13 赋权的关系 Empowered Relationships

:::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。 :::

The most vital right is the right to love and be loved.

EMMA GOLDMAN¹

最重要的权利是爱与被爱的权利。

爱玛·戈德曼 (Emma Goldman)¹

People who are empowered in their intimate relationships can express needs and ask for them to be met. They can talk about problems. They can say what works for them and expect that their partners will try to accommodate their needs as much as they can.

在亲密关系中获得赋权的人可以表达需求并要求满足这些需求。他们可以谈论问题。他们可以说出什么对他们有效，并期望他们的伴侣会尽力满足他们的需求。

Empowerment, like security, is a two-way street: It’s not possible to make a person feel empowered, just as it’s not possible to make a person feel secure. The best you can hope to do is to create an environment that welcomes participation and encourages empowerment. You can, however, disempower people, and that can be very dangerous. People who are disempowered have little to lose by breaking the rules. Disempowerment breeds resentment, and eventually, losing the relationship might not seem so bad.

赋权就像安全感一样，是一条双行道：你不可能强迫一个人感到被赋权，就像你不可能强迫一个人感到安全一样。你能做的最好的事情就是创造一个欢迎参与和鼓励赋权的环境。然而，你可以剥夺人们的权力，这可能非常危险。被剥夺权力的人通过打破规则几乎没有什么可失去的。剥夺权力会滋生怨恨，最终，失去这段关系可能看起来并不那么糟糕。

Some defining elements of empowerment in an intimate relationship are:

亲密关系中赋权的一些定义要素包括：

engaging and participating in the decision-making process for decisions that affect you
having a full range of options available when decisions are made, not a simple yes or no option (or, in extreme cases, the “accept it or leave” option)
having agency over your own body, relationships and life
being able to express needs, opinions, desires and boundaries
having access to the information that materially affects your relationship, your body, and your safety or security
being able to propose alternatives
having the ability to object to, and having open negotiations about, the rules, agreements and structures of your relationships
having the ability to give, withhold or withdraw consent
参与和参加影响你的决定的决策过程
在做出决定时有各种各样的选择，而不是简单的“是”或“否”选项（或者在极端情况下，“接受或离开”的选项）
对你自己的身体、关系和生活拥有代理权
能够表达需求、意见、愿望和界限
能够获取实质性影响你的关系、身体以及安全或保障的信息
能够提出替代方案
有能力反对并公开协商你的关系的规则、协议和结构
有能力给予、保留或撤回同意

It’s no coincidence that many of these characteristics resemble some of the relationship rights we listed in chapter 2.

这些特征中有许多与我们在第 2 章列出的一些关系权利相似，这并非巧合。

When you use these criteria to define empowerment, it can become clear that an empowered relationship is not necessarily one in which everyone has equal power. Rather, it is one in which no one is actively disempowered, intentionally or unintentionally, by the structure of the relationship or the behaviour of the people in it.

当你使用这些标准来定义赋权时，你会清楚地看到，赋权的关系并不一定意味着每个人都拥有平等的权力。相反，它是指没有任何人会有意或无意地被关系的结构或其中人的行为主动剥夺权力。

Empowerment is not equality

赋权不是平等

When you bring up the notion of nonmonogamous relationships without hierarchy, people often imagine you’re talking about equal relationships, where equal means everyone has the same things. That might mean, for example, trying to create a relationship structure in which everyone has the same amount of time, the same status or the same resources. Perhaps it means everyone is having sex with everyone else, everyone lives under the same roof or everyone loves everyone else “equally.”

当你提出没有等级制度的非单偶制关系的概念时，人们通常会以为你在谈论平等的关系，这里的平等意味着每个人都拥有相同的东西。这可能意味着，例如，试图创建一个关系结构，其中每个人都拥有相同的时间、相同的地位或相同的资源。也许这意味着每个人都与其他人发生性关系，每个人都住在同一个屋檐下，或者每个人都“平等地”爱其他人。

This definition pops up as both a good-faith misunderstanding and as a straw man presented by advocates of hierarchy. It’s not reasonable, these advocates will say, to give the long-distance comet you’ve known for a year the same influence over major life decisions as you give your spouse. And that’s usually true. That’s why we find it more useful, when thinking of alternatives to hierarchy, to speak of empowerment. Because different people want different things, empowerment is more useful than sameness as a relationship principle. What if one person naturally wants more time with a shared partner, and another less? Is it reasonable to tell them both they’re only allowed to have the same amount of time? What if one relationship has existed for six years, another for six months? It doesn’t make sense to expect the same level of commitment and entwinement from each.

这种定义既作为一种善意的误解出现，也作为等级制度倡导者提出的稻草人出现。这些倡导者会说，给你认识了一年的异地彗星式伴侣与给你的配偶在重大生活决定上相同的影响力是不合理的。这通常是对的。这就是为什么我们在思考等级制度的替代方案时，发现谈论赋权更有用。因为不同的人想要不同的东西，作为关系原则，赋权比相同更有用。如果一个人天生想要更多时间与共同伴侣在一起，而另一个人想要更少呢？告诉他们只允许拥有相同的时间合理吗？如果一段关系已经存在了六年，另一段只有六个月呢？期望两者有相同水平的承诺和纠缠是没有意义的。

A literal take on “equality” might be that everyone should have the same obligations to share a home and the same vote in how to handle the mortgage. A more rational take might mean that everyone has equal power to choose how they run their lives.

对“平等”的字面理解可能是每个人都应该有相同的义务分担家庭责任，并在如何处理抵押贷款方面拥有相同的投票权。更理性的理解可能意味着每个人都有平等的权力选择如何经营自己的生活。

People who have long been together often have a vested “sweat equity” in the relationship. They’ve made sacrifices and incurred obligations together. Those obligations look like the big commitment arrows on the illustrations in chapter 11. In an empowered relationship, a new person is not told, “You have the same standing and the same voice in these existing obligations and responsibilities.” Rather, that person is told, “As you invest in the relationship, you, too, will build sweat equity. You will not be denied the opportunity to do this.”

