演讲文本

So after traveling and talking to people
在我游历俄克拉何马州和得克萨斯州
in places like Oklahoma or small-town Texas,
并与那里小镇上的人交谈之后，
we found evidence that the initial premise was dead on.
我们发现有迹象显示之前的提案已经死了。
Visibility really is key.
相互了解是关键。
Familiarity really is the gateway drug to empathy.
熟悉程度是引发同情的重要因素。
Once an issue pops up in your own backyard or amongst your own family,
当一个问题出现在你家后院或你自己的家庭中，
you're far more likely to explore sympathy for it
你有大得多的可能性去同情，
or explore a new perspective on it.
或接受一个新的观点。
Of course, in my travels I met people
当然，在我的旅行中我遇见了
who legally divorced their children for being other than straight,
跟同性恋子女断绝法律关系的父母，
but I also met people who were Southern Baptists
但是我也看到了这样的父母，当他们知道
who switched churches because their child was a lesbian.
他们的孩子是同性恋时，他们从美南浸信会改信了基督教。
Sparking empathy had become the backbone of Self Evident Truths.
同理心的触动是“不证自明的真理”的基石。
But here's what I was starting to learn that was really interesting:
但是接下来我发现了真正有趣的事情：
Self Evident Truths doesn't erase the differences between us.
“不证自明的真理”并没有消除我们之间的差异。
In fact, on the contrary, it highlights them.
相反的，差异被突出了。
It presents, not just the complexities
这体现出这件事情的复杂性，
found in a procession of different human beings,
不仅体现在不同的人群之间，
but the complexities found within each individual person.
也体现在每个独立的个人之间。
It wasn't that we had too many boxes, it was that we had too few.
我们的盒子不是太多，而是太少。
At some point I realized that my mission to photograph "gays" was inherently flawed,
在某刻我意识到我拍摄“同性恋者”的计划一开始就有瑕疵，
because there were a million different shades of gay.
“同性恋者”这个词可以分成上百万种不同的分类。
Here I was trying to help,
我希望能够做点什么，
and I had perpetuated the very thing I had spent my life trying to avoid --
而我接下来做的事情是我毕生想要去避免的——
yet another box.
创造新的盒子。
At some point I added a question to the release form
从某刻开始我在自己的问卷中添加了一个问题，
that asked people to quantify themselves
要求填写者评估自己“同性恋”的程度，
on a scale of one to 100 percent gay.
从零分到一百分给自己打分。
And I watched so many existential crises unfold in front of me.
然后我就目睹了无数的存在危机在我面前上演。
People didn't know what to do
人们从来没有
because they had never been presented with the option before.
被问过这个问题，也不知道怎么回答。
Can you quantify your openness?
你能量化自己的开放性么？
Once they got over the shock, though,
当他们缓过神来之后，
by and large people opted for somewhere between 70 to 95 percent
多人给自己的分数在70到95分
or the 3 to 20 percent marks.
和3到20分之间。
Of course, there were lots of people who opted for a 100 percent one or the other,
当然也有人认为自己是百分百的异性恋或同性恋，
but I found that a much larger proportion of people
但是我发现非常大比例的人
identified as something that was much more nuanced.
自我定位都是比较微妙的。
I found that most people fall on a spectrum of what I have come to refer to as "Grey."
我发现大多数人在这个色谱上都落在“灰色”的位置。
Let me be clear though -- and this is very important --
我要明确一点——非常明确的一点——
in no way am I saying that preference doesn't exist.
我从未否认过偏好(preference)的存在。
And I am not even going to address the issue of choice versus biological imperative,
我也没有打算去讨论这个问题是先天基因还是后天选择决定的，
because if any of you happen to be of the belief
但是如果你们当中有人相信
that sexual orientation is a choice,
性取向是后天选择的，
I invite you to go out and try to be grey.
我邀请你站出来承认自己是“灰”的。
I'll take your picture just for trying.
我想给你拍张大头照。
What I am saying though is that human beings are not one-dimensional.
我想说，人类不是单一维度就可以区分的。

视频及简介

演讲简介：

欧伊·蒂利特·莱特为2000个自认为有同性恋倾向的人拍摄了肖像并要求他们为自己同性恋（异性恋）的倾向程度按百分制打分。结果她发现，绝大多数人都认为自己不是百分百的同性恋或异性恋，而是介于两者之间。这给歧视同性恋歧视的人出了一个现实难题：到底要歧视谁？你又如何定义？