So my moment of truth did not come all at once. In 2010, I had the chance to be considered for promotion from my job as director of policy planning at the U.S. State Department. This was my moment to lean in, to push myself forward for what are really only a handful of the very top foreign policy jobs, and I had just finished a big, 18-month project for Secretary Clinton, successfully, and I knew I could handle a bigger job.
其实我人生的几个关键拐点 都不是一下子来临的。 2010年,我有个被考虑的机会, 从原来的职位提升为 美国国务院的 政策规划负责人。 这正是我倚身向前, 推动自己前进的时刻。 (尤其是)面对只有凤毛麟角的 最高层外交政策的工作。 而我也刚好为国务卿希拉里·克林顿 成功地完成了 一个长达18个月的大项目。 我知道我能担此重任。
The woman I thought I was would have said yes. But I had been commuting for two years between Washington and Princeton, New Jersey, where my husband and my two teenage sons lived, and it was not going well. I tried on the idea of eking out another two years in Washington, or maybe uprooting my sons from their school and my husband from his work and asking them to join me. But deep down, I knew that the right decision was to go home, even if I didn't fully recognize the woman who was making that choice.
我所知道的那个我 会欣然接受这个机会。 然而,我的丈夫和两个十几岁的儿子 居住在新泽西州的普林斯顿市,我已经 在华盛顿特区和普林斯顿之间 来回奔波了两年。 这种状态并不尽如人意。 我想着在华盛顿再勉强坚持工作两年, 也许我能让我的儿子们转学, 并让我的丈夫来华盛顿工作, 让他们和我一起生活。 但是,在我的内心深处,我知道 我应该选择回家, 即使我不再完全认识 那个下此决定的我。
That was a decision based on love and responsibility. I couldn't keep watching my oldest son make bad choices without being able to be there for him when and if he needed me. But the real change came more gradually. Over the next year, while my family was righting itself, I started to realize that even if I could go back into government, I didn't want to. I didn't want to miss the last five years that my sons were at home. I finally allowed myself to accept what was really most important to me, not what I was conditioned to want or maybe what I conditioned myself to want, and that decision led to a reassessment of the feminist narrative that I grew up with and have always championed.
那是一个基于爱 和责任的决定。 我无法看着我的大儿子 在最需要我意见的时候, 而我却无法伴其左右, 而做出错误的选择。 但是,真正的改变是慢慢显现的。 之后的一年, 当我的家庭恢复原样后, 我开始发现 即使我有机会再回政府工作, 我也不愿意了。 我不愿意失去最后五年 与我的儿子在家相处的时光。 我最终说服了自己 去接受对我最重要的东西, 那并不是我习以为常的目标, 或是我自我定义的目标。 而那个决定也导致我重新审视 那个自小伴我成长并且我始终捍卫的 女权主义的故事。
I am still completely committed to the cause of male-female equality, but let's think about what that equality really means, and how best to achieve it. I always accepted the idea that the most respected and powerful people in our society are men at the top of their careers, so that the measure of male-female equality ought to be how many women are in those positions: prime ministers, presidents, CEOs, directors, managers, Nobel laureates, leaders. I still think we should do everything we possibly can to achieve that goal. But that's only half of real equality, and I now think we're never going to get there unless we recognize the other half. I suggest that real equality, full equality, does not just mean valuing women on male terms. It means creating a much wider range of equally respected choices for women and for men. And to get there, we have to change our workplaces, our policies and our culture.