长期在一起的人通常在关系中拥有既得的“血汗资产”。他们一起做出了牺牲并承担了义务。这些义务看起来就像第 11 章插图中的大承诺箭头。在一段赋权的关系中，新人不会被告知，“你在这些现有的义务和责任中拥有相同的地位和发言权。”相反，那个人被告知，“当你在这段关系中投入时，你也将建立血汗资产。你不会被剥夺这样做的机会。”

In the context of nonmonogamy, an empowered relationship also means that no one outside a relationship has the authority to place restrictions on that relationship. The flows of connection, commitment and power within a relationship can be of any size, and can even be unequal within relationships. But the defining element of hierarchy—power from within one relationship that controls or restricts another relationship—is absent.

在非单偶制的背景下，赋权的关系也意味着关系之外的任何人都无权对该关系施加限制。关系内部的连接、承诺和权力的流动可以是任何大小，甚至可以在关系内部不平等。但是等级制度的定义要素——来自一段关系内部控制或限制另一段关系的权力——是不存在的。

“Equality” is also not the ideal framework because it can end up meaning an equality of bad behaviour. For example, some people’s logic goes like this: “I’m jealous, so I want you to break up with your other partner. But it’s okay, I will break up with my other partner, too, so it’s fair.” This might sound like an extreme example, but the impulse often exists, when people are faced with unpleasant emotions, to treat others as expendable.

“平等”也不是理想的框架，因为它最终可能意味着不良行为的平等。例如，有些人的逻辑是这样的：“我嫉妒，所以我希望你和你的另一个伴侣分手。但这没关系，我也会和我的另一个伴侣分手，所以这很公平。”这听起来可能是一个极端的例子，但当人们面对不愉快的情绪时，往往会有一种将他人视为可牺牲品的冲动。

Owning your power

拥有你的权力

Nonmonogamous relationships clearly highlight the gap between your perception of your power and the reality of your power. It is often easier to see someone else’s power and privilege than to see your own. Science fiction writer Samuel R. Delany compares our perception of power to “a fog over a meadow at evening”:

非单偶制关系清楚地突显了你对权力的感知与权力的现实之间的差距。看到别人的权力和特权通常比看到自己的更容易。科幻作家塞缪尔·R·迪兰尼 (Samuel R. Delany) 将我们对权力的感知比作“傍晚草地上的雾”：

From any distance, it seemed to have a shape, a substance, a color, an edge. Yet, as you approached it, it seemed to recede before you. Finally, when common sense said you were at its very center, it still seemed just as far away; only by time it was on all sides, obscuring any vision of the world beyond it.²

从任何距离看，它似乎都有形状、实体、颜色和边缘。然而，当你接近它时，它似乎在你面前退去。最后，当常识告诉你你就在它的正中心时，它似乎仍然一样遥远；只是此时它已在四周，遮蔽了对其之外世界的任何视野。²

If your partner begins a new relationship, you might see how they invest in the new relationship and feel powerless—without recognizing how the established structures, history, commitments and shared life experiences in your own relationship give you a tremendous amount of power that the newer partner doesn’t have. You’re at the centre of the fog. The new partner, however, is often keenly aware of the power you have as the established partner, because they’re just arriving at the meadow from outside the fog. It doesn’t mean newer partners have no power—far from it. But they lack the already-built structure and history of a pre-established relationship, which is very real and substantial.

如果你的伴侣开始了一段新关系，你可能会看到他们如何投入新关系并感到无力——却没有意识到你们自己关系中已建立的结构、历史、承诺和共同的生活经历给了你巨大的权力，而新伴侣并不拥有这些。你处于雾的中心。然而，新伴侣往往敏锐地意识到你作为既定伴侣所拥有的权力，因为他们刚刚从雾外到达草地。这并不意味着新伴侣没有权力——远非如此。但他们缺乏预先建立的关系中已经建立的结构和历史，这是非常真实和实质性的。

Not recognizing your power doesn’t just affect metamours, by the way! If you don’t understand that you have power in your relationships, it can lead you to do really hurtful things without realizing it. Things like unkind words, passive aggression, withdrawal and refusing to show vulnerability can be extremely painful for someone who cares deeply—but if you don’t think you’re worthy of that kind of care, and you don’t understand how someone can feel that way about you, then you may not even realize when you’re hurting someone by not showing up fully.³

顺便说一句，不承认你的权力不仅仅影响表侣！如果你不明白你在关系中拥有权力，这可能会导致你在没有意识到的情况下做出真正伤人的事情。像不友善的言语、被动攻击、退缩和拒绝表现出脆弱，对于深切关心的人来说可能是极其痛苦的——但如果你认为自己不值得那种关心，并且你不理解别人怎么会对你有那种感觉，那么你甚至可能没有意识到当你没有完全在场时伤害了某人。³

A key to practising empowered relationships is to recognize and understand the power you hold. For this, you need to return to the ideas about security and worthiness in chapter 4. Without a strong internal sense of security and worthiness, you will find it nearly impossible to be aware of your power in your romantic relationships. When you feel unworthy, you feel disconnected—even when your loved ones are craving connection with you. You feel isolated and alienated, even when you’re surrounded by love and support.

实践赋权关系的一个关键是认识并理解你所持有的权力。为此，你需要回到第 4 章关于安全感和价值感的观点。没有强烈的内在安全感和价值感，你会发现几乎不可能意识到你在浪漫关系中的权力。当你感到无价值时，你会感到断联——即使你爱的人渴望与你连接。即使被爱和支持包围，你也会感到孤立和疏远。

While you’re working on the project of your own worthiness, though, you can also seek to understand your own power—even if you don’t yet feel it in your heart. You must look for evidence. If you are terrified of losing a ten-year relationship, step back and think about the fact that your partner has chosen to be in a relationship with you for ten years. This didn’t happen by accident! It happened because for ten years, you have added value to your partner’s life.

