遊民畫家泊仔送的畫像，在左圖中白鳥的右下方，就是他自己。
我想我是一個認真的人，有時候到了嚴肅的地步。還記得剛入小學的第一課就是ㄅㄆㄇㄈ，老師說下週要考，可是一週過去了，我還沒全學會，急得不得了，回家就發燒了，媽媽還得幫我惡補。下星期老師竟然完全忘了考試這回事！而我至今餘悸猶存。
最近一位好友退休，她在嚴肅這件事上比我更勝一籌，在我們為她舉行的餐會中一絲不苟地討論未來生活的意義，我勸她不必急，不妨先混一混。李豐（寫《我賺了四十年》的那位台大醫師）在電話上聽了我的轉述，大笑道：「你混得怎樣？」我說：「不錯啊！」她卻不以為然：「我聽妳聲音就知道妳還是那樣，說話太快了！」幾十年來她一直勸我慢下來。慢才能品味生活，才能靜攬人生，才能修鍊身心。
不僅需要調整步調，我也想改變自己的寫作風格，輕鬆一點，閒適一點，更多一點生活，多一點感覺。渴望有自己的部落格，不被字數、時尚、市場、刊物風格、主編好惡綁住。大部分是為自己寫吧，也為了分享，至於未來，就交給上天了。
email: yenlinku@mail2000.com.tw
2020-08-29
2020-07-31
“Sex” and “Gender” in Taiwan (Part I) 2018-2020 不只是中翻英的問題 不只是中翻英的問題
顧燕翎
2018年7月20日消歧公約(CEDAW)第3次國家報告之國際審查會議中，有民間團體提案，要求政府在概念上和用法上採取該公約對於「生理性別」(sex)及「社會性別」(gender)之定義，勿以意義不明確之「多元性別」取代消歧公約中的「女」、「男」，得到國際審查委員會的認可。2019年7月我參與部會之性平會議，發現行政院要求各部會依照消歧公約中「性」（sex）與「性別」（gender）的定義和用法，「統一所有法律和政策文件用詞，並促進對『性』與『性別』正確、一致之認知。」由於指示並不具體，在座之性平委員和性平處代表也不明事由，我感到十分困惑，乃上性平處網站詳閱中英文會議紀錄及資料，發現這可能是一重大議題。
我乃於2019年7月20日致信行政院羅政務委員秉成等，反映性平處網站有關消歧公約(CEDAW)第3次國家報告審查會議之中文翻譯可能未掌握國際委員建議之重點，亦即「目前在台灣對於＂生理性別＂和＂社會性別＂的概念和實際上的使用都有所偏誤(the inappropriate conceptual and practical use of the terms“sex”and
gender”in Taiwan)」(官方譯文漏掉「在台灣」)，而需要「檢視法律及政策文件，予以修正」。國際委員們特別指出在台灣使用不當是很嚴肅而具體的表達，略去台灣便失去焦點，而使得委員會的結論和建議無法被理解和有效執行。
109年2月6日羅政務委員秉成主持召開CEDAW第3次國家報告結論性意見與建議第10點及第11點研商會議。(參閱會議紀錄)
可惜本次會議為閉門會議，並未邀請最初提案之民間團體，以致無法完整呈現各種不同觀點，亦未慎重檢視審查委員的建議，也忽略了聯合國對於性別定義的多次正式討論和決議，最後將問題簡化為名詞中翻英的誤差，而決議由性平處提供有關「性」與「性別」英文檢視原則，性平處的作法是提供了名詞中翻英之對照表，卻未同時提供英翻中之對照表，結果將國際委員所稱的＂sex and gender"中的”sex”完全消除了，統一將所有法規和公文中之性別都翻譯為”gender”。惟”gender”除了可以是「社會性別」(或「心理性別」)之外，亦是一個更廣泛、抽象的類別（如宗教、年齡…），不涉及個體，許多法規的英文原譯＂the sexes”明指男女；改為＂gender”以後所指不清。(例如:An employer shall under no condition discriminate between the sexes in the payment of wages. 被改為An employer shall under no condition discriminate between the gender in the payment of wages. 原文為 勞動基準法第 25條： 雇主對勞工不得因性別而有差別之待遇 。工作相同 、 效率相同者，給付同等之工資。)
此外，這樣的翻譯恐導致後續政府文件處理及身分認定上之問題，該檢視原則註2說明，「性別之認定以身分證件之性別欄位為認定原則」，而目前出生證明和身分證上之性別仍為生理性別(sex)，而非具流動性的社會或心理性別(gender)，檢視原則本身呈現出自相矛盾的局面，極易在法規和政策執行過程中造成困擾。至於在台灣的許多政策討論和會議中經常出現、而且具權威性的「多元性別」則沒有中翻英，也沒有英翻中，更無定義和用法之說明。
建議有關「生理性別」、「社會/心理性別」、「多元性別」的議題應該在社會上經過更廣泛、深入之討論，並取得相當共識後，再決定如何翻譯及如何制定相關政策，以符合民主、公開及平等參與的原則，也可能為更符合消歧公約(CEDAW)第3次國家報告國際審查會議之決議。
詳細資料請參閱以下兩篇貼文
2020-07-04
親愛的，我們在台灣把女人變不見了 The Magic of Disappearing Women in Taiwan (Sex and Gender in Taiwan)
The series of discussions on the definition and usage of "sex" and "gender" in national policies in Taiwan initiated by NGOs at the Review and Presentation of the ROC (Taiwan) CEDAW 3rd National Report in July, 2018 was conducted in the following order.