我依旧全身心投入于 争取男女平等的事业, 但让我们思考一下平等真正的含义, 以及如何能最好地实现它。 我总是认为, 在我们社会中最受尊敬和最强大的人 是那些站在各种职业顶端的男人们, 所以对于男女平等的计量 应该是女性在那些职位中所占的数量。 (比如)首相,总统,首席执行官, 总监,经理,诺贝尔奖获奖者,领导者们。 我也始终坚信,我们应该尽我们所能 去实现那样的目标。 然而,这只是真正平等的一半。 我现在则认为,我们将永远无法实现它, 除非我们意识到那另一半是什么。 我认为真正的、 完全的平等, 不是只用男人的准则 去衡量女性的价值。 它意味着为女性和男性 共同提供更广泛的、 受到同等尊重的选择。 为了实现这个目标, 我们必须改变我们的工作场所、 政策方针和文化。
In the workplace, real equality means valuing family just as much as work, and understanding that the two reinforce each other. As a leader and as a manager, I have always acted on the mantra, if family comes first, work does not come second -- life comes together. If you work for me, and you have a family issue, I expect you to attend to it, and I am confident, and my confidence has always been borne out, that the work will get done, and done better. Workers who have a reason to get home to care for their children or their family members are more focused, more efficient, more results-focused. And breadwinners who are also caregivers have a much wider range of experiences and contacts. Think about a lawyer who spends part of his time at school events for his kids talking to other parents. He's much more likely to bring in new clients for his firm than a lawyer who never leaves his office. And caregiving itself develops patience -- a lot of patience -- and empathy, creativity, resilience, adaptability. Those are all attributes that are ever more important in a high-speed, horizontal, networked global economy.
在职场中, 真正的平等是对家庭 和工作给予同样的价值衡量, 并懂得两者是相辅相成的。 作为一名领导者以及管理者, 我总是言行合一。 如果家庭是第一位, 那工作就不是第二位。 生活是齐头并进的。 如果你为我效力, 而又需要解决家庭问题时, 我希望你去处理它。 同时,我有信心, 而我的这种信心 总是一再被证明是对的, 那就是他们不仅会完成自己的工作, 并且做得更出色。 那些提出需要回家照顾孩子 或者其他家人的员工们, (在工作上)更专注,更有效率, 并且更加注重结果。 而且那些既要养家糊口、 又要照料家庭的人, 会有更丰富的经验 和交际圈。 试想一个律师,他用一部分时间 参加他孩子的学校活动, 与其他家长交谈。 与一个足不出户的律师相比, 他更有可能为他的事务所 引入新的客户。 另外,照料家庭本身 能培养耐心- (而且是)很多的耐心- 以及同情心,创造力,恢复力,适应力。 而所有这些特征已然显得更为重要, 尤其是在一个高速(运转)、横向化、 网络化的全球经济体中。
The best companies actually know this. The companies that win awards for workplace flexibility in the United States include some of our most successful corporations, and a 2008 national study on the changing workforce showed that employees in flexible and effective workplaces are more engaged with their work, they're more satisfied and more loyal, they have lower levels of stress and higher levels of mental health. And a 2012 study of employers showed that deep, flexible practices actually lowered operating costs and increased adaptability in a global service economy.
而最优秀的公司恰恰了解到了这点。 那些在美国以(提供) 弹性工作场所著称的公司中, 有不少是我们最成功的公司。 而一项2008年关于 美国劳动力变化的报告 也显示,员工 在有弹性和有效的工作场所中, 更愿意全情投入他们的工作, 他们会更满足和更忠心, 他们的压力水平相对较低, 而精神健康水平则相对较高。 另一项2012年关于雇主的研究 进一步显示,灵活的操作 实际上降低了(公司的)经营成本, 并加强了(公司的)适应能力, (尤其是)在全球服务经济下。
So you may think that the privileging of work over family is only an American problem. Sadly, though, the obsession with work is no longer a uniquely American disease. Twenty years ago, when my family first started going to Italy, we used to luxuriate in the culture of siesta. Siesta is not just about avoiding the heat of the day. It's actually just as much about embracing the warmth of a family lunch. Now, when we go, fewer and fewer businesses close for siesta, reflecting the advance of global corporations and 24-hour competition. So making a place for those we love is actually a global imperative.