然而，当你在致力于自己的价值感项目时，你也可以寻求理解你自己的权力——即使你心里还没有感觉到。你必须寻找证据。如果你害怕失去一段十年的关系，退一步想想你的伴侣选择和你在一起十年这个事实。这不是偶然发生的！这是因为十年来，你为你伴侣的生活增添了价值。

If you feel you need hierarchy to protect a co-parenting relationship, think about what it means that your partner has chosen to make the enormous commitment of having children with you, and look at evidence they give you daily in the form of care and investment in your children. Practise gratitude for all of the ways, large and small, your partner invests in your relationship. It will help you understand the value of the relationship to them.

如果你觉得你需要等级制度来保护共同抚养关系，想想你的伴侣选择与你生孩子这一巨大承诺意味着什么，并看看他们每天以关心和投资孩子的形式给你的证据。为你伴侣在你们关系中投入的所有大大小小的方式练习感恩。这将帮助你理解这段关系对他们的价值。

At the same time, it’s common for people to hoard power in relationships, or to consciously or unconsciously conceal the power their partners have. This might come from an actual desire to control others, but often it comes from their own fears—of vulnerability, of not being in control of their own lives—or from shame that shrouds their own needs. Being vulnerable, having and expressing needs, and being attached all give someone else power. If you’ve been hurt or traumatized, or have had that kind of power misused against you, then it can be incredibly scary to let others see that they have it. Concealing your needs and vulnerability, and thus limiting others’ awareness of their importance to you, is a tendency in all the insecure attachment styles. Avoidant people deal with it by telling themselves they have no needs or vulnerability (and no one else should, either); anxious people deal with it by overfocusing on the needs of their partners (and usually feeling resentful about it); and fearful-avoidant people, who tend to be keenly aware of power dynamics, often directly try to manage them.⁴

同时，人们在关系中囤积权力，或者有意识或无意识地隐瞒伴侣拥有的权力是很常见的。这可能源于控制他人的实际愿望，但往往源于他们自己的恐惧——对脆弱的恐惧，对无法掌控自己生活的恐惧——或者源于掩盖他们自己需求的羞耻感。脆弱、拥有并表达需求以及依恋都会给别人权力。如果你受过伤害或创伤，或者那种权力曾被滥用来对付你，那么让别人看到他们拥有这种权力可能会非常可怕。隐瞒你的需求和脆弱，从而限制他人意识到他们对你的重要性，是所有不安全依恋风格的一种倾向。回避型的人通过告诉自己他们没有需求或脆弱（而且其他人也不应该有）来处理它；焦虑型的人通过过度关注伴侣的需求（并且通常对此感到怨恨）来处理它；而恐惧-回避型的人，往往敏锐地意识到权力动态，经常直接试图管理它们。⁴

So as usual, it’s not simple: Understanding your own power isn’t just about building your own self-esteem and rationally examining your partners’ investment in you. You’re not a mind reader, and if someone is obscuring the power you hold in a relationship, you can’t be expected to understand it without their collaboration. But given that about 50% of the population has insecure attachment styles, and that they tend to be drawn to one another, it makes sense that if you don’t understand the power you have in a relationship, there are likely to be elements of both issues at play.

所以像往常一样，这并不简单：理解你自己的权力不仅仅是建立你自己的自尊并理性地审视伴侣对你的投入。你不会读心术，如果有人模糊了你在关系中拥有的权力，没有他们的合作就不能指望你理解它。但考虑到大约 50% 的人口具有不安全的依恋风格，并且他们倾向于相互吸引，如果你不理解你在关系中拥有的权力，这很有可能是这两个问题的因素都在起作用。

Empowered relationships and children

赋权的关系与孩子

When starting a new relationship, it’s important to be forthright and clear with the new person about your existing commitments. In fact, demonstrating that you keep your commitments to others is a good way to show a new partner that you are worthy of their trust and investment as well. Most nonmonogamous commitments should offer multiple paths to meeting those commitments while still making room for new partners. Flexibility also allows for the renegotiation of agreements, including the ways in which commitments are met when new relationships alter the playing field.

当开始一段新关系时，向新人直率并清楚地说明你现有的承诺很重要。事实上，证明你信守对他人的承诺是向新伴侣表明你也值得他们信任和投入的好方法。大多数非单偶制承诺应该提供多种途径来履行这些承诺，同时仍为新伴侣留出空间。灵活性也允许重新协商协议，包括当新关系改变竞争环境时履行承诺的方式。

Children are the most important commitment many people will ever make. If you’re a parent, your children are probably the most important people in your life. Children are dependent: They need people to take care of them, and their parents need to prioritize meeting those needs. Only slowly do they develop good judgment, free agency and decision-making power on their way to adulthood, so they need special consideration and protection for many years. These overriding needs can get in the way of adult partnerships, which is tough. If you have or want children, you likely (and hopefully) choose partners who understand this fact.

孩子是许多人将做出的最重要的承诺。如果你是父母，你的孩子可能是你生命中最重要的人。孩子是依赖性的：他们需要人照顾，他们的父母需要优先满足这些需求。在通往成年的道路上，他们只是慢慢地发展出良好的判断力、自由代理权和决策权，所以他们需要多年的特别考虑和保护。这些压倒一切的需求可能会妨碍成人伴侣关系，这很艰难。如果你有或想要孩子，你可能会（也希望会）选择理解这一事实的伴侣。

So surely, given the unique vulnerability of children, some hierarchy must be necessary for nonmonogamous families with kids? Are empowered nonmonogamous relationships even possible with children?

那么当然，鉴于孩子独特的脆弱性，对于有孩子的非单偶制家庭来说，某种等级制度一定是必要的吗？有孩子的赋权非单偶制关系甚至可能吗？

Well, as far as we know, parents, at the moment of their child’s birth, don’t suddenly become incapable of honouring commitments and responsibilities on their own. If you were a responsible adult before your kids were born, you will remain a responsible (if highly sleep-deprived) adult after.

