如此脆弱，以至于最轻微的触碰都会威胁要结束一段关系。你需要能够接受一定程度的推挤，并通过温和地反击来重申你的界限。你需要能够说“嘿，我希望你不要做这件事”，而不是“你这个怪物！你怎么敢！”（治疗师桑德·T·琼斯 (Sander T. Jones) 的书《培养连接》是思考和沟通界限的绝佳资源。）

This is a tricky balancing act, because abusive people are skilled at probing boundaries. One of the tools of a predator is to ignore a no in small ways, testing how people respond, finding weaknesses, and choosing people who won’t reassert a no.⁴ Alternatively, some people can make all the right sounds and say all the right things when you assert a boundary—including compassionate listening, apologies and promises to change—but simply not change their behaviour. This may be because it’s not easy or convenient, or because on some level, they simply don’t see a problem with it. Or it could be because they are being intentionally manipulative. Or they just may not have the skills to shift their behaviour in a way that better respects your boundaries.

这是一个棘手的平衡行为，因为施虐者善于试探界限。掠夺者的工具之一是以微小的方式忽视拒绝，测试人们的反应，寻找弱点，并选择那些不会重申拒绝的人。⁴ 或者，当你主张界限时，有些人可以发出所有正确的声音并说出所有正确的话——包括同情倾听、道歉和承诺改变——但根本不改变他们的行为。这可能是因为这不容易或不方便，或者因为在某种程度上，他们根本看不出有什么问题。或者这可能是因为他们故意操纵。或者他们只是没有技能以更好地尊重你界限的方式改变他们的行为。

To an extent, it’s worth considering the reasons for repeated boundary violations. Your sense of what’s going on behind the problem might make a difference as to how you want to handle it. Have you been totally clear about what your boundary is and what the consequence will be for continuing to violate it? How many violations or what kind of violations are you willing to tolerate? For how long, and under what conditions? For instance, maybe you can extend some patience if your partner is actively working on their communication skills with a therapist, but are less inclined to do so if they’ve quit therapy and insist everything is fine. But bear in mind that just because someone doesn’t have evil intentions, they don’t get a free pass indefinitely to cross the lines you set. There comes a point where intention isn’t the important thing: effect matters more. Plus, some skilled boundary violators will string you along, playing on your compassion to convince you to stay while they continue to behave in ways that harm you. Can you tell the difference? And more importantly, what is the point at which that potential difference doesn’t matter, because you’ve reached the end of your tolerance?

在某种程度上，值得考虑重复侵犯界限的原因。你对问题背后发生的事情的感觉可能会影响你处理它的方式。你是否完全清楚你的界限是什么，以及继续违反它的后果是什么？你愿意容忍多少次违规或什么样的违规？多长时间，在什么条件下？例如，如果你的伴侣正在积极与治疗师一起努力提高沟通技巧，你也许可以多一点耐心，但如果他们已经停止治疗并坚持认为一切都很好，你就不太愿意这样做了。但请记住，仅仅因为某人没有恶意，他们也不能无限期地获得免费通行证来越过你设定的界限。到了某个点，意图就不重要了：效果更重要。此外，一些熟练的界限侵犯者会拖着你，利用你的同情心说服你留下来，同时继续以伤害你的方式行事。你能分辨出区别吗？更重要的是，在什么时候这种潜在的区别不再重要，因为你已经达到了容忍的极限？

You need to use your discernment to make decisions about how to handle boundary violations. This might mean doing introspective work, like journalling, meditation or movement that helps you connect with your inner sense of clarity. It might mean reaching out to resources such as a trusted friend, a therapist or a self-help book to try and get a sense of where “please stop” should become “I’m breaking up with you.” However you reach clarity on this, the line will be different for each person and in each situation. The key is to allow some flexibility for unintended boundary violations, but also to be willing to reassert your boundaries—or end a relationship—in the face of repeated infringement.