But the wording was too vague for people to understand. (I witnessed the cofusion at official meetings.)
CEDAW 第4次國家報告座談會會議紀錄(第2輪第2場) (含民間團體會後書面意見摘要)
消歧公約第三次報告國際審查委員會有關"生理性別"及"社會性別"之討論過程
CEDAW 第4次國家報告座談會會議紀錄(第2輪第2場) (含民間團體會後書面意見摘要)
場次：■7/16下午 □7/17上午 □ 7/17下午 2018
|
CEDAW: Article 3
|
Issue: Definitions of
Sex/ Gender (and Equality)
|
一、英文
Dear
committees,
In
represent of my own and other three Associations, I would like to talk about
the issue of definitions.
There
are no clear definitions of sex/gender in our laws (the Enforcement Act of
CEDAW and the Gender Equity Education Act), and they are confusing in the
policies. Partly because both sex and gender are translated as the same
Chinese term "性別"。Without clear definitions, it initiates a
misdirecting progress.
At
first, the terms in our legal documents are in accordance with the UN
definition-(Sex means women/men, gender means female/male). However, the
definition was latter expanded and shifted to multi-sexes and multi-gender (多元性別），and in the
end, it becomes the synonym of LGBT.
"Women"
simply disappeared! It ends up with ignoring women in the
policies.
For
example:
1.The theme of
photo competition on "Seeing gender diversity" were restricted to
LGBT. Women are not included.
2.In the
Government supported radio program Gender Equality Eazy Go, LGBT topics are
about doubled than the Women topics.
3.In the
universities, all Women study were renamed as Multi-gender study.
Women are no
longer the focus of gender equality policy or education, it's replaced by
LGBT. Many women's issues are now ignored.
Therefore, we
suggest that:
1.There should
be clear definitions of sex/gender in the laws, and they should be consistent
with UN CEDAW.
2.All the laws
should include clear definitions of gender as female and male (woman &
men), and distinguishing them from sexual orientation or gender
identity.
3.Sex should be
translated as 「性別」- as it is
showed on our ID and Passport. And, gender should be translated in a
different term, as「社會性別」.
4.Stop using the
confusing term-多元性別 (multi-gender) in all legal documents.
Delete Article 2 in the Gender Equity Education Act.
5.Follow UN's
suggestion, the Gender Equity Education Act should be corrected as Gender
"Equality" education Act.