嗯，据我们所知，父母在孩子出生的那一刻，并不会突然变得无法独自履行承诺和责任。如果你在孩子出生前是一个负责任的成年人，你在之后仍将是一个负责任的（即使极度缺乏睡眠）成年人。

Responsible adults do not secretly want to ignore their children’s well-being so badly that, if not for hierarchy, that’s what they’d do. If people can be trusted to make good decisions in other realms of life, such as friendships, employment or hobbies, they can be trusted in their intimate relationships and as parents. We have the optimistic view that if you are given the ability to make your own choices, you will honour your agreements, uphold your responsibilities and care for the people you love—partners and children.

负责任的成年人不会因为如果不实行等级制度就会秘密地极度想要忽视孩子的幸福。如果人们在生活的其他领域（如友谊、就业或爱好）可以被信任做出正确的决定，那么他们在亲密关系和作为父母方面也可以被信任。我们持乐观的观点：如果你被赋予做出自己选择的能力，你将遵守你的协议，履行你的责任，并照顾你爱的人——伴侣和孩子。

Perhaps the best way for parents to work toward creating stable and loving homes is to seek partners who are other mature grown-ups and share their values and priorities, then work to build a strong foundation for all their relationships and demonstrate over time that they are reliable and trustworthy. And then trust each other to make decisions that will benefit their relationships and their families.

也许父母致力于建立稳定和充满爱的家庭的最好方法是寻找其他成熟的成年人作为伴侣，并分享他们的价值观和优先级，然后努力为他们所有的关系建立坚实的基础，并随着时间的推移证明他们是可靠和值得信赖的。然后互相信任，做出有利于他们的关系和家庭的决定。

In empowered relationships, when a co-parent is about to make a choice that another parent doesn’t feel is best for the family, the concerned parent can bring it up. The adults can talk about the issue and make their choices accordingly. If one person in the partnership begins consistently making choices that aren’t best for the family, then it may be time to re-evaluate that partnership—just as happens in monogamous relationships. And just as happens in monogamous relationships, sometimes the best thing for everyone may be for the parental dyad to share parenting some other way—such as living apart or in a live-in, platonic co-parenting relationship. (This kind of arrangement is not uncommon among nonmonogamous people and queer people. It’s even becoming trendy among some monogamous folks these days, and we think that’s a great thing!)

在赋权的关系中，当一位共同父母即将做出另一位父母觉得对家庭不是最好的选择时，忧虑的父母可以提出来。成年人可以讨论这个问题并做出相应的选择。如果伴侣关系中的一个人开始持续做出对家庭不是最好的选择，那么可能是时候重新评估这种伙伴关系了——就像在单偶制关系中发生的那样。就像在单偶制关系中发生的那样，有时对每个人来说最好的事情可能是父母二人组以其他方式分担育儿责任——例如分开居住或处于同居、柏拉图式的共同育儿关系中。（这种安排在非单偶制人群和酷儿人群中并不少见。如今甚至在一些单偶制人群中也变得流行起来，我们认为这是一件好事！）

If you don’t like how someone is (or isn’t) honouring their commitments to you, or you don’t feel they can be trusted to honour their commitments and you can’t talk it through with them, then they may not be a good choice as a co-parent. If an adult is willing to abandon their commitments, then hierarchy isn’t going to force them to keep them!

如果你不喜欢某人如何（或不如何）履行对你的承诺，或者你觉得他们不可信，无法履行承诺，而你又无法与他们沟通，那么他们可能不是共同父母的好选择。如果一个成年人愿意放弃他们的承诺，那么等级制度也无法强迫他们遵守！

So what happens if the original parental dyad does dissolve? Must this scenario be prevented at all costs if there are kids involved?

那么，如果最初的父母二人组确实解散了会发生什么？如果有孩子卷入，必须不惜一切代价防止这种情况发生吗？

Relationships end. In a family with children, the end of a relationship will be sad and stressful for everyone. But the same thing happens in monogamous families, and there are ways to minimize the stress on the children. Often, in fact, a new relationship created with a more recent partner is more beneficial for a child than the parents’ relationship was, if the parents’ relationship was dysfunctional. This happens commonly with monogamous blended families, and the same is true for nonmonogamous families. Disruptions, discussed in the next chapter, happen to everyone, not just to nonmonogamous people. Sometimes children are affected.

关系会结束。在有孩子的家庭中，关系的结束对每个人来说都是悲伤和压力的。但这在单偶制家庭中也会发生，有些方法可以最大限度地减少对孩子的压力。事实上，如果父母的关系功能失调，与较新的伴侣建立的新关系通常比父母的关系对孩子更有利。这在单偶制重组家庭中很常见，对非单偶制家庭也是如此。我们在下一章讨论的干扰会发生在每个人身上，不仅仅是非单偶制者。有时孩子会受到影响。

Many of us still carry an idea, preserved from the mononormative fairy tale, that a parental dyad is critical, often above all other concerns, for a child’s well-being. Many still imagine that keeping someone in a bad relationship “for the sake of the children” is better than allowing two parents to live apart. But the nuclear family is a modern invention, and it’s by no means the only way to make a family or raise children, or necessarily the best. When people focus on this structure as the only valid one, it causes a few problems. It erases other family structures from the discussion—everything from the broad, multigenerational webs of care common in many Indigenous cultures, to single parents, to post-divorce blended families, to queer co-parenting networks. It also posits an ideal that is in fact nearly impossible for most parents to uphold, and that doesn’t represent reality anyway. The vast majority of families with kids actually rely on a ton of non-parental help in raising them: babysitters, daycares, schoolteachers, grandparents, neighbours, friends, relatives and more. And that’s not a sign of failure. Kids thrive when they have multiple trusted adults watching out for them, teaching them and contributing to their socialization, growth and development. Additionally, the emphasis on the nuclear family places the focus on the structure and not the content. Some nuclear families are happy, healthy, enriching environments for kids. Others are rife with abuse, addictions, neglect and stress. It’s not the structure that determines the quality of a family life; it’s the behaviour of the people within it. And the isolation that can result from a nuclear family structure can actually be really damaging to all concerned if what’s happening inside that family is toxic.