所以你可能会想, 将工作先于家庭的理念 仅仅只是我们美国人的问题。 不过遗憾的是,沉迷于工作 已不再是一种美国独有的病态现象。 二十年前, 我们一家第一次去意大利时, 我们尽情享受了那里的午休文化。 午休不仅仅只是为了避开一天中炎热的时间, 它其实恰恰 包含了享受一顿温暖的家庭午餐。 现在,当我们再去意大利, 越来越少的公司 会为了午休而暂停营业, 这反应出了全球企业的推进 以及24小时化的竞争。 因此,为我们所爱的人留出空间 实际上是一种全球性使命。
In policy terms, real equality means recognizing that the work that women have traditionally done is just as important as the work that men have traditionally done, no matter who does it. Think about it: Breadwinning and caregiving are equally necessary for human survival. At least if we get beyond a barter economy, somebody has to earn an income and someone else has to convert that income to care and sustenance for loved ones.
在政策方面, 真正的平等意味着承认 那些传统意义上女性所从事的工作, 其重要性等同于 那些传统意义上男性们从事的工作, 无论是谁在从事它。 思考一下,养家糊口和照料家庭 都是人类生存所必需的。 至少,一旦我们超越了以物换物的经济模式, 总得有人赚取收入, 另外得有人将那些收入转化为 照料和维持家人的生计。
Now most of you, when you hear me talk about breadwinning and caregiving, instinctively translate those categories into men's work and women's work. And we don't typically challenge why men's work is advantaged. But consider a same-sex couple like my friends Sarah and Emily. They're psychiatrists. They got married five years ago, and now they have two-year-old twins. They love being mothers, but they also love their work, and they're really good at what they do. So how are they going to divide up breadwinning and caregiving responsibilities? Should one of them stop working or reduce hours to be home? Or should they both change their practices so they can have much more flexible schedules? And what criteria should they use to make that decision? Is it who makes the most money or who is most committed to her career? Or who has the most flexible boss?
而现在,当你们大部分的人在听我 讨论关于养家糊口和照料家庭的时候, 你们本能地将这两类工作 分别理解为男人的工作和女人的工作。 另外,我们通常也不会质疑 为什么男性的工作显得更得天独厚。 然而,想像一下一对同性伴侣, 比如我的朋友萨拉和艾米丽。 她们是精神科医生。 她们5年前结婚, 现在有一对两岁的双胞胎。 她们热爱作为母亲的角色, 但她们也热爱自己从事的工作, 而且她们在工作上确实很出色。 那她们将如何分配 养家糊口和照料家庭的职责呢? 她们中的一位是否应该不工作 或者减少工作时间呆在家里? 又或者她们应该同时更换工作? 这样她们就能有更多灵活的时间了? 她们应该依据怎样的标准 来做决定呢? 是谁赚的钱更多? 还是谁的事业心更重呢? 抑或是谁的老板更变通呢?
The same-sex perspective helps us see that juggling work and family are not women's problems, they're family problems. And Sarah and Emily are the lucky ones, because they have a choice about how much they want to work. Millions of men and women have to be both breadwinners and caregivers just to earn the income they need, and many of those workers are scrambling. They're patching together care arrangements that are inadequate and often actually unsafe. If breadwinning and caregiving are really equal, then why shouldn't a government invest as much in an infrastructure of care as the foundation of a healthy society as it invests in physical infrastructure as the backbone of a successful economy?
同性伴侣的案例让我们了解到, 同时工作并照顾家庭 并不是女性的矛盾, 而是家庭的矛盾。 萨拉和艾米丽是幸运的, 因为她们可以选择 她们的工作时长。 数以百万的男女 既要养家糊口又得照料家庭, 只为赚取赖以生计的收入, 很多人只能勉强度日。 他们相互拼凑时间来照料家庭, 而这是不够的, 并且往往是不安全的。 如果养家糊口和照料家庭是真正一致的, 那为什么政府 没有向作为健康社会为根基的 福利基础设施方面进行投资? 就像往作为成功经济为支柱的 物质基础设施方面,进行一样多的投入?
The governments that get it -- no surprises here -- the governments that get it, Norway, Sweden, Denmark, the Netherlands, provide universal child care, support for caregivers at home, school and early childhood education, protections for pregnant women, and care for the elderly and the disabled. Those governments invest in that infrastructure the same way they invest in roads and bridges and tunnels and trains. Those societies also show you that breadwinning and caregiving reinforce each other. They routinely rank among the top 15 countries of the most globally competitive economies, but at the same time, they rank very high on the OECD Better Life Index. In fact, they rank higher than other governments, like my own, the U.S., or Switzerland, that have higher average levels of income but lower rankings on work-life balance.