6.The factors
for intersectional discrimination, including religion or belief, race,
ethnicity, health, age, status, class, should also be included in the law to
ensure that all women are equally treated.
|
場次：■7/16下午 □7/17上午 □ 7/17下午 2018
|
關切議題（Issue): CEDAW第三條：關於性別定義
|
二、中文
委員好：
我代表中華兒少愛滋關懷防治協會發言，我們有三個協會都關注到性別定義的議題。
在CEDAW國內施行法以及性別平等教育法當中，性別定義是令人混淆的。因為英文文件當中的Gender以及Sex都使用同一個中文詞“性別”做翻譯，因此產生混淆。缺乏明確的定義，將導致錯誤的性別觀念與錯誤的政策方向。
原本我國法律中的性別定義跟聯合國CEDAW的定義是相同的，但是後來性別的定義被擴張成為「多元性別」，甚至多元性別成了LGBTQ的同義詞。
舉例來說：
1. 行政院所舉辦的多元的性別攝影比賽，比賽主題與方向限定為LGBTQ。女人根本被排除在外。
2. 政府經費支持的電台節目性別平等Easy go節目中，與LGBTQ相關的話題是女性的兩倍。
3.大專院校原本名為婦女研究的計畫或是課程，被迫更名為性別研究課程。
女性不見了，而女性的權益因為定義寬鬆而無法被完全的保障。
所以，我們建議：
1. 在法律條文中明確定義Sex與Gender的不同，並且符合聯合國CEDAW以生理性別（男女）為基礎。
2. CEDAW國內施行法以及性別平等教育法及所有法令應該清楚的定義Sex 以及Gender，並與性傾向及性別認同加以區別。
3. Sex應該翻譯成「性別」─與我國身份證及護照上的翻譯一致。而Gender翻譯成「社會性別」。
4. 不要再使用多元性別一詞，刪除性平法第二條。避免繼續造成混淆
5. 性別平等教育的英文名（Gender Equity
Education Act）應該更名為 Gender
Equality Education Act，以符合聯合國委員對於法律達到實質平等的要求。
6. 將其他會造成交叉歧視的要素，例如種族、部落、宗教或是信仰、健康、社經地位以及年紀等條件都納入性別平等教育法案中。
|
(2)
Recommendations of the CEDAW International Review Committee to the government 2018/07/20
Meaning and use of the terms “sex” and “gender”10. The IRC is concerned with the inappropriate conceptual and practical use of the terms “sex” and “gender” in Taiwan. In the CEDAW jurisprudence the Convention refers to sexbased discrimination, but also covers gender-based discrimination against women. The term “sex” refers to biological differences between men and women. The term “gender” refers to socially constructed identities, attributes and roles for women and men and society’s social and cultural meaning for these biological differences resulting in hierarchical relationships between women and men and in the distribution of power and rights favoring men and disadvantaging women.
11. The IRC recommends the Government to align all the legislative texts and policy documents and promote the correct and consistent understanding of the terms “sex” and “gender” in line with CEDAW Convention and the Committee’s General Recommendation No. 28.
消歧公約國際審查委員會對政府的建議2018/07/20 (官方中譯)
「性」與「性別」的意義與運用
10. 審查委員會關切「性」（sex）與「性別」（gender）二詞在概念上與實際上的不 當運用。在 CEDAW 法理中，公約提及基於性的歧視，但亦涵蓋對女性基於性別 的歧視。「性」意指男女生理上的差異；「性別」意指社會建構的男女身分、歸屬 和角色，以及社會賦予這些生理差異的社會文化意義，導致男女之間的階層關係以 及權力和權利的分配有利於男性而不利於女性。
11. 審查委員會建議臺灣政府 審查委員會建議臺灣政府依照 CEDAW 和 CEDAW委員會第28號一般性建議統 號一般性建議統 一所有法律和政策文件用詞， 一所有法律和政策文件用詞，並促進對「性」與「性別」正確、一致之認知。
The major points made in this meeting:
以下為性平會發給各政府單位的檢視原則:
中文 | 英文 |
性別 | Gender |
性傾向 | Sexual orientation |
性侵害 | Sexual assault |
性騷擾 | Sexual harassment |
性霸凌 | Sexual bullying |
性別認同 | Gender identity |
性別特質 | Gender traits |
性別歧視 | Gender discrimination |
Neither gender should occupy less than one-third of the seats of the committee/commission |
(4) My letter to the Executive Yuan
yenlin ku 2019/07/20
A. I point out that the Chinese translation of the recommendations left out the very important words "in Taiwan". "The inappropriate conceptual and practical use of the terms 'sex' and 'gender' "actually takes place here in Taiwan and needs to be addressed.
B.The instructions sent out by the Executive Yuan were so vague that most officials failed to understand its meanings.