我们许多人仍然怀有从单偶常态童话中保留下来的想法，即父母二人组对孩子的福祉至关重要，往往高于所有其他考虑。许多人仍然想象，“为了孩子”把某人留在一断糟糕的关系中比允许父母分开居住要好。但核心家庭是现代发明，它绝不是组建家庭或抚养孩子的唯一方式，也不一定是最好的方式。当人们将这种结构视为唯一有效的结构时，会导致一些问题。它从讨论中抹去了其他家庭结构——从许多原住民文化中常见的广泛、多代照护网络，到单亲父母，到离婚后的重组家庭，再到酷儿共同育儿网络。它还假设了一个实际上大多数父母几乎无法坚持的理想，而且无论如何都不代表现实。绝大多数有孩子的家庭实际上依靠大量的非父母帮助来抚养孩子：保姆、托儿所、学校老师、祖父母、邻居、朋友、亲戚等等。这并不是失败的迹象。当孩子们有多个受信任的成年人照顾他们、教导他们并为他们的社会化、成长和发展做出贡献时，他们会茁壮成长。此外，对核心家庭的强调将重点放在了结构而不是内容上。有些核心家庭对孩子来说是快乐、健康、丰富的环境。其他的则充满了虐待、成瘾、忽视和压力。决定家庭生活质量的不是结构；是其中人的行为。如果那个家庭内部发生的事情是有毒的，核心家庭结构可能导致的孤立实际上对所有相关人员都非常有害。

For a child, having secure parents who are committed to that child (in whatever configuration those parents come, and even if that configuration changes), and who are living lives that fulfill them, is far superior to having two parents who are “together” dysfunctionally only because rules and a hierarchy keep them in line. And this situation is certainly better than having people in or adjacent to the household who are treated as secondary to other people. If children observe such behaviour in their families, they will take those ideas out into the world and treat other people the same way.

对于孩子来说，拥有致力于孩子的安全父母（无论这些父母以何种配置出现，即使该配置发生变化），并且过着让他们满足的生活，远胜于拥有两个因为规则和等级制度而功能失调地“在一起”的父母。而且这种情况肯定比在家庭中或家庭附近有人被视为次要于其他人要好。如果孩子们在家庭中观察到这种行为，他们就会把这些想法带到世界上，并以同样的方式对待他人。

An empowered approach to nonmonogamous parenting might include agreements that look like this:

一种赋权的非单偶制育儿方法可能包括如下协议：

I have chosen to parent with you because you share my values and hopes, and I trust you to honour your commitments to me and to make decisions in your relationships that are in the best interest of our family. If your decisions do not support us, I will tell you how and why, and I trust you to work with me—and your other partners, if necessary—to make it right. If you begin behaving in a way that is harmful to me, our relationship or our child, and you don’t rectify it, we will need to renegotiate the terms of our relationship and our co-parenting arrangement.

我选择和你一起抚养孩子，因为你分享我的价值观和希望，我信任你会履行对我的承诺，并在你的关系中做出最符合我们家庭利益的决定。如果你的决定不支持我们，我会告诉你如何以及为什么，我信任你会与我——如果有必要，还有你的其他伴侣——一起纠正它。如果你开始以伤害我、我们的关系或我们的孩子的方式行事，并且你不纠正它，我们将需要重新协商我们的关系和共同育儿安排的条款。

It is absolutely true that guidelines and structure benefit children. They thrive on order, predictability and outside direction, and can be distressed when given freedom they can’t yet handle. Parents can create structure and prioritize their children without making one adult partner subject to restrictions created by another partner. Guidelines and structure can be achieved without hierarchy, because adults can be trusted to build a family out of goodwill, free choice, and their love for their partner and their children.

毫无疑问，指导方针和结构对孩子有益。他们在秩序、可预测性和外部指导下茁壮成长，当被给予他们尚无法处理的自由时可能会感到痛苦。父母可以创造结构并优先考虑孩子，而不必让一个成年伴侣受制于另一个伴侣制定的限制。没有等级制度也可以实现指导方针和结构，因为可以信任成年人出于善意、自由选择以及对伴侣和孩子的爱来建立家庭。

Trust and flexibility

信任与灵活性

Empowered relationships rely on trust. Trust that your partners want to cherish and support you. Trust that if you make your needs known, your partners will want to meet your needs. This requires courage, care and good faith on all sides. Building relationships on a shared understanding of needs means having the courage to stand in the face of a negative emotion and ask, “What is this feeling telling me? Is there a need that is not being met? Is there something I can do to enlist my partner as my ally in dealing with this?”

赋权的关系依赖于信任。相信你的伴侣想要珍惜和支持你。相信如果你表达了你的需求，你的伴侣会想要满足你的需求。这需要各方的勇气、关怀和诚意。在对需求的共同理解上建立关系意味着有勇气面对负面情绪并问：“这种感觉在告诉我什么？是否有未得到满足的需求？我能做些什么来争取我的伴侣作为我的盟友来处理这个问题吗？”

If you’re the person whose partner is experiencing emotional hardship, it can be tempting to read this chapter as a way of saying “You have the responsibility to deal with your own emotions, so I don’t want you putting restrictions on me.” That is partly true, in the sense that you can’t solve someone else’s problem for them, and if your partner places restrictions on your behaviour, those restrictions rarely resolve the underlying issue. But it’s a mistake to put what Douglas Adams calls a Somebody Else’s Problem field around a partner’s distress. If you care, you will help. Behaving with compassion means working together to overcome relationship issues.

如果你是那个伴侣正在经历情感困境的人，你很容易把这一章解读为“你有责任处理你自己的情绪，所以我不想你对我施加限制。”这在某种程度上是正确的，因为你不能替别人解决问题，如果你的伴侣限制你的行为，这些限制很少能解决根本问题。但是，在伴侣的痛苦周围设置道格拉斯·亚当斯 (Douglas Adams) 所说的“别人的问题”力场是一个错误。如果你在乎，你会帮忙。以同情心行事意味着共同努力克服关系问题。

Another valuable technique in the toolkit of strategies for empowered, trusting relationships is to let go of attachment to the form that a partner’s behaviour must take. For example, suppose you feel you aren’t getting enough time with your partner. One way to address this is to insist, for example, that your partner be home by nine o’clock each night. This may or may not succeed. Your partner might start coming home by nine, but then spend the rest of the evening talking or texting with the person they just left, or go to bed early, or get some extra work done. You might have assumed that them being home at nine meant spending time together, but that wasn’t what you actually asked for. What might work instead would be junking the nine o’clock rule in favour of a direct request: “I need some of your undivided attention every day.”

