往生送死、親屬倫理與同志友誼：老T搬家續探

Abstract

1970年代初，在二戰後成長的第一批台灣女同志們在駐台美軍常光顧的男同志酒吧中，首次取得了依據性別角色區分而賦予的性／別認同指稱：「像男人」的女同志叫「T」（英文「tomboy」的縮寫）；「像女人」者叫「婆」（意為「T的老婆」）。近40年後，在全球化市場經濟的打擊下，不少當年的「T」（今日自稱「老T」）因為年事老大或欠缺此刻市場要求之專業技術的原因，已然失業多年。不僅如此，部分中老年女同志因病住院，但因社會福利的異性戀家屬戶籍規定，故而難以取得給付和補助。 基於長達15年的田野調查資料，本文試圖探究以下議題：首先，老年同志如何認知並處理諸如醫療福利、關懷照顧和死後的喪葬儀式？在如台灣一般仍廣受父系傳承意識形態規範的「現代化」社會中，垂死的女同志（亦即「未嫁的女兒」）會考慮何人作為安排她生命和死亡事務的代表？她的「圈內」友人又是否會與她的原生家庭成員共負此責？若如此，二者如何分工？其次，此研究可如何有助吾人理解生命政治、照護倫理和「酷兒家庭」之社會文化意義間的可能連結關係？更重要的是，何謂「酷兒家庭」？此類家庭的日常生活實踐為何？建立另類關懷照護行動的契機又是什麼？

Coined in the early 1970s gay bars frequented by American soldiers stationed in Taiwan, the English term ”T” (a short for ”tomboy”) refers to ”man-like lesbians” and the Chinese word ”Po” (literally meaning ”woman”) to ”T's wife.” Nearly four decades later most lesbian tomboys are unemployed owing to either senility or lacking professional skills in a rapidly globalized market economy. Moreover, quite a few of them have been hospitalized with terminal illness in need of both welfare benefits and on-site caretaking that are institutionally denied the economically disadvantaged of Taiwan. Based on materials of ethnographic research of fifteen years, this paper addresses the following questions: How does an elderly queer in the deathbed conceive and manage matters of medical welfare, caretaking and the imminent death ceremony? In a ”modernized” Chinese society still characterized by conventional patrilineal ideology, who would be considered by a dying lesbian (namely, an unmarried daughter) to be the legitimate representative of her life-and-death arrangements? Will her queer friends join with the biological family members to carry out the job? If so, is there division of such a form of labor between ”the queer world” and ”the straight one”? In addition, how would such an investigation shed a light on analyzing the possible linkages between life politics, ethics of caretaking, and the socio-cultural significance of ”queer family”? More importantly, would this analysis aid in our understanding of the relationship between the everyday-life practices of the queer family and the possibility of constructing alternative ethical practices of caring?