收件人：羅政務委員秉成、性平處吳處長秀貞、勞動部林常務次長三貴
送件人：顧燕翎
主旨：有關 第3 次國家報告（審查委員會結論性意見與建議第）1011-00-02、序號2、點次10及11）國際委員指出之重要名詞誤用
說明：
審查委員會建議台灣政府根據消歧公約的條文以及委員會第28號一般性建議，校正所有法律和政策文件用詞，提升對「生理性別」(sex)與「社會性別」(gender)這兩個名詞正確、一致之理解。
附原文：
(5) Reply from the Executive Yuan 2019/07/29
They will convene a meeting to discuss this issue.(5) 行政院性平處的回覆
| Mon, 29 Jul 2019 09:56:00 |
編號 | 中文 | 英文 | 審議結論 |
1 | 性別 | Gender | gender (心理性別/社會性別) sex (生理性別) |
2 | 性傾向 | Sexual orientation | sexual orientation |
3 | 性侵害 | Sexual assault | sexual assault |
4 | 性騷擾 | Sexual harassment | sexual harassment |
5 | 性霸凌 | Sexual bullying | sexual bullying |
6 | 性別認同 | Gender identity | gender identity |
7 | 性別特質 | Gender traits | sex trait(s)/characteristic(s) (生理) gender trait(s) /characteristic(s) (心理) |
8 | 性別歧視 | Gender discrimination | sex-based discrimination; sex discrimination (對生理性別的歧視) gender-based discrimination; gender discrimination (對心理/社會性別的歧視) |
9 | 任一性別[1]人數(代表)不得少於三分之一 | Neither gender should occupy less than one-third of the seats of the committee/commission | Members of each sex shall constitute no less than one-third of the membership of the committee/commission. |
2021/01/16
Dear All,
As the fruit of several hours of research, here are my preliminary comments re the ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ discussion:
First, it is notable that the UN Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Discrimination against Women (CEDAW) does not use the term ‘gender’ at all. In Article 1, it defines ‘discrimination’ as “any distinction, exclusion or restriction made on the basis of sex …” In Article 5, it calls for the elimination of prejudices and practices “which are based on the idea of the superiority or inferiority of either of the sexes …” All of its other provisions refer to ‘men’ and ‘women’, avoiding the use of ‘sex’, ‘sexes’ and ‘gender’.
General Recommendation No. 28 of CEDAW’s Committee on the Elimination of Discrimination against Woman repeatedly refers to the elimination of all forms of discrimination against women “on the basis of sex and gender” – thus stressing the distinction between ‘sex’ and ‘gender’ in this context. This distinction is highlighted by the call on states to take steps to achieve “sex non-discrimination and gender equality in practice” – i.e., no discrimination on the basis of biological sex, and equality in respect of gender identity. To clarify this distinction, the report states as follows:
Although the Convention only refers to sex-based discrimination, interpreting article 1 together with articles 2 (f) and 5 (a) indicates that the Convention covers gender-based discrimination against women. The term ‘sex’ here refers to biological differences between men and women. The term ‘gender’ refers to socially constructed identities, attributes and roles for women and men and society’s social and cultural meaning for these biological differences resulting in hierarchical relationships between women and men and in the distribution of power and rights favouring men and disadvantaging women.
This subject was helpfully examined by the European Network of Legal Experts in Gender Equality and Non-discrimination, whose report titled Gender Equality Law in Europe was published by the European Commission in January 2019. On page 10 of this report, under the subheading of “Sex/gender/transgender”, it states:
EU law does not provide definitions of the concepts of ‘sex’, ‘gender’ and ‘transgender’, and does not distinguish clearly between sex and gender. Similarly, very few countries define the concepts of ‘sex’, ‘gender’ and/or ‘transgender’ in their legislation. Finland, Montenegro, Romania, Serbia, and Sweden are exceptions. In the Finnish Act on Equality Between Men and Women, a new subsection defines what is meant by gender identity and expression of gender. Article 10 of the Serbian Gender Equality Act defines both sex and gender: ‘sex’ relates to biological features of a person, while ‘gender’ means socially established roles, position and status of women and men in public and private lives from which, due to social, cultural and historic differences, discrimination ensues on the basis of biologically belonging to a sex. Romania recently (2015) introduced definitions of sex and gender, as well as ‘gender stereotypes’ in its Gender Equality Law, whereby gender is understood to mean the combination of roles, behaviours, features and activities that society considers to be appropriate for women and men. In Sweden, the Discrimination Act defines sex as the fact “that someone is a woman or a man.” Maltese law includes definitions of ‘gender expression’ and ‘gender identity’.