你需要运用你的辨别力来决定如何处理界限侵犯。这可能意味着进行内省工作，如写日记、冥想或运动，帮助你与内心的清晰感联系起来。这可能意味着接触资源，如值得信赖的朋友、治疗师或自助书籍，试图了解“请停止”何时应该变成“我要和你分手”。无论你如何在此事上达成清晰，这条线对每个人和每种情况都是不同的。关键是允许对意外的界限侵犯有一定的灵活性，但也要愿意在面对重复侵犯时重申你的界限——或结束一段关系。

Boundaries and mental health

界限与心理健康

One place where boundaries in any intimate relationship can become especially difficult to navigate is around issues of mental health. The focus in many nonmonogamous communities and in literature on self-work and independence often leads to perspectives that in practice are quite ableist, where everyone is expected to go it alone with regard to mental health, and mental health issues are only welcome as long you can manage to keep them from becoming anyone else’s problem. This expectation encourages people struggling with mental illness to mask, and can lead to them feeling disposable if they can’t keep their shit together all the time. In recent years, the popularization of words like “narcissist,” “borderline” and “sociopath”—words derived from clinical diagnoses but used pejoratively by laypeople without any real precision—has increased stigma around certain mental health diagnoses or symptoms related to them.

在任何亲密关系中，界限可能变得特别难以驾驭的一个地方是围绕心理健康问题。许多非单偶制社区和文献中对自我工作和独立的关注往往导致实际上相当健全中心主义 (ableist) 的观点，即每个人都被期望在心理健康方面独自应对，只有当你能设法不让心理健康问题成为别人的问题时，它们才受欢迎。这种期望鼓励与精神疾病作斗争的人进行伪装，如果他们不能一直保持状态，可能会导致他们感到自己是可有可无的。近年来，“自恋者”、“边缘型”和“反社会者”等词的普及——这些词源于临床诊断，但被外行在没有任何真正精确度的情况下贬义地使用——增加了围绕某些心理健康诊断或与其相关症状的污名。

And yet, each person has the right to set whatever boundaries they want, and these include boundaries concerning whether they can be with or how they can support partners with certain mental health issues. A person who grew up with an alcoholic parent might be sensitive around dealing with substance abuse, for example, and might set a boundary that they will not start a relationship with someone who drinks or uses drugs. Someone who has trauma from a relationship with a family member or former partner who had a certain diagnosis might not be able to share intimacy with someone else with the same diagnosis—not because the new person is likely to harm them, but because some behaviours may remind them too much of someone who did. That’s a choice each person is allowed to make. You can decline to enter into a relationship for any reason, and that extends to mental health. Plus, if you know you’re not prepared to show up compassionately and supportively for someone, the kindest thing to do is not enter a relationship with them to begin with.

然而，每个人都有权设定他们想要的任何界限，这包括关于他们是否能与有特定心理健康问题的伴侣在一起或如何支持他们的界限。例如，一个在酗酒父母身边长大的人可能对处理药物滥用很敏感，并可能设定一个界限，即不与饮酒或吸毒的人建立关系。一个因与患有某种诊断的家庭成员或前伴侣的关系而受到创伤的人，可能无法与另一个有相同诊断的人分享亲密关系——不是因为新人可能会伤害他们，而是因为某些行为可能让他们太容易想起那个曾经伤害过他们的人。那是每个人被允许做出的选择。你可以以任何理由拒绝进入一段关系，这也延伸到心理健康。此外，如果你知道你还没准备好以同情和支持的方式出现在某人身边，最仁慈的做法是从一开始就不与他们建立关系。

Fully disclosing your known mental health issues is an important part of maintaining honest relationships too, both because withholding information from anyone about things that affect them erodes informed consent, and also because honest disclosure helps your partners support you. Early disclosure will also help you discern whether someone has the capacity to support you without shaming, pathologizing or blaming you. If you have a mental health issue that affects your ability to engage in relationships, it’s also important to take whatever steps you can to take care of yourself. This might mean things like therapy, treatment, and trying to get enough exercise and sleep. But it’s also important to have partners who are willing and able to support you and work with you on accommodations you might need in the relationship. For example, someone with anxiety may need to hear from a partner every day. That’s a reasonable request, but not one that everyone can meet. If someone can’t offer that, neither of you is wrong, but you’re not compatible in that way.

