臺灣戰後異端性/身體的管束歷史：以同性戀和陰陽人為例，（1950s-2008）

Regulating Deviant Sexualities and Bodies in Taiwan, 1950s-2008: the Cases of Homosexuality and Heramphrodites

余欣庭(Hsin-Ting Yu)

指導教授 ： 王秀雲

高雄醫學大學/護理學院/性別研究所/碩士(2009年)

摘要

本研究探討臺灣戰後以來各種權力機制有關性異端（以同性戀和陰陽人為例）的性與身體論述的管束歷史。我以戰後臺灣社會的歷史變遷為背景，分析各種性與身體的管束力量，例如軍隊、警察、法律、醫學等如何將性／身體異端推擠進入一個「正常」的框架中，亦即身體與性（sexuality）的一致的規範。我採取論述分析的方法，透過臺灣戰後報紙雜誌、醫學期刊、大眾醫學刊物、一般雜誌、醫普書、非醫療專家作品（包含心理與教育輔導專家）以及坊間性教育書籍等資料進行分析。

透過異端性與身體的管制的歷史，我們可見身體的重要性在臺戰後半世紀以來逐漸建立了特殊的重要性。此一重要性，乃是藉由國家機器的各個機制所形成。各類異端的性與身體的現身往往是由於他們與軍隊、警察、戶政、醫療體系發生關係所致；他們的生理性別必須被國家機器一一確認清楚。又如，陰陽人的性別判定強調性器官的「正常」標準；連帶的，個別主體所慾望的對象與社會服儀也要遵守一套對應於身體的性別的規則。

以同性戀而言，50 年代軍隊透過提供軍妓以解決軍人的性需求可視為性治理的一環，也就是軍力、國力的治理，同時也以同性慾望的排除作為手段。同性戀的「生殖力」特別容易關聯到國力的興亡盛衰。而「生殖」於醫療在陰陽人性別決定的過程中，也佔有一定的份量。身體的性別依附在「生殖」功能上，強化了可生殖身體的重要性。

比較臺灣戰後醫學論述與權力機制管束「同性戀」與「陰陽人」的歷史，發現二者呈現相當不同的路徑。對「同性戀」的治理，多少偏離了西方「同性戀不是病」的軌道。但對「陰陽人」的治理，明顯跟隨著西方的以外科手術為主的身體論述而行。同性戀的管制方式，並非總是直接針對同性情慾，有時必須透過否認或確認身體的生理性別來達成。相對於管制同性情慾是通過管理身體的方式進行，管制陰陽人的身體，有時則涉及管束其慾望特質。儘管今日已將同性戀與陰陽人理解為不同的群體，但通過生命政治(biopower)的觀點，我們看到權力對性與身體的治理如何交織展現在二者之中。

關鍵字

同性戀 ； 陰陽人 ； 生殖 ； 管束 ； 生命政治 ； 異端性/身體

並列摘要

Focusing on the cases of homosexualities and intersexualities, this thesis examines the history of the regulations of deviant sexualities and bodies in postwar Taiwan. In doing so, I show that the two-sex model as understood and practiced today was the result of the working of several converging regulatory forces that emerged in the second half of the twentieth century; previously during the period of Japanese rule (1895-1945) the body and sexuality did not subject to the same regulations, and there were several cases where one was allowed to assume the gender of the other sex (i.e. woman presented herself as a man and vice versa). I identify and analyze these regulatory forces such as military, police, law, and medicine. The primary sources include various medical literature, popular press, and other historical documents.

In the post WWII period, through various state apparatuses, including military conscription, household census surveys, police activities, and medical examinations, many bodies were made deviant or “abnormal.” Medical establishments assumed the authority in determining the sex of problematic bodies such as hermaphrodites, and in doing so they came to draw the line between the normal and the abnormal. At the same time, heterosexuality was also imposed upon the body after the sex of the body had been determined. Not surprisingly, one should also cloth and act according to his/her body.

Sexual governance and reproductive regulations were both parts of Taiwan’s nation building project. The former was carried out by providing prostitutes for the military, as an attempt to meet the sexual needs of soldiers, and it also aimed at eliminating the so-called latent same-sex desire. In addition, one of the concerns regarding homosexuality was the supposed infertility, a matter of national productivity and prowess. In the case of assigning sex for the hermaphroditic body, reproductive potential was the main determining factor. Thus, sex was defined by the body’s reproductive capacity, underlining the significance of the reproductive body.

Even though both homosexuality and intersexuality were subject to a set of similar regulatory forces, the ways in which the two were regulated differed. Depite the fact that homosexuality had been removed from DSMIV, physicians in Taiwan were reluctant to de-medicalize homosexuality completely. In contrast, when dealing with the hermaphroditic body, surgeons were compelled to do the same as their western conterparts, i.e. surgically removed the ambiguities of the body. In addition, the regulation of homosexuality was done directly against same-sex desire, instead it was carried out through the confirmation or negation of bodily sex. Whereas in the case of intersexualities, it was sometimes through the management of the desire a regulation of the body was achieved. Taking the viewpoint of bio-power, one finds the regulatory powers of sexualities and bodies were intertwined.

並列關鍵字

homosexuality ； heramphrodites ； reproductive capacity ； regulation ； biopower ； deviant sexualities and bodies

參考文獻

于模抿，＜雌雄莫辦為何？專家看同性戀問題＞，《時報周刊》，第268期，1983.4.17-23, P. 99。

王秀雲，＜身體心理還是基因？科學與同性戀＞，《科學發展月刊》，期385，（2005年1月），頁81-82。

王秀雲，＜太太醫學：台灣婦女醫學寶鑑（1950s-2000s）初探＞，《台灣社會研究季刊》，forthcoming。

王秀雲，＜「招搖過市」：台灣性別文化史中的「不男不女」, 1960s-1970s＞，未刊稿。

王守珍等，《兒童心理會診》（臺北：時報，1981）。