性騷擾緣何仍在不斷發(fā)生？

Will the fall of Harvey Weinstein become a watershed in male-female relations? The outpouring of millions of stories of sexual harassment from women (and some men) under the hashtag #Metoo looks like the beginning of what social scientists call a “norm cascade”. Smoking used to be acceptable everywhere; today smokers, in developed countries at least, are confined to draughty stoops. If only groping women — and worse — could go the way of the cigarette.

哈維•韋恩斯坦(Harvey Weinstein)的倒臺(tái)是否會(huì)成為男女關(guān)系的分水嶺?女性在話題標(biāo)簽#還有我#(#Metoo)下講述的數(shù)以千萬(wàn)計(jì)的性騷擾故事，看起來(lái)標(biāo)志著社會(huì)學(xué)家所說(shuō)的“規(guī)范普及”(norm cascade)的開(kāi)始。曾經(jīng)抽煙在任何地方都是可以被接受的行為;如今，至少在發(fā)達(dá)國(guó)家，吸煙者都只能在通風(fēng)良好的門廊吸煙。要是猥褻女性——甚至更嚴(yán)重的行為——也可以像吸煙一樣被禁止就好了。

The Weinstein affair will not be a turning point, but rather another milestone in a slow march. Over the decades of my lifetime, sexual harassment emerged as a legal category and a social taboo. Construction workers know not to wolf whistle; executives know not to demand sexual favours from secretaries. Mr Weinstein acknowledged the change, by saying that he “came of age in the ’60s and ’70s, when all the rules about behaviour and workplaces were different”.

韋恩斯坦事件不會(huì)成為轉(zhuǎn)折點(diǎn)，但是會(huì)成為漫漫長(zhǎng)路中的又一座里程碑。在我人生數(shù)十載中，性騷擾成為了法律問(wèn)題和社會(huì)禁忌。建筑工知道不能對(duì)著女性吹流氓哨;高管知道不能要求秘書(shū)給予性好處。韋恩斯坦說(shuō)他“是成年于六七十年代的人，那時(shí)一切行為規(guī)范和職場(chǎng)規(guī)則都是不同的”，這印證了時(shí)代已經(jīng)改變。

Harassment continues not because men do not know sexual harassment is wrong, but because they do not believe they will be caught or punished. As one Weinstein victim after another made clear, women are afraid to report harassment due to a power imbalance between an individual victim and her harasser. The situation is he said-she said, and he is much more able to insist on his version. At best, she might end up with a settlement and a non-disclosure agreement, but at the cost of her job.

性騷擾仍在不斷發(fā)生，不是因?yàn)槟行圆恢佬则}擾是錯(cuò)的，而是因?yàn)樗麄儾徽J(rèn)為自己會(huì)被抓到或遭到懲罰。正如一個(gè)又一個(gè)的韋恩斯坦受害者所表明的那樣，女性不敢報(bào)告性騷擾事件，因?yàn)閱蝹€(gè)的受害者與騷擾者之間權(quán)利不平衡。報(bào)告后的局面是各執(zhí)一詞，而且他能夠強(qiáng)勢(shì)得多地堅(jiān)持自己的說(shuō)法。充其量，她可能最終達(dá)成一份和解和保密協(xié)議，但代價(jià)是丟了工作。

The only safety in these situations lies in numbers, yet individual victims cannot easily find one another. It may be possible in the case of a serial abuser who preys on women in his workplace, but so many cases — politicians, directors, professors, priests, chief executives — involve encounters with many different women who do not know each other. Once women realise that others have had the same experience, they are more likely to pile on, but note that a number of Mr Weinstein’s prominent accusers, such as Gwyneth Paltrow and Angelina Jolie, only joined the chorus after others had come forward on the record. It still takes great courage to go first.

解決這種局面唯一保險(xiǎn)的辦法是以量制勝，但單個(gè)受害者不容易找到其他受害者。如果一名性騷擾慣犯是在他的工作場(chǎng)所向女性下手，這些女性或許可以聯(lián)合起來(lái)，但是在太多情況下——比如政客、導(dǎo)演、教授、牧師、首席執(zhí)行官——受害者是很多彼此并不認(rèn)識(shí)的女性。一旦女性知道其他人遭受過(guò)相同經(jīng)歷，他們更可能加入控訴。但請(qǐng)注意，指控韋恩斯坦的多位知名女性，比如格威妮絲•帕爾特羅(Gwyneth Paltrow)和安杰利娜•喬利(Angelina Jolie)，都是在其他人已經(jīng)公開(kāi)站出來(lái)之后才加入進(jìn)來(lái)。第一個(gè)站出來(lái)仍需要巨大的勇氣。

Female investigative reporters can certainly help; New York Times teams have broken stories about harassment in media, the tech industry, and now Hollywood. This serial spotlight will incrementally help right the balance between men and women by alerting firms that exposure is possible and reminding human resources departments and management committees of the perils of ignoring early reports of bad behaviour. But #Metoo is not likely to become #Hetoo, as some social media users have urged. Each woman will still calculate the consequences to her job or career of accusing her harasser by name, and likely stay silent.