有些政府意识到了- 毫无疑问- 那些意识到这点的政府 像挪威、瑞典、丹麦和荷兰。 他们提供广泛的儿童福利保障, 为在家的照料家庭的一方提供资助, 提供学校和儿童时期的学前早教, 为怀孕期妇女提供保障, 并且为老年人和残疾人提供护理。 这些政府在那些基础设施方面的投资 与他们在道路、桥梁、 隧道和铁路等(基础设施)方面的投资一致。 这些社会同时也证明 养家糊口和照料家庭 是相辅相成的。 这些国家常年排在全球 最具竞争力的经济体中的前15名, 但与此同时, 他们在经济合作和发展组织(OECD)的 “美好生活指数”排名中也名列前茅。 事实上,他们比其他一些国家的排位要更高, 比如像我的国家,美国或瑞士, 这些国家有较高平均收入水平, 但较低“事业-生活”平衡水平。
So changing our workplaces and building infrastructures of care would make a big difference, but we're not going to get equally valued choices unless we change our culture, and the kind of cultural change required means re-socializing men. (Applause) Increasingly in developed countries, women are socialized to believe that our place is no longer only in the home, but men are actually still where they always were. Men are still socialized to believe that they have to be breadwinners, that to derive their self-worth from how high they can climb over other men on a career ladder. The feminist revolution still has a long way to go. It's certainly not complete. But 60 years after "The Feminine Mystique" was published, many women actually have more choices than men do. We can decide to be a breadwinner, a caregiver, or any combination of the two. When a man, on the other hand, decides to be a caregiver, he puts his manhood on the line. His friends may praise his decision, but underneath, they're scratching their heads. Isn't the measure of a man his willingness to compete with other men for power and prestige? And as many women hold that view as men do. We know that lots of women still judge the attractiveness of a man based in large part on how successful he is in his career. A woman can drop out of the work force and still be an attractive partner. For a man, that's a risky proposition. So as parents and partners, we should be socializing our sons and our husbands to be whatever they want to be, either caregivers or breadwinners. We should be socializing them to make caregiving cool for guys. (Applause)
所以,改变我们的工作场所, 并建立福利保障基础设施 将会大有不同, 但我们还是无法获得同等价值的选择, 除非我们改变我们的文化, 而这种文化变革上的诉求 意味着要对人重新社会化。 (掌声) 在越来越多的发达国家, 社会的认知使女性相信, 我们的舞台不再仅仅局限在家中, 但男性事实上仍然留在他们原来的位置。 社会的认知让他们依旧坚信, 他们必须成为养家糊口的人, 这种认识使他们 通过在职业生涯中超越其他男性 来获得自尊。 女权主义的革命道路仍然长路漫漫。 她肯定还没有完成。 然而, 在《女性的奥秘》出版60年后, 许多女性实际上获得了 比男性更多的选择。 我们可以选择养家糊口, 照料家庭,亦或者兼而为之。 但另一方面,当一位男性 选择照料家庭, 他就把自己的男子气概放在了悬崖边。 他的朋友们可能会称赞他的决定, 但他们心底一定快抓狂了。 难道衡量一个男人的价值, 不就是看他为了权力和声望 去与其他男人竞争的雄心壮志么? 而且持有这种观点的女性 和男性同样多。 我们知道许多女性 在判断一位男性是否有魅力时, 仍然将其事业上有多成功 作为绝大部分的衡量基础。 一位离开了职场的女性 仍然可以成为一个有魅力的伴侣。 但如果是男人,那会是个有风险的提议。 所以作为家长和妻子, 我们应该让我们的儿子和丈夫 在认识和适应社会的过程中, 选择他们想要扮演的角色, 无论是照料家庭还是赚钱养家。 我们应该让他们认识到,男人照料家庭 是一件很棒的事情。 (掌声)
I can almost hear lots of you thinking, "No way." But in fact, the change is actually already happening. At least in the United States, lots of men take pride in cooking, and frankly obsess over stoves. They are in the birthing rooms. They take paternity leave when they can. They can walk a baby or soothe a toddler just as well as their wives can, and they are increasingly doing much more of the housework. Indeed, there are male college students now who are starting to say, "I want to be a stay-at-home dad." That was completely unthinkable 50 or even 30 years ago. And in Norway, where men have an automatic three month's paternity leave, but they lose it if they decide not to take it, a high government official told me that companies are starting to look at prospective male employees and raise an eyebrow if they didn't in fact take their leave when they had kids. That means that it's starting to seem like a character defect not to want to be a fully engaged father.
