21世纪大学英语课文翻译unit2

Unit 2 Book 3
What does the word feminist mean to you? A man-hating female who gets offended at common courtesy? Someone who insists that women can and should do everything men do? A person who sees women's strengths and abilities as different from men's, but equally valuable? Or someone who's sensitive to the unfair treatment that women have suffered for centuries and wants to correct it? The feminist movement has made great progress in ensuring women equal legal rights, but social critics in most countries agree that there's still a long way to go. The three texts in this unit explore some of the difficulties that both men and women encounter along the road to equal rights. Text A challenges us to examine our priorities and attitudes more closely, while Texts B and C contemplate some of the complications of putting our visions of equal rights into practice in everyday life.
The Titanic Puzzle
Should a good feminist accept priority seating on a lifeboat?
by Charles Krauthammer
You're on the Titanic II. It has just hit
an iceberg and is sinking. And, as last
time, there are not enough lifeboats. The
captain shouts, “Women and children
first!” But this time, another voice is
heard: “Why women?”
Why, indeed? Part of the charm of the successful movie Titanic are the period costumes, the period extravagance, and the period prejudices. An audience can enjoy these at a distance. Oddly, however, of all the period attitudes in the film,
the old maritime tradition of “women and children first” enjoys total acceptance by modern audiences. Listen to the audience boo at the bad guys who
try to sneak on the lifeboats with -- or ahead of -- the
ladies.
But is not grouping women with children a raging
anachronism? Should not any self-respecting modern
person, let alone feminist, object to it as insulting to
women?
Yet its usage is as common today as it was in 1912.
Consider these examples
taken almost at random from recent newspapers:
“The invaders gunned down the Indians, most
of them women and children ...”
“As many as 200 civilians, most of them
women and children, were killed ...”
“At the massacre in Ahmici 103 Muslims, including 33 women and children,
were killed ...”
At a time when women fly combat
aircraft and run multi-national
corporations, how can one not wince when
adult women are routinely classed with
children? In Ahmici, it seems, 70 adult men
were killed. And how many adult women?
Not clear. When things get serious, when
blood starts to flow or ships start to sink, you'll find them with the children.
Children are entitled to special consideration for two reasons: helplessness and innocence. They have not yet acquired either the faculty of reason or the wisdom of experience. Consequently, they are defenseless (incapable of fending for themselves) and blameless (incapable of real sin). That's why we grant them special protection. In an emergency, it is our duty to save them first because they, helpless, have put their lives in our hands. And in wartime, they are supposed to be protected by special immunity because they can have threatened or offended
no one.
The phrase “women and children”
attributes to women the same dependence
and moral simplicity we find in
five-year-olds. Such an attitude perhaps made sense in an era dominated by male privilege. Given the disabilities attached to womanhood in 1912, it was only fair that a new standard of gender equality not suddenly be proclaimed just as lifeboat seats were being handed out. That deference -- a somewhat more urgent variation on giving up your seat on the bus to a woman -- complemented and perhaps to some extent compensated for the legal and social constraints placed
on women at the time.
But in our era of extensive social restructuring to
grant women equality in education, in employment, in
government, in athletics, what entitles women to the
privileges -- and reduces them to the status -- of
children?
Evolutionary psychologists might say that
ladies-to-the-lifeboats is an instinct that developed to
perpetuate the species: Women are indispensable
child-bearers. You can repopulate a village if the women survive and only a few of the men, but not if the men survive and only a few of the women. Women being more precious, biologically speaking, than men, evolution has conditioned us to give them the kind of life-protecting deference we give to that other seed of the future: kids.
The problem with this kind of logic, however, is its depressing reductionism.
It's like a serious version of the geneticist's old joke that a chicken is just an egg's way of making another egg. But humans are more than just egg-layers. And traditional courtesies are more than just disguised
survival strategies. So why do we say “women
and children”?
Perhaps it's really “women for children.”
The most basic parental bond is maternal. Equal
parenting is great, but women, from breast to
cradle to reassuring hug, can nurture in ways that
men cannot. And thus, because we value children, women should go second. The
children need them.
But kiddie-centrism gets you only so far.
What if there are no children on board? You
are on the Titanic III, and this time it's a
singles cruise. No kids, no parents. Now:
Iceberg! Lifeboats! Action!
Here's my scenario. The men, out of sheer
irrational heroism, should let the women go
first. And the women, out of sheer feminist self-respect, should refuse.
Result? Stalemate. How does this movie end? How should it end? Hurry, the ship's going down.
泰坦尼克号之谜
一位真正的女权主义者应该接受上救生船的优先权吗？
查尔斯· 克劳瑟莫
你在泰坦尼克II号轮上。