女性調(diào)查記者無(wú)疑可以幫上忙;《紐約時(shí)報(bào)》(New York Times)團(tuán)隊(duì)曝光了在媒體、科技行業(yè)的性騷擾事件，如今又報(bào)道了好萊塢的性騷擾事件。這種系列重磅報(bào)道能夠警告企業(yè)這種行徑可能曝光，并提醒人力資源部門和管理委員會(huì)忽視不良行為的早期報(bào)告會(huì)產(chǎn)生危害，從而將逐漸幫助糾正兩性權(quán)力的失衡。但是#還有我#不太可能像一些社交媒體用戶所敦促的那樣，變成#還有他#(#Hetoo)。每個(gè)女性受害者還是會(huì)考慮點(diǎn)名指責(zé)性騷擾者而帶來(lái)的失去工作或葬送前途的后果，并且可能保持沉默。

Individual decisions also have larger political costs, at least in the US. Republicans pounced on the Weinstein affair because a prominent liberal is in the dock. On the other side of the aisle, Fox News has had its travails, but the revelations about Roger Ailes and Bill O’Reilly never triggered an outpouring on social media. At the very top, 11 women came forward in 2016 to accuse then presidential candidate Donald Trump of physical harassment, with no apparent effect.

個(gè)人決定也會(huì)帶來(lái)更大的政治后果，至少在美國(guó)是這樣。共和黨人強(qiáng)烈抨擊韋恩斯坦事件，因?yàn)楸桓嫦献氖侵淖杂芍髁x者。在走廊的另一邊，?？怂剐侣?Fox News)付出了艱辛的努力，但揭發(fā)羅杰•艾爾斯(Roger Ailes)和比爾•奧賴?yán)?Bill O'Reilly)并未觸發(fā)社交網(wǎng)絡(luò)的熱議。在政治最頂層的是，2016年11名女性站出來(lái)指責(zé)當(dāng)時(shí)的總統(tǒng)候選人唐納德•特朗普(Donald Trump)進(jìn)行肢體騷擾，沒(méi)有明顯效果。

On the contrary, a Washington Post-ABC poll three weeks before the election showed that seven in 10 respondents believed Mr Trump “probably made unwanted sexual advances towards women”, yet he won the presidency with the support of 53 per cent of white women. Many of them reportedly expected and accepted that kind of male behaviour as “men will be men”.

相反，《華盛頓郵報(bào)》(Washington Post)與美國(guó)廣播公司(ABC)在大選前三周的民調(diào)顯示，10個(gè)受訪者中有7個(gè)人認(rèn)為特朗普“很可能違背對(duì)方意愿對(duì)女性做出了有性意味的舉動(dòng)”，但他卻以53%的白人女性支持率贏得了總統(tǒng)大選。據(jù)報(bào)道，很多受訪者預(yù)料到或接受了男性的那類行為，認(rèn)為這是“男人本性”。

Liberal harassers are hypocrites; conservative harassers are dinosaurs. In each credible individual case, our sympathies should be with the victim, assuming that the men accused are given their full due process rights. Yet if the exposure of harassment occurs largely on the left, the larger political consequence may be to give aid and comfort to a misogynist faction on the right. That is an ugly trade-off. The Trump administration supports a wide range of policies that will hurt millions of American women, denying them birth control, reproductive healthcare, and protections from sexual assault on college campuses.

自由主義的性騷擾者就是偽君子;保守主義的性騷擾者則是老古董。在每一宗真實(shí)可信的個(gè)案中，我們都應(yīng)該同情受害者，假定被指責(zé)的男性得到了正當(dāng)程序的充分權(quán)利。不過(guò)，如果被曝光的大多數(shù)是左翼人士的性騷擾行為，更大的政治后果可能是給右翼中的厭女者提供幫助和慰藉。這是一種骯臟的妥協(xié)。特朗普政府支持的一系列政策將損害美國(guó)數(shù)以百萬(wàn)計(jì)的女性的權(quán)益：不為她們提供避孕措施和生育醫(yī)療、并且拒絕保護(hù)大學(xué)生免遭性侵。

The best way to ensure the steady decline of sexual harassment over time is to educate young men to treat young women as equals. From that perspective, the stories pouring out can be an effective form of consciousness-raising for both young men and women who are prone to believe that the battle for gender equality has already been won. We still have a long fight ahead.

確保性騷擾事件隨著時(shí)間推移而穩(wěn)步減少的最佳方式是，教育年輕男性平等對(duì)待年輕女性。從該角度來(lái)看，這些事件的曝光可能有這樣的作用：幫助那些傾向于認(rèn)為性別平等之戰(zhàn)已經(jīng)打贏的年輕人——無(wú)論男性還是女性，意識(shí)到事實(shí)并非如此。戰(zhàn)斗還遠(yuǎn)未結(jié)束，路漫漫其修遠(yuǎn)兮。

The writer is president of New America and an FT contributing editor

本文作者為智庫(kù)“新美國(guó)”(New America)總裁和英國(guó)《金融時(shí)報(bào)》特約編輯