赋权、信任关系策略工具箱中的另一个有价值的技巧是放弃对伴侣行为必须采取的形式的执着。例如，假设你觉得和伴侣在一起的时间不够。解决这个问题的一种方法是坚持，例如，你的伴侣每晚九点前回家。这可能会成功，也可能不会。你的伴侣可能会开始在九点前回家，但随后整个晚上都在和刚离开的那个人聊天或发短信，或者早早睡觉，或者做些额外的工作。你可能以为他们在九点回家意味着在一起度过时光，但那不是你实际上要求的。取而代之的有效方法可能是抛弃九点钟规则，转而提出直接请求：“我每天需要你的一些全神贯注的关注。”

Life is occasionally chaotic and unpredictable, from flat tires to late-night emergency-room visits. Sometimes, even when you make a good-faith effort to meet your partners’ needs, life gets in the way. Flexibility is important. Resiliency in the face of adversity is a powerful tool for building good relationships.

从爆胎到深夜急诊室就诊，生活偶尔是混乱和不可预测的。有时，即使你真诚地努力满足伴侣的需求，生活也会受到阻碍。灵活性很重要。面对逆境的韧性是建立良好关系的有力工具。

Fairness

公平 (Fairness)

“That’s not fair!” People below a certain age say this all the time. Past that age, their vision gets longer, and they learn that fairness operates best on a global, not a local, scale. If you did the dishes last night and it’s your sister’s turn tonight, but she isn’t doing the dishes because she just got back from dental surgery, it may seem unfair to you from a purely selfish perspective … but really, would you want to trade places with her? And if you were the one who’d just been through the root canal, wouldn’t you appreciate a pass on the dishes tonight? Sometimes compassion dictates that a rigid schedule should flex.

“这不公平！”某个年龄以下的人总是这样说。过了那个年龄，他们的眼光会变长，并且了解到公平最好在全球范围内运作，而不是在局部范围内。如果你昨晚洗了碗，今晚轮到你妹妹，但她因为刚做完牙科手术没洗碗，从纯粹自私的角度来看，这似乎对你不公平……但实际上，你想和她交换位置吗？如果你是那个刚刚做完根管治疗的人，你难道不希望今晚不用洗碗吗？有时同情心要求僵化的时间表应该灵活变通。

By the time they’re adults, most people have pretty much figured this out. That, or they’ve just given in to exhaustion and stopped worrying so much about what’s “fair” on such a granular level. Yet in relationships, and especially in nonmonogamous relationships, the little whisperings of your five-year-old self can poke through and say “That’s not fair!” when things don’t go the way you expect. Even when you don’t talk about your expectations. Even when you suspect your expectations are unreasonable. Hell, sometimes even when what’s happening is not only fair, but most excellent as well.

到了成年，大多数人几乎已经想通了这一点。要么就是他们已经精疲力竭，不再那么担心这种细微层面的“公平”了。然而在关系中，特别是在非单偶制关系中，当事情不按你的预期发展时，你内心那个五岁小孩的低语可能会冒出来说“这不公平！”。即使你不谈论你的期望。即使你怀疑你的期望是不合理的。见鬼，有时即使正在发生的事情不仅公平，而且非常棒。

In dealing with human beings, issues of “fairness” sometimes need to go right out the window. People change and needs change, but often their notions about what is “fair” remain static, so deeply buried that they’re not even aware of them. The fairness that is important in relationships isn’t the tit-for-tat “I did the dishes last night, so it isn’t fair that I have to do them tonight too!” variety. In fact, sometimes a tit-for-tat approach to fairness creates a situation that’s decidedly unfair, such as if someone demands that their partner break up with a metamour but promises to break up with their own other partner as well, for the sake of fairness. Four broken hearts instead of one is a peculiar definition of the word fair, and it illustrates an important point: Symmetry is not the same thing as fairness.

在与人打交道时，“公平”问题有时需要完全抛诸脑后。人会变，需求也会变，但他们关于什么是“公平”的观念往往保持静止，埋藏得如此之深，以至于他们甚至没有意识到。在关系中重要的公平不是那种针锋相对的“我昨晚洗了碗，所以今晚还要我洗是不公平的！”类型。事实上，有时针锋相对的公平方法会造成一种绝对不公平的情况，例如，如果有人要求他们的伴侣与表侣分手，但也承诺为了公平起见与自己的其他伴侣分手。四个破碎的心而不是一个，这是对公平一词的奇怪定义，它说明了一个重要的观点：对称不等同于公平。

The kind of fairness that really counts is the kind that begins with compassion. Doing the dishes two days in a row because your sister has just had a root canal is compassionate. On the other hand, saying “I’ll dump my partner of many years just to get you to dump yours” is hardly compassionate. Fairness means saying things like “I realize that my insecurity belongs to me, so I will not use it as a blunt instrument on you, nor expect you to plot your life around it. I may, however, ask you to talk to and support me while I’m dealing with it.”

真正重要的那种公平是始于同情的公平。因为你妹妹刚做完根管治疗而连续两天洗碗是富有同情心的。另一方面，说“我会抛弃我多年的伴侣只是为了让你抛弃你的伴侣”几乎不是富有同情心的。公平意味着说像这样的话：“我意识到我的不安全感属于我，所以我不会把它当作钝器用在你身上，也不会期望你围绕它来规划你的生活。但是，我可能会要求你在我处理它的时候与我交谈并支持我。”

This isn’t the kind of fairness your inner five-year-old understands; that child is far more likely to be worried about someone else getting something that they don’t have, or getting something for a lower “price” than they paid for it. At the end of the day, though, your mental five-year-old isn’t likely to make your life better, no matter how much of a fuss they put up.