我几乎可以听到你们很多人 心里在想,“没门儿”。 但事实上,这种改变已经在发生。 至少在美国, 许多男人对于自己烹饪引以为傲, 并坦诚自己热衷于此。 他们会呆在产房里、 然后尽可能的休育婴假。 他们会自己带着小婴儿, 或牵着刚学步的小孩散步, 就和他们的妻子干得一样出色, 而且他们包揽 越来越多的家务活。 事实上,现在有些男性大学生 开始说: “我要做一个全职爸爸。” 这在50年前甚至30年前 完全是难以置信的。 在挪威,那里的男性 自动享受为期三个月的育婴假, 但如果他们选择不使用育婴假, 那这个假期就没有了。 一位政府的高层官员告诉我, 现在一些公司开始从这个角度来判断 他们男性员工的未来, 并且会不满地竖起眉毛,如果 在孩子出生时,他们没有使用育婴假。 这就意味着这似乎开始成为 一种负面的品质, (让人认为)此人是位不称职的父亲。
So I was raised to believe that championing women's rights meant doing everything we could to get women to the top. And I still hope that I live long enough to see men and women equally represented at all levels of the work force. But I've come to believe that we have to value family every bit as much as we value work, and that we should entertain the idea that doing right by those we love will make all of us better at everything we do.
我从小到大 相信保卫女性权利 就是尽我们一切所能 让女性站在巅峰。 而我仍然希望我能活着看到, 所有阶级的劳动力 都实现男女平等的一天。 但是我开始相信, 我们必须珍惜我们家庭的 一点一滴, 就如同我们重视我们的工作一样。 而且我们应该思考并明白, 好好对待我们所爱的人 会让我们在做其他任何事情上更出色。
Thirty years ago, Carol Gilligan, a wonderful psychologist, studied adolescent girls and identified an ethic of care, an element of human nature every bit as important as the ethic of justice. It turns out that "you don't care" is just as much a part of who we are as "that's not fair." Bill Gates agrees. He argues that the two great forces of human nature are self-interest and caring for others. Let's bring them both together. Let's make the feminist revolution a humanist revolution. As whole human beings, we will be better caregivers and breadwinners. You may think that can't happen, but I grew up in a society where my mother put out small vases of cigarettes for dinner parties, where blacks and whites used separate bathrooms, and where everybody claimed to be heterosexual. Today, not so much. The revolution for human equality can happen. It is happening. It will happen. How far and how fast is up to us.
30年前,卡罗尔.吉利根(Carol Gilligan), 一位出色的心理学家,她通过研究青春期少女 确认了关怀伦理 作为一种人性本质, 与正义伦理同样重要。 这就派生出“你不关心” 在我们部分的观念中, 与“那不公平”是一样的。 比尔.盖茨(Bill Gates)表示同意。 他认为人性中两股伟大的力量 是利己和关爱他人。 那就让我们将两者放在一起。 让我们把女权主义革命变成 人道主义革命。 对所有人类来说, 我们能更好地照料家庭和养家糊口。 你可能会认为这不可能发生, 但我在这样一个社会长大: 我的母亲会为了晚餐聚会 摆上小型烟雾化器, 黑人和白人用分开的卫生间, 每个人都声称自己是异性恋。 而现在,(这些)都不再普遍。 为争取人类平等的革命 会发生的。 事实上,它正在发生着。 它比将发生。 到什么程度以及会有多快 都取决于我们自己。
Thank you.
谢谢大家。
(Applause)
(掌声)