以家之實，抗家之名：台灣女同志的成家實踐

Abstract

本研究從台灣女同志的成家實踐，探討台灣家庭的變遷，與親屬關係的社會建構，並試圖指出性傾向�性別結構�性別關係在其中的多重張力。我採取田野工作方法，於前測時訪問了四位女同志，進一步在正式研究中訪談了八對女同志伴侶。本研究發現，女同志以愛與照顧為主的家務依賴關係，為伴侶是否成家的界定，因此漢人父系家庭中，被掩蓋的女性照顧活動，在女同志家庭中反被突顯，並在女同志主體的成家論述上與行動上，挪移為家庭的基礎，被賦予重要的價值。這一方面解構了家庭與血緣生殖的關聯，一方面也不脫離常民所經驗的具體家庭生活。漢人父系親屬結構的限制被轉化，出現了女同志成家的可能性，也突顯了當代台灣家庭的變化。 然而，父系血緣對於女同志主體而言，並非可隨意拋棄的文化概念。雖然經濟能力，使女同志能脫離女兒身分在傳統父系親屬結構中，一定要「被交換」的命運，加上不須擔負血緣繼嗣的義務，給予女同志家庭建構另類親屬關係的空間，但父系親屬結構掌控了家庭的物質資源，在目前女同志家庭沒有法制規範的情況下，父系親屬結構對女同志而言，是一個重要的社會關係資源，如同女同志成家的中介。也是在這樣的本土脈絡下，做為一種新型態的社會建構，台灣女同志成家，依然與既有漢人父系親屬結構有著一定程度的交織互動。 基於對女同志成家實踐的描述，本研究進一步提出「日常生活中的實作式現身」，突顯以家庭關係實做來展演自我，強調自我認同，而非標舉同志認同的反抗策略。

My research examines how lesbians “doing family” in Taiwan, and analyzes how their “doing family” is related with the transition of the Taiwanese family struction as well as the sexuality/gender system. I interviewed 8 lesbian couples, and 4 lesbians in my pilot study. I find that lesbians in Taiwan define their families as a domestic union of love and care work, where family members depend on each other. In Chinese patrilineage family, women always take the responsibility of invisible domestic works. However, lesbians stress the importance of domestic works, and emphasize the value of love and care work of it, and view it as the foundation of family life. I argue that this definition breaks the myth that family can only be created by biological procreation. On the other hand, it is also the same with the family life that most Taiwanese people experience. The belief that the traditional Chinese kinship structure of patrilineage is based on biology is also challenged, for lesbians create this new definition of family. It is the change of family in Taiwan that bring the resources of lesbians to build their family, and their action in turn reshape the Taiwanese family. However, lesbians I interviewed do not treat patrilineage ties of blood as a worthless culture concept. I observe that the lesbians I interviewed can slip out of the daughter’s destiny that women must be exchanged in patrilineage rule. It is because their economic independence, and their exemption from the responsibility of having son to carry on the family name. Both conditions give them the capacity of creating their own family. Nevertheless, Chinese kinship structure of patrilineage has controlled the material resources of having a house. Because lesbians family in Taiwan are still not entitled to certain rights through legal protection,Chinese kinship structure of patrilineage still plays a role as mediating the resource of social relationships for lesbians to “do” family. And with this local context, lesbians family in Taiwan still have frequent interaction with the traditional Chinese kinship structure of patrilineage. Lesbians’ “doing family” demonstrate a new form of coming out of the closet; they come out with their everyday lives in family relationship, rather than declaring their lesbian identity explicitly and openly. I aruge that what they strive to establish is a broad self identity, not limited to gay and lesbian identity that is emphasized in Taiwan’s gay and lesbian movement.