这不是你内心那个五岁小孩能理解的公平；那个孩子更有可能担心别人得到他们没有的东西，或者以比他们支付的更低的“价格”得到某样东西。但归根结底，无论你精神上的那个五岁小孩怎么大吵大闹，他都不太可能让你的生活变得更好。

OF MONKEYS AND CUCUMBERS

关于猴子和黄瓜

You may have seen this experiment on YouTube or TED:⁵ Primatologist Frans de Waal experimented with primate reactions to inequality by placing two monkeys within sight of each other and rewarding them for doing a small task, such as handing a rock to a human lab aide. The reward was either a tasty piece of cucumber or an even tastier grape. When both monkeys got a cucumber, everything was fine—they’d happily complete the task dozens of times. But if one of them got a cucumber and one got a grape, watch out! The “lower paid” monkey completely lost it: throwing the cucumber back at the aide, pounding the floor, rattling the cage. Like any good scientist, De Waal repeated this experiment many times, with different species and variations. Same result.

你可能在 YouTube 或 TED 上看过这个实验：⁵ 灵长类动物学家弗兰斯·德瓦尔 (Frans de Waal) 通过将两只猴子放在彼此视线范围内并奖励它们完成一项小任务（例如将石头递给人类实验室助手）来实验灵长类动物对不平等的反应。奖励要么是一块美味的黄瓜，要么是更美味的葡萄。当两只猴子都得到黄瓜时，一切都很好——它们会高兴地完成几十次任务。但是如果其中一只得到黄瓜而另一只得到葡萄，小心！“低薪”猴子完全失控了：把黄瓜扔回给助手，捶打地板，摇晃笼子。像任何优秀的科学家一样，德瓦尔用不同的物种和变体重复了这个实验多次。结果相同。

We prefer to avoid the quagmire of evolutionary psychology; our intent with this example isn’t to talk about how your feelings about fairness may be rooted deep in your brain. Instead, we want to talk about how you decide what are “cucumbers” and what are “grapes” in your relationships. By way of example, think of a fictional polycule we’ll call Ali, Tatiana and Alexis. Ali lives with Tatiana and is also in a relationship with Alexis. Ali and Tatiana have two young children. Their relationship involves a lot of housework, diaper changes and arguing over the budget. Their downtime together consists of a lot of cuddling in front of Doctor Who, but not much sex and only the occasional night out.

我们更愿意避开进化心理学的泥潭；我们举这个例子的目的不是讨论你对公平的感受可能如何深深植根于你的大脑中。相反，我们想谈谈你是如何决定关系中什么是“黄瓜”什么是“葡萄”的。举个例子，想象一个虚构的多边关系网络，我们称之为阿里 (Ali)、塔蒂亚娜 (Tatiana) 和阿列克谢 (Alexis)。阿里和塔蒂亚娜住在一起，同时也和阿列克谢有关系。阿里和塔蒂亚娜有两个年幼的孩子。他们的关系涉及大量的家务、换尿布和争论预算。他们在一起的休息时间包括在《神秘博士》面前拥抱，但没有多少性生活，只是偶尔晚上出去。

Ali and Alexis only see each other a couple of times a month, so their time together is intense. They usually spend half of it having sex, the other half in deep conversation or doing exciting things—all focused on one another. Maybe once or twice a year they’ll get away together for a long weekend at a bed and breakfast.

阿里和阿列克谢一个月只在彼此几次，所以他们在一起的时间很紧张。他们通常花一半时间做爱，另一半时间进行深入交谈或做令人兴奋的事情——所有这些都专注于彼此。也许一年有一两次他们会一起去民宿度个长周末。

Most people in Tatiana’s position would feel like she’s getting all the cucumbers and Alexis is getting all the grapes. The things Ali and Alexis do are fun, right? They’re dates—something long-established couples can have a tendency to forget about, or not have time for. And it is very important for live-in couples to take time to care for their relationship, so they don’t take each other for granted. But it’s also worth considering why you might think Tatiana is getting the cucumbers—and how, to Alexis, those cucumbers might actually look a lot like grapes.

大多数处于塔蒂亚娜位置的人都会觉得她得到的全是黄瓜，而阿列克谢得到的全是葡萄。阿里和阿列克谢做的事情很有趣，对吧？那是约会——这是长期夫妇往往会忘记或没时间做的事情。对于同居夫妇来说，花时间照顾他们的关系非常重要，这样他们就不会认为对方是理所当然的。但也值得考虑为什么你会认为塔蒂亚娜得到了黄瓜——以及对阿列克谢来说，那些黄瓜实际上可能看起来很像葡萄。

Ali and Alexis might have a “vacation” relationship—they may have more fun together, and Ali and Tatiana more work. But Ali and Tatiana share some things that are arguably far more precious, and which Alexis may never have access to. Things like

阿里和阿列克谢可能拥有一段“度假”关系——他们在一起可能更有趣，而阿里和塔蒂亚娜更多的是工作。但阿里和塔蒂亚娜分享了一些可以说更加珍贵的东西，而这些是阿列克谢可能永远无法获得的。比如

being able to wake up nearly every morning together
having each other close enough to touch, almost all the time
curling up on a rainy afternoon with each other, snuggling beneath warm covers
building a private language from a shared history of experience
standing by each other through the shared struggles of building a life
being able to plan a future with each other
working together to bring two small humans into the world.
几乎每天早上都能一起醒来
几乎所有时间都离得很近，触手可及
在下雨的午后蜷缩在一起，在温暖的被子下依偎
从共同的经历历史中建立一种私密语言
在建立生活的共同斗争中相互支持
能够一起规划未来
共同努力把两个小人类带到这个世界上。

After all, Ali and Tatiana chose the life they have together. If they had wanted, they could have had a relationship that looked instead like Ali and Alexis’s. They did not have to move in together, mingle finances or have children. They chose to. They valued the things on this list. When people talk about taking a relationship—or a partner—for granted, it often means these sorts of things are being discounted. And these things, in a relationship, can be very sweet indeed, if you take time to appreciate them.