In light of these authorities, I would suggest:
1. Strictly speaking, 性別 should be translated as ‘sex’ rather than ‘gender’, even though both terms are commonly used interchangeably in English-speaking countries, with ‘gender’ having perhaps already become more commonly used than ‘sex’ for indicating whether one is male or female. [Note: According to Wikipedia, the use of ‘gender’ in place of ‘sex’ as a biological classification can be traced to the 1980s, officially adopted in 1993 when the US Food and Drug Administration started to use ‘gender’ instead of ‘sex’; however, in 2011, the FDA reversed its position and began using ‘sex’ as the biological classification and ‘gender’ as “a person’s self representation as male or female, or how that person is responded to by social institutions based on the individual’s gender presentation.”]
2. To cover the situation of those whose biological sex is not definitively male or female, or who do not identify with their birth sex, or who are undergoing or have undergone transition, 性別認同 should be translated as ‘gender identity’, since the identification is more with the construct of gender than with the biological fact of sex. This also allows for identification as gender neutral.
3. I’d say that 性別特質 might be translated as either ‘sex trait(s)’ or ‘gender trait(s)’ since it could refer to trait(s) of either biological sex or gender construct.
4. 性別歧視 might be translated as both ‘sex discrimination’ and ‘gender discrimination’ (or ‘sex-based discrimination’ and ‘gender-based discrimination’, as used in the above-cited General Recommendation No. 28).
5. 性傾向， 性侵害， 性騷擾 and 性霸凌 are appropriately translated, respectively, as ‘sexual orientation’, ‘sexual assault’, ‘sexual harassment’ and ‘sexual bullying’, since they refer to sexual behavior rather than maleness versus femaleness.
6. 任一性別人數（代表）不得少雨三分之一 should be translated as “Members of each sex shall occupy no less than one third of the seats of the committee/commission” or “Members of each sex shall constitute no less than one-third of the membership of the committee/commission.” (Note: In laws and regulations, 應 and 不得 should be translated respectively as ‘shall’ and ‘shall not’ rather than ‘should’ or ‘should not’, since they are prescriptive rather than suggestive.)
Peter
(6)「性」與「性別」英文用詞專家學者諮詢小組會議紀錄 Minutes of the Second Expert Meeting on the Usage of Sex and Gender Called by the Executive Yuan
壹、 時間：110年1月22日（星期五）下午2時
貳、 地點：本院第七會議室
參、 主持人：吳處長秀貞 紀錄：蔡宏富
肆、 出(列)席人員：詳如簽到表
伍、 主席致詞：略。
陸、 報告事項：略。
柒、 討論案：
第1案：我國法律和政策文件用詞有關「性」與「性別」之英文用詞檢視結果之其他疑義，請討論案。
決議：
一、 有關中文「性別」之英譯無法統一翻譯為sex或gender，應視法律內容脈絡判斷。至有關委員所提總統副總統選舉罷免法等疑義，併於討論案第2案就各相關法規內容討論。
二、 有關任一性別人數(代表)不得少於三分之一之英譯，維持現行性平處提供之CEDAW第3次國家報告結論性意見與建議第10點及第11點有關「性」與「性別」英文檢視原則內容版本，未來因應性別內涵之進程再作不同英譯處理考量。另刪除該檢視原則之註釋2文字。
[[1] 包含性別比例、任一性別、單一性別比例、任一性別比例、任一性別人數等文字。
第2案：有關各部會依本處提供英文(譯)之檢視原則辦理法規檢視作業之結果，請討論案。
決議：
一、 法規涉及須提供個人資料記載「性別」者，基於不同國家證件之性別英譯可能為sex或gender，爰該類法規之「性別」英譯為sex/gender，以利實務運作順暢。
二、 專家學者其他修正建議彙整如附件，並由性平處另函請相關部會依本次會議決議再行修正。
捌、 散會。（下午5時15分）
法規之性與性別英譯檢視結果之專家學者檢視意見
目錄
發表文章
