News stories about gender are everywhere today.

現在則有許多有關性別的新故事。

Should people declared men at birth be allowed into women-only colleges?

一個生理男性可以進入女性大學就讀嗎？

Can I use whatever washroom I fancy? Can women become men?

我可以隨喜好來選擇要用什麼廁所嗎？女人可以變成男人嗎？

According to American philosopher Judith Butler, these conversations miss an important point - gender is a lot messier than we'd like to think.

美國哲學家朱迪斯．巴特勒認為，這些討論都忽略了相當重要的概念－社會性別遠比我們想像的要複雜。

Gender is a sort of script - that society expects us to act out.

性別就像是一份腳本，而這個社會希望我們照著演出。

Women have long hair, they wear bikinis, they walk and talk, they even sit like women.

女人有長髮，穿比基尼，他們走路、說話甚至坐姿都要像女人。

And men, are expected to be manly. They walk like men, they talk like men, they pump iron, and they certainly don't get caught up with anything girly.

至於男人則被期待要有男子氣概。他們走路、說話的方式像男人，他們練舉重，而且完全不會跟任何女性化的東西扯上關

Even a hundred years ago, it was perfectly normal for women to have body hair, and boys to wear pink dresses.

即使在一百年前，女人有體毛或者男人穿粉紅色裙子都是非常正常的。

Norms have changed with society.

習俗隨著社會逐漸改變。

Society assumes that girls act like girls because of hormones, or because their brains are just different.

這個社會認為女人之所以要像個女人，是因為他們的賀爾蒙，或是因為他們的腦部結構就是不一樣。

But these gender roles are, according to Butler, determined by society.

但巴特勒認為，這些性別角色都是由社會所決定的。

From the moment the doctor declares it's a girl, we're expected and compelled to act like our gender.

從醫生宣布「這是個女生」那一刻起，我們就被期待並被迫依照我們的社會性別行事。

Girls are supposed to play with purple ponies and dolls, while boys get spaceships and G.I. Joes.

女孩子就應該玩紫色小馬或娃娃，而男生則會收到太空船和大英雄的玩偶當禮物。

Gender is the narrative we ascribe to anatomy. And there's plenty of people who don't fit into either category.

社會性別是我們根據生理而生的敘述，然而許多人並不符合男女的分類。

Our ideal man, and woman, are fictions. And they are constantly breaking down.

我們理想中的男人和女人其實都是被創造出來的，而這樣的概念也逐漸在崩解。

We know of women who prefer swords and sports, and men who prefer dresses and poetry.

我們聽聞喜歡耍劍和運動的女人，也知道喜歡洋裝和詩歌的男人。

For Butler, gender is performative. We act it out every day in our mannerisms, our speech, and our thoughts.

巴特勒認為，社會性別是展演性的。我們在每天的行為、言語和思想中，都在落實這些性別概念。

And when we act it out, we're not just putting on a show, we're consolidating and actively constructing these gender identities.

當我們展示性別的時候，我們不只是在表演，同時也在鞏固和積極建設這些性別認同。

Gender is not just an identity, it's a ritual.

社會性別不只是一種認同，更是一種儀式。

If gender is performative, then perhaps our best course of action is to refuse to perform, perform differently, or even laugh at it.

如果性別是展演性的，或許我們最好的辦法就是拒絕演出、脫稿演出，甚至對它大肆嘲笑。

When we refuse to perform our gender script, the neat binary between men and women starts to fall apart.

當我們拒絕按照性別腳本演出的時候，男女之間嚴謹的二分法就開始瓦解了。

We see people with male anatomy who want to identify as female. And, vice versa.

我們看見生理男性開始追求女性身分認同，反之亦然。

For some, that means seeking surgery to change their anatomy.

有些人則藉由手術來更改自己的生理性別。

This begs the question, what is a real woman?

但這已經丐題了（論證的前提隱藏結論），什麼是真正的女人？

To which Butler responds, there is none. Many others are quite content existing in a grey area, between sexes and genders.

對此，巴特勒回應，沒有所謂「真正的女人」。許多人對於生存在生理及社會性別之間的灰色地帶，相當滿意。

It's this in-between area which exposes that Gender is fluid.

這個中間地帶剛好顯示，所謂社會性別，其實是個浮動的觀念。

Identity serves to restrict our very being, and exclude those who

身分認同束縛了我們的所作所為，同時也排除了

don't conveniently fit into the binary of men and women, such as homosexuals and transgender people.

那些無法輕易歸類為男性或女性的人們，例如同性戀或變性者。

So the question is not "Can boys act like girls," but as Butler may ask, should the category of boys and girls even exist?

所以，我們該問的問題不是「男孩子能不能表現得像個女生」，而是如巴特勒可能提問的，男女這樣的分類到底應不應該存在呢？