毕竟，阿里和塔蒂亚娜选择了他们共同拥有的生活。如果他们愿意，他们本可以拥有一段看起来像阿里和阿列克谢那样的关系。他们不必搬到一起住，合并财务或生孩子。他们选择了这样做。他们重视清单上的这些东西。当人们谈论认为一段关系——或一个伴侣——是理所当然的时候，这通常意味着这类事情正在被打了折扣。而在一段关系中，如果你花时间去欣赏它们，这些事情确实会非常甜蜜。

If you feel like you’re getting all the cucumbers and someone else is getting all the grapes, then ask your partner for some grapes, for sure, but also remember that you and your partner chose to have the kind of relationship you have. Take time to notice and express gratitude for the benefits that come from it. If you have a live-in partner, those benefits might be the small touches, the opportunities to care for each other (even if it’s grumbling as you pick up someone’s dirty socks), the chance to sleep close to each other, the cuddles and shared meals, your small daily interactions, the future you’re building together. If you live apart and see each other less frequently, when you find yourself longing for some of these more entwined behaviours (and you know they aren’t available to you), it may help to notice the fact that your partner is carving out time from their busy and full life to focus exclusively on you.

如果你觉得你得到的全是黄瓜，而别人得到的全是葡萄，那么一定要向你的伴侣要一些葡萄，但也要记住，你和你的伴侣选择了你们拥有的这种关系。花时间注意并表达对从中获得的好处的感激。如果你有一个同居伴侣，那些好处可能是微小的接触、互相关心的机会（即使是在捡起某人的脏袜子时发牢骚）、睡得很近的机会、拥抱和共进餐点、你们每天的小互动、你们共同建立的未来。如果你们分开居住并且见面频率较低，当你发现自己渴望一些这些更纠缠的行为（并且你知道你无法获得）时，注意到你的伴侣正在从他们忙碌而充实的生活中抽出时间专门关注你可能会有所帮助。

This is another reason why fairness is not the same thing as symmetry. Tatiana and Alexis may envy each other for the things each has with Ali. They may need to work with Ali to reshape their relationships so that each gets more of what they need. But it’s also possible that we primates all have a hard time seeing the value of what we have when we are busy looking at what someone else is getting. The monkeys in the experiment threw their cucumbers away—cucumbers that a few minutes before, they were eager to have. And it’s also important to remember, if you’re the hinge, that very few relationships can survive on only cucumbers or only grapes. Most relationships need a mix of work and play to grow strong over the long term.

这也是为什么公平不等同于对称的另一个原因。塔蒂亚娜和阿列克谢可能会因为各自与阿里拥有的东西而互相嫉妒。他们可能需要与阿里合作重塑他们的关系，以便每个人都能得到更多他们需要的东西。但也可能我们灵长类动物在忙着看别人得到什么时，都很难看到我们拥有的东西的价值。实验中的猴子把黄瓜扔掉了——几分钟前它们还渴望拥有的黄瓜。同样重要的是要记住，如果你是枢纽，很少有关系能仅靠黄瓜或仅靠葡萄生存。大多数关系需要工作和娱乐的结合才能在长期内茁壮成长。

QUESTIONS TO ASK YOURSELF 问自己的问题

Empowerment in nonmonogamous relationships and structures can be difficult to define, but its presence or absence is usually clearly felt. Here are some questions that can help you and your partners think about the level of empowerment in your relationships:

非单偶制关系和结构中的赋权可能很难定义，但它的存在或缺失通常能被清楚地感受到。以下是一些可以帮助你和你的伴侣思考你们关系中赋权水平的问题：

How do I encourage decision-making participation by all my partners? In what ways do I show my partners they are empowered?
If I feel a desire to restrict relationships between my partners and their partners, what underlying need am I trying to meet?
What are my existing commitments? How can I meet them while still making room for new relationships?
What evidence do I have that my partners love and care for me? How do I show my partners I love and care for them?
What specific things can I ask my partners to do for me to help me feel loved and cared for? How can I do better at showing my partners I love and care for them?
In what ways am I empowered in my relationships? What things help me to feel empowered?
Can I renegotiate the agreements in my relationships? Can my partners?
我如何鼓励我所有的伴侣参与决策？我以何种方式向我的伴侣表明他们被赋权了？
如果我感到渴望限制我的伴侣和他们的伴侣之间的关系，我试图满足什么潜在需求？
我现有的承诺是什么？我怎样才能在履行它们的同时为新关系腾出空间？
我有什么证据表明我的伴侣爱我和关心我？我如何向我的伴侣表明我爱他们并关心他们？
我可以要求我的伴侣为我做哪些具体的事情来帮助我感到被爱和被关心？我怎样才能更好地向我的伴侣表明我爱他们并关心他们？
我在关系中以何种方式被赋权？什么事情有助于我感到被赋权？
我可以重新协商我关系中的协议吗？我的伴侣可以吗？

The most vital right Emma Goldman, “The Tragedy of Woman’s Emancipation,” in Anarchism and Other Essays (New York & London: Mother Earth Publishing Association, 1911), 219–231. ↩ ↩²
a fog over a meadow at evening Samuel R. Delany, Tales of Nevèrÿon (Middletown, CT: Wesleyan University Press, 1993), 63. ↩ ↩²
not showing up fully See, for example, Heidi Priebe, “The Biggest Blindspot of People with Low Self-Esteem (& How to Keep It from Ruining Relationships),” YouTube, February 19, 2024, https://youtu.be/HFUIv2YXRjw. ↩ ↩²
keenly aware of power dynamics Heidi Priebe, “10 Signs You May Have a Fearful-Avoidant Attachment Style,” YouTube, January 16, 2022, https://youtu.be/5jk7PAa8D1o. ↩ ↩²
seen this experiment Frans de Waal, “Moral Behavior in Animals” (TedX Peachtree, Atlanta, Georgia), November 2011, video, https://www.ted.com/talks/frans_de_waal_moral_behavior_in_animals. ↩ ↩²