林恩·奧布賴恩·哈爾斯坦 鄭秀君

The election of Michelle Wu as Bostons new mayor is historic. Wus election， as NPR noted， “broke a 199-year streak of white， male elected city leaders.” Much of the local and national coverage of Wus election also documented Wus history-making intersectionality1 in terms of both race and gender. Boston.com wrote that Wu， who would be sworn in as mayor on November 16， would “become the first woman， person of color， and Asian American elected as mayor of Boston.”

But this focus on Wus win is missing an additional shaping factor in her identity： she is also a mother who insists that being a mother is another central formative factor of her identity， politics， and campaign. Until her motherhood is also recognized in these intersectional descriptions， the historic nature of Wus win will remain incomplete and dishonors her commitment to making mothering both visible and a key shaping factor of who she is as a politician and as Bostons mayor-elect.

Of course， there have been politicians who are mothers—Hillary Clinton， Wus own mentor， Elizabeth Warren. As Seth Kovan and Sonja Michel suggest in their book Mothers of a New World， many women “transformed motherhood from womens primary private responsibility into public policy.”

By the 1980s in the United States， many privileged well-educated women began to take advantage of the large-scale social changes that resulted from the 1960s and 1970s. Unfortunately many of those women were told that in order to be successful， they either had to forgo motherhood or keep motherhood invisible or secondary to their professional life and only part of their private identity.

As I was working on a PhD in the late 1980s and early 1990s， both my MA advisor and PhD advisor were childless women. Both shared with me that they had been told， both explicitly and implicitly， that “successful” academics were unencumbered by family responsibilities. In fact， my MA advisor told me that she made a decision to be childless in order to become a successful scholar.

Fortunately for me， however， neither discouraged me from becoming a mother someday. But I was counseled throughout my early career to wait until after I received tenure， advice， I might add， that many graduate students continue to hear today. Equally important， and especially early in my career after I became a mother， as with other professional women I felt pressure to keep my “private” and “professional” lives separate. After I turned my intellectual interest in feminist thinking and writing toward motherhood， however， I began resisting these pressures to keep quiet about motherhood， to resist separating motherhood as a central shaping factor of who I am as a human， a professor， a thinker， and a writer.

What is exciting and important to me about Wu， then， is that she has resisted this mothering-isnt-one-of-the-central-factors-of-my-identity model. She has embraced the idea that her lived experiences of caregiving—first as a daughter， then as a mother—are pivotal to her identity as a human and a politician， and as such， must be made explicit and visible. Indeed， in my reading of Wu， she has been clear and direct about how her lived experiences—as a woman of color， as an Asian American， and as a mother—have informed her leadership， politics， and policy decisions. On her campaign website， under “Meet Michelle，” Wu describes herself： “Im a mom， a daughter of immigrants， and I fiercely believe that we can solve our deepest challenges through building community.” In her final passage in this section， she writes， “This work is deeply personal for me. As a mom to Blaise and Cass， every day I feel the urgency of families fighting the system to hear us， and to build communities that are healthy， safe， and resilient.”

Back when she was City Council president and in the midst of a reelection campaign in 2017， three months after the birth of her second son， Cass， Wu wrote an editorial titled “City Council President： Why Im Bringing My Baby to Work” for CNN. “Women especially are often asked to choose between being a mother and being a leader，” it said. “Without adequate policy support， too many women face not only financial barriers to balancing motherhood and leadership， but cultural stigmas too.” After fully acknowledging that she understands how privileged she is and that many parents do not have the same options she did， Wu continued： “In bringing my baby to work， I am happy to be a visible reminder of how messy and difficult it is to be a working parent.”

I am advocating for a particular kind of maternal “getting it done” modeled by Wu. As Wu also noted in her CNN editorial： “I know that many parents do not have the options I do. It motivates me further to fight for better solutions especially for moms who dont have the option of bringing their babies to work or the resources to make other arrangements.”

Wus maternal embrace is unlike the kind of uber-2mom， neoliberal maternal embrace and suggestion that “good-mother politicians” get things done on their own， based on their own determination and individual will. Rather， it is rooted in a visible maternal embrace that motivates political leaders to be community-focused， rather than individually focused， and to fight for the family supports that the United States continues to so desperately need.

吳弭當(dāng)選波士頓市長具有重要歷史意義。美國國家公共廣播電臺稱，吳弭勝選“終結(jié)了波士頓連續(xù)199年由白人男性任職市長的局面”。在報道吳弭的勝選時，不少當(dāng)?shù)丶懊绹鴩颐襟w也分析了她的種族和性別在這一歷史性事件中的交織影響。Boston.com稱，即將在（2021年）11月16日宣誓就職的吳弭“將成為波士頓歷史上第一位女市長，第一位有色人種市長，也是第一位亞裔市長”。

不過，這種對吳弭勝選的關(guān)注忽略了塑造她身份的另一因素：她同時還是一位母親，她堅稱身為人母對自己的身份認(rèn)同、政治觀念、競選活動同樣有著重大影響。在分析多重身份的交織影響時，只有把她的母親身份也考慮進去，她獲選的歷史性意義才會完整，她的承諾才能兌現(xiàn)：讓大家看到母親這一角色，并使之成為塑造她作為政治人物（包括波士頓新當(dāng)選市長）的一個要素。