完全披露你已知的心理健康问题也是维持诚实关系的重要组成部分，既因为对任何人隐瞒影响他们的信息会侵蚀知情同意，也因为诚实的披露有助于你的伴侣支持你。早期披露也将帮助你辨别某人是否有能力在不羞辱、病理化或指责你的情况下支持你。如果你有影响你参与关系能力的心理健康问题，采取任何你能采取的措施来照顾好自己也很重要。这可能意味着治疗、疗法，以及试图获得足够的锻炼和睡眠。但拥有愿意并能够支持你并与你一起处理你在关系中可能需要的调整的伴侣也很重要。例如，焦虑症患者可能需要每天收到伴侣的消息。这是一个合理的请求，但并非每个人都能满足。如果有人不能提供这一点，你们都没有错，但你们在那方面不兼容。

That said, nobody can guarantee to a partner that they’ll never develop a mental health issue in the future. It’s just not realistic to expect that even the happiest, most secure person in the world won’t someday experience new trauma or severe life stressors, or even ordinary life phases, such as pregnancy, menopause or old age, that induce changes to physical and mental health. When this happens within an established relationship, it is certainly reasonable to ask your partner for help and support.

话虽如此，没有人能向伴侣保证他们将来永远不会出现心理健康问题。指望即使是世界上最快乐、最安全的人也不会有一天经历新的创伤或严重的生活压力，甚至是导致身心健康变化的普通生活阶段，如怀孕、更年期或老年，这是不现实的。当这发生在一段既定关系中时，向你的伴侣寻求帮助和支持当然是合理的。

Unfortunately, the stigma attached to mental health problems can discourage full disclosure. It’s your responsibility to treat these disclosures with understanding and compassion, and to make it safe for your partners or potential partners to talk to you. And it’s important to challenge the preconceived notions you may have about mental health and mental illness. There is no sharp dividing line between “mentally healthy” and “mentally unwell”; our understandings of what mental health is shift over time and based on the prevailing winds in our culture. Western colonial concepts of mental illness tend to be very medicalized and often overlap with efforts to police marginalized social groups, such as 2SLGBTQI+ people, poor people, BIPOC* people, young people and more. In contrast, many Indigenous and non-Western cultures make space for phenomena within their social structures and spiritual systems that Western medicine might label as “illness,” and provide approaches for support and treatment that are rooted in traditional medicines, spiritual practices, ancestral knowledge and kinship networks.

不幸的是，附在心理健康问题上的污名可能会阻碍充分披露。你有责任以理解和同情来对待这些披露，并让你的伴侣或潜在伴侣与你交谈是安全的。挑战你可能对心理健康和精神疾病持有的先入之见很重要。“心理健康”和“心理不健康”之间没有明显的界限；我们对心理健康是什么的理解随着时间的推移而转变，并基于我们文化中的盛行风气。西方殖民主义的精神疾病概念往往非常医疗化，并且经常与监管边缘化社会群体的努力重叠，例如 2SLGBTQI+ 人群、穷人、BIPOC* 人群、年轻人等等。相比之下，许多原住民和非西方文化在其社会结构和精神体系中为西方医学可能标记为“疾病”的现象留出了空间，并提供了植根于传统药物、精神实践、祖先知识和亲属网络的维持和治疗方法。

On a positive note, even Western medicine, in the last number of decades, has seen major shifts in diagnostic categories away from pathologizing people’s identities and sexualities: For instance, 2SLGBTQI+ people are no longer considered intrinsically mentally ill, and society has a much better understanding of the social determinants of mental (and physical) health overall, such as poverty, sexism, homophobia and racism. There have also been shifts in the way addictions are treated, for example through harm reduction approaches, and various prescription drugs have been refined and improved greatly over time. People are beginning to better understand the vast range of neurodiversity—how common it really is, and how often it is simply benign human variation. (Check out Alyssa Gonzalez’s book, Nonmonogamy and Neurodiversity, for some insights!)⁵ Researchers have increasingly studied and learned about the effects of adverse childhood experiences on people’s future mental and physical health, about brain plasticity and our capacity to heal, and about the widespread nature of trauma as well as novel ways to treat its symptoms. (Gabor Maté’s accessible masterwork, The Myth of Normal, summarizes several decades of trauma study, if you’re curious.)⁶ And some great resources are available to teach you how to support the people you know and love who have mental illnesses, such as JoEllen Notte’s books about sex, depression and interpersonal support, listed in the notes and resources.⁷

积极的一面是，即使是西方医学，在过去几十年里，诊断类别也发生了重大转变，不再将人们的身份和性取向病理化：例如，2SLGBTQI+ 人群不再被认为本质上患有精神疾病，社会对精神（和身体）健康的社会决定因素有了更好的整体理解，如贫困、性别歧视、恐同和种族主义。成瘾治疗方式也发生了转变，例如通过减少伤害的方法，各种处方药随着时间的推移得到了极大的完善和改进。人们开始更好地理解神经多样性的广泛范围——它实际上是多么普遍，以及它往往只是良性的人类变异。（看看 Alyssa Gonzalez 的书《非单偶制与神经多样性》(Nonmonogamy and Neurodiversity) 以获得一些见解！）⁵ 研究人员越来越多地研究和了解不良童年经历对人们未来身心健康的影响、大脑可塑性和我们治愈的能力，以及创伤的普遍性以及治疗其症状的新方法。（如果你好奇的话，加博尔·马泰 (Gabor Maté) 通俗易懂的杰作《正常的迷思》(The Myth of Normal) 总结了几十年的创伤研究。）⁶ 还有一些很好的资源可以教你如何支持你认识和喜爱的患有精神疾病的人，例如 JoEllen Notte 关于性、抑郁和人际支持的书籍，列在注释和资源中。⁷

However, there has also been a steady expansion of diagnostic categories, and increasing criticism of the arbitrary and unscientific process by which these are established. Contemporary neoliberal approaches to health care often emphasize a reliance on pharmaceuticals, self-management and short-term therapeutic intervention, while de-emphasizing the importance of community support, culturally appropriate social services and long-term relational therapy. Holistic approaches are increasingly popular, and can be very helpful for some, but aren’t always well regulated or appropriate; homeopathy is snake oil, for example, and sometimes “go meditate” or “try mindfulness” can be just one more way for a doctor to dismiss a person’s symptoms—and depending on the type of mental illness in question, these techniques aren’t always beneficial anyway. Many people can’t afford or access the most appropriate kinds of treatment for their problems, so may turn to addictive substances as self-medication; meanwhile, the formal study of cannabis, psychedelics and various Indigenous traditional medicines for mental illness treatment is in its infancy and often bumps up against anti-drug policies.

然而，诊断类别也在稳步扩大，并且对建立这些类别的武断和非科学过程的批评也越来越多。当代新自由主义的医疗保健方法通常强调依赖药物、自我管理和短期治疗干预，而淡化社区支持、文化适宜的社会服务和长期关系治疗的重要性。整体疗法越来越受欢迎，对一些人可能很有帮助，但并不总是监管良好或合适的；例如，顺势疗法就是骗人的万灵油，有时“去冥想”或“尝试正念”可能只是医生打发病人症状的另一种方式——而且取决于具体的精神疾病类型，这些技术并不总是有益的。许多人负担不起或无法获得最适合他们问题的治疗，因此可能会转向成瘾物质进行自我治疗；与此同时，对大麻、迷幻剂和各种用于治疗精神疾病的原住民传统药物的正式研究尚处于起步阶段，并且经常与禁毒政策发生冲突。

What does all this add up to? It’s a complicated picture, and any one individual’s mental health situation might benefit from various advances or be compromised by the systems’ various failings—or some of both. So before simply saying “I won’t date a person with X mental health diagnosis,” or whatever else, it’s worth taking some time to get educated about all these topics, as well as learning about a given person’s specific situation and how they manage it.