當(dāng)然，世間不乏身為人母的政治家，比如希拉里·克林頓和吳弭的導(dǎo)師伊麗莎白·沃倫。正如塞思·科萬和索尼婭·米歇爾在《新世界的媽媽們》一書中所說，許多女性“將母親身份從女性的主要私有責(zé)任轉(zhuǎn)變?yōu)楣舱摺薄?/p>

到了20世紀(jì)80年代，美國許多出身特權(quán)階層、受過良好教育的女性開始從60年代和70年代的大規(guī)模社會變革中獲益?？上У氖?，這些女性中有許多被告知，要想成功，她們要么干脆不做母親，要么必須將母親身份隱藏起來或置于事業(yè)之后，只把它當(dāng)作她們私人身份中的一部分。

當(dāng)我在20世紀(jì)80年代末和90年代初攻讀博士學(xué)位時，我的碩導(dǎo)和博導(dǎo)都是未曾生育的女性。兩位老師都曾告訴我，她們都聽到過“‘成功學(xué)者不為家庭責(zé)任所累”這種言論，只不過有些人說得直白，有些人說得委婉。事實上，我的碩導(dǎo)告訴我，她為了取得學(xué)術(shù)上的成功才決定不生育。

所幸，她們倆的經(jīng)歷沒有使我打消當(dāng)媽媽的念頭。但在我職業(yè)生涯早期，始終有人建議我要等拿到終身教職后再決定要不要孩子。另外提一句，很多研究生時至今日還在聽到這樣的建議。同樣重要的是，特別是我在處于事業(yè)初期當(dāng)了媽媽以后，我和其他職場女性一樣為了把私人生活和工作分開而感到有壓力。不過，當(dāng)我把學(xué)術(shù)興趣從女權(quán)主義思想和寫作轉(zhuǎn)向母親身份后，我開始抵抗壓力，這些壓力源于避而不談我的母親身份，源于把我的母親身份從塑造我作為人、教授、思考者以及作家的核心因素中剔除。

因此，吳弭令我激動的重要一點是，她抵抗這種思維模式，即“當(dāng)媽媽不是塑造我身份的核心因素之一”。她堅信，她的生活經(jīng)歷中關(guān)于育兒的部分（先是作為女兒，然后又成為母親）對她為人和從政很關(guān)鍵，她認(rèn)為必須對這一部分直言不諱。其實，在我看過的吳弭寫的文章里，她一直都直截了當(dāng)?shù)卣務(wù)撟约鹤鳛橛猩朔N女性、亞裔美國人及一位母親的經(jīng)歷如何影響了她的領(lǐng)導(dǎo)才能、政治觀點和政策決定。在她的競選網(wǎng)站“走進吳弭”這一欄目中，吳弭這么描述自己：“我是一位媽媽，也是移民人家的女兒，我深信我們可以通過建立社區(qū)來解決我們面臨的最嚴(yán)峻的挑戰(zhàn)。”在該欄目的最后一段，她寫道：“這份工作和我的個人生活息息相關(guān)。身為布萊斯和卡斯的媽媽，我每天都感受到家庭與社會體系的抗?fàn)幰哑仍诿冀?，只有?dāng)這種抗?fàn)幾優(yōu)楝F(xiàn)實，我們的聲音才會得到傾聽，健康、安全、具有韌性的社區(qū)才能得以建立?！?/p>

2017年，吳弭擔(dān)任市議會議長，在次子卡斯出生3個月后的一次競選連任活動中，她為美國有線電視新聞網(wǎng)撰寫了一篇題為《我為什么帶著孩子上班？市議會議長如是說》的社論?！芭杂绕浣?jīng)常被迫在當(dāng)媽媽和當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)之間做選擇?！?文章寫道，“沒有足夠的政策支持，太多女性不僅僅面臨平衡當(dāng)媽媽和當(dāng)領(lǐng)導(dǎo)之間的經(jīng)濟阻礙，還面臨文化污名?！眳清裘靼鬃约河卸嘈疫\，而許多做父母的人沒她那么多選擇，完全承認(rèn)這點后，她繼續(xù)寫道：“我?guī)е⒆由习?，能讓大家清楚看到做一名要育兒的上班族是多么棘手和困難，這讓我很高興?！?/p>

我提倡吳弭示范的那種母親式“全力辦好”的做事理念。吳弭在那篇寫給美國有線電視新聞網(wǎng)的社論中還寫道：“我知道許多做父母的人沒有我所擁有的選擇。這更激勵我努力尋找更好的解決方案，特別是為了那些沒法帶著孩子上班或沒有其他辦法安頓孩子的媽媽們?！?/p>

吳弭關(guān)于母親身份的看法不同于“超級媽媽”和新自由主義式的觀點，后者建議“好媽媽型政治家”應(yīng)依靠個人決心和意志獨立做事。吳弭不一樣，她將對母親身份的擁護搬上臺面，激勵政治領(lǐng)導(dǎo)人以社區(qū)而不是個人為中心，為美國仍然迫切需要的育兒支持而努力。

（譯者為“《英語世界》杯”翻譯大賽獲獎?wù)撸?/p>

1 intersectionality各（歧視的）交叉性，指（具有多重社會身份的個體遭受的）各種歧視（性別、性取向、經(jīng)濟社會地位、種族、婚姻狀態(tài)）相互關(guān)聯(lián)、互相影響的狀態(tài)。

2 前綴，同über-，（用于名詞前）極度的，超級的，極好的，極成功的。