所有这一切意味着什么？这是一个复杂的图景，任何一个人的心理健康状况都可能受益于各种进步，或者受到系统各种缺陷的损害——或者两者兼而有之。所以在简单地说“我不会和有 X 心理健康诊断的人约会”或其他什么之前，值得花点时间去了解所有这些话题，并了解特定人的具体情况以及他们是如何管理的。

One further important point is that a person’s behaviour is not necessarily determined by their mental health status. Plenty of people with mental illnesses are kind, compassionate and generous, with deep self-knowledge and great communication skills. And plenty of people who violate boundaries, act inappropriately or inconsiderately, speak unkindly or haven’t developed great communication skills do not have diagnosable mental illnesses. It’s worth considering whether you want to set boundaries around mental illness itself, or whether your boundaries around how you’re willing to be treated would be sufficient to cover whatever arises, regardless of someone’s mental health status. Whatever your boundaries may be, it is your responsibility to express them, preferably after getting some education, and before you have put someone else’s heart on the line. With this or any other kind of boundary, you cannot expect another person to guess. And if you hear a boundary that you know applies to you, it is also your responsibility to respect it, even when it’s difficult.

另一点很重要，一个人的行为并不一定由其心理健康状况决定。许多患有精神疾病的人善良、富有同情心和慷慨，具有深刻的自我认知和极好的沟通技巧。而许多侵犯界限、行为不当或不体贴、说话刻薄或没有养成良好沟通技巧的人并没有可诊断的精神疾病。值得考虑的是，你是想围绕精神疾病本身设定界限，还是你围绕你愿意被如何对待设定的界限足以涵盖出现的任何情况，无论某人的心理健康状况如何。无论你的界限是什么，你有责任表达出来，最好是在接受了一些教育之后，并且在你把别人的心置于险地之前。对于这种或任何其他类型的界限，你不能指望别人去猜。如果你听到一个你知道适用于你的界限，你也有责任尊重它，即使这很困难。

Often mental health issues are surrounded by walls of shame and guilt; they are not easy to talk about. But again, people cannot consent to be in relationships with you if that consent is not informed. If a prospective partner has expressed a boundary, and you don’t feel safe sharing your history of mental health issues or substance use, that’s okay, but it’s still ethically necessary to tell that partner, “I don’t think we’re compatible.”

心理健康问题通常被羞耻和内疚之墙包围；它们不容易谈论。但同样，如果不知情，人们就无法同意与你建立关系。如果一个潜在的伴侣表达了一个界限，而你觉得分享你的心理健康问题或物质使用史不安全，那没关系，但在伦理上仍然有必要告诉那个伴侣，“我认为我们不合适。”

Having, and being able to assert, good personal boundaries is a vital prerequisite for the next part of creating frameworks for successful nonmonogamous relationships and negotiating agreements and (maybe) rules. Only by clearly understanding your own boundaries can you hope to work out relationship agreements that meet your needs while still honouring the needs of everyone else involved.

拥有并能够主张良好的个人界限是创建成功的非单偶制关系框架以及协商协议和（也许）规则的下一部分的重要先决条件。只有清楚地了解你自己的界限，你才能希望制定出既满足你的需求又尊重所有其他相关人员需求的关系协议。

QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF 问自己的问题

If you aren’t sure whether a problem is just a normal bump or instead points to a boundary violation, ask yourself these questions.

如果你不确定一个问题是否只是正常的颠簸，还是指向了界限侵犯，问问自己这些问题。

• What are some boundaries I know I have in intimate relationships? How good am I at setting and holding them gently, compassionately and firmly?

• Are there areas where I tend to feel resentment in my relationships? Could these point to any boundaries I have that I am not honouring?

• Are my boundaries rigid or porous, or firm and flexible? Do I feel I have learning to do so I can better show care for myself and others at the same time?

• Do I tend to be a “giver” in relationships? Do I find myself frequently agreeing to cross what I thought was a bottom line? If so, how can I recognize when this is happening, and what other choices could I make that honour my own boundaries?

• Do I ever try to use boundary language to control the behaviour of others? Do I ever use boundaries as a form of punishment? If so, what non-manipulative strategies could I employ to get my needs met?

• Do others feel safe saying no to me? Am I able to hear when I have overstepped someone’s boundaries? Do I make it safe for people to disclose this to me? If not, what can I do differently to shift this?

• Do the people in my life seem to regularly respect my boundaries? If not, how do I communicate with them about this, or how can I start communicating with them better about it?

• 我知道我在亲密关系中有哪些界限？我在温和、富有同情心且坚定地设定和坚持它们方面做得如何？

• 在关系中，我是否有容易感到怨恨的地方？这些是否指向我没有尊重的任何界限？

• 我的界限是僵化的还是多孔的，或者是坚定且灵活的？我是否觉得自己需要学习，以便更好地同时照顾自己和他人？

• 我在关系中倾向于做一个“给予者”吗？我是否发现自己经常同意越过我认为的底线？如果是这样，我如何识别这种情况何时发生，我可以做出哪些其他选择来尊重我自己的界限？

• 我是否曾试图使用界限语言来控制他人的行为？我是否曾将界限作为一种惩罚形式？如果是这样，我可以采用什么非操纵性策略来满足我的需求？

• 别人对我说“不”是否感到安全？当我越过某人的界限时，我能听进去吗？我是否让人们向我披露这一点变得安全？如果没有，我可以做些什么不同的事情来改变这种情况？

• 我生活中的人似乎经常尊重我的界限吗？如果没有，我如何与他们沟通这一点，或者我如何开始更好地与他们沟通这一点？

* Black, Indigenous and people of colour * 黑人、原住民和有色人种 (Black, Indigenous and people of colour)

---

Footnotes

1. daring to set boundaries Brené Brown, “3 Ways to Set Boundaries,” Oprah.com (blog), no date, https://www.oprah.com/spirit/how-to-set-boundaries-brene-browns-advice ↩ ↩²

2. author Nora Samaran Nora Samaran, “For Men Who Desperately Need Autonomy,” (blog), July 21, 2016, https://norasamaran.com/2016/07/21/for-men-who-desperately-need-autonomy-make-it-dont-take-it. ↩ ↩²

3. The Tree Who Set Healthy Boundaries Topher Payne, The Tree Who Set Healthy Boundaries: A Parody Alternate Ending for Shel Silverstein’s The Giving Tree (n.d.), https://www.topherpayne.com/giving-tree. ↩ ↩²

4. reassert a no de Becker, The Gift of Fear. ↩ ↩²

5. Alyssa Gonzalez’s book Alyssa Gonzalez, Nonmonogamy and Neurodiversity: A More Than Two Essentials Guide (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2023). ↩ ↩²

6. decades of trauma study Gabor Maté and Daniel Maté, The Myth of Normal: Trauma, Illness and Healing in a Toxic Culture (Toronto, ON: Knopf Canada, 2023). ↩ ↩²

7. sex, depression and interpersonal support JoEllen Notte, The Monster Under the Bed: Sex, Depression, and the Conversations We Aren’t Having (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2020); and In It Together: Navigating Depression with Partners, Friends, and Family (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2023). See also her essay “Sex and Love When You Hate Yourself and Don’t Have Your Shit Together,” in Ask: Building Consent Culture, ed. Kitty Stryker (Victoria, BC: Thornapple Press, 2017), 9–14. ↩ ↩²