它刚撞上一座冰山，正在下沉。

像上一次一样，没有足够的救生船。

船长喊道：“妇女和孩子们先上！”但这一次，人们听到了另一个声音：“为什么妇女先上？”
的确，为什么？大获成功的电影《泰坦尼克号》的部分魅力在于那个时代的服装，那个时代的奢华，和那个时代的偏见。

时隔多年，观众能够欣赏这些东西。

然而，奇怪的是，电影中的所有那个时代的观念中，“妇女和儿童优先”这一古老的海事传统却被现代观众全盘接受了。

听一听观众对那些试图同女士们一起----或抢在她们前面----偷偷溜上救生船的坏家伙发出的嘘声就知道了。

但是将妇女和儿童归为一类难道不是一种与时代极不相称的行为吗？难道任何一个自尊的现代人----更不用说女权主义者----不该视其为对女性的侮辱而加以反对吗？
然而如今这种做法仍像1912年时一样普遍。

看看这些几乎是随意从最近的报纸上摘选的例子吧：
“入侵者枪杀了印第安人，其中大多数为妇女和儿童……”
“200名平民被杀，其中大多数为妇女和儿童……”
“在阿米奇的大屠杀中，103名穆斯林被杀，其中包括33名妇女和儿童……”
在一个妇女驾驶战斗机、经营跨国公司的时代，这种将成年妇女与儿童归为一类的惯常做法，怎能不让人皱眉蹙额呢？在阿米奇好像也有70名成年男子被杀。

那么有多少名成年妇女被杀呢？不清楚。

在事态严重时，在鲜血开始流淌或者轮船开始沉没时，你就会发现她们是和孩子们算在一起的。

孩子们之所以有权享受特殊照顾有两个理由：无助和无辜。

他们还不具备推理的能力或来自经验的智慧。

所以，他们不能自卫（不能照料自己），无可指责（不可能真正犯罪）。

这就是我们给予他们特殊保护的原因。

在紧急情况下，我们有责任先救他们，因为他们软弱无助，已将生命交付于我们手中。

在战时，他们应该受到特殊豁免权的保护，因为他们不可能会威胁或冒犯任何人。

“妇女和儿童”这句话将我们在五岁的孩子们身上看到的依赖性和道德上的单纯也赋予了妇女。

这样一种态度在男性特权占统治地位的时代也许还讲得通。

考虑到1912年时妇女被视为软弱无能的情况，在安排救生船的座位时，确实不宜突然宣布一种性别平等的新标准。

这种礼让----同在公共汽车上给女士让座一样，只不过更有点紧迫----对当时加在妇女身上的法律和社交限制是一种补充，或许在一定程度上是一种补偿。

但我们正在进行广泛的社会重组，在教育、就业、政府、管理、体育运动中给妇女以平等地位，在这样一个时代，是什么使妇女享有儿童的特权，并将她们贬至儿童的地位呢？
进化心理学家们也许会说女士上救生船是一种为繁衍物种而形成的本能：妇女是必不可少的生儿育女者。

如果全部妇女和只有为数不多的男子幸存下来，一个村庄可以重新人丁兴旺，但如果全部男子和只有为数不多的妇女幸存下来，情况则不然。

因为从生物学的角度来讲妇女比男子更为珍贵，所以进化论的影响使我们把给予未来的另一颗种子----儿童的那份保护生命的礼让给予了她们。

然而，这种逻辑的问题在于它那种对妇女的简单贬低令人沮丧。

这完全像遗传学家的那个老笑话----蛋要生蛋只有变成鸡----的一种翻版。

但人类绝不仅仅是下蛋的鸡。

传统的礼让绝不只是伪装掩盖下的生存策略。

那我们为什么说“妇女和儿童”呢？
也许事实上是“妇女为了儿童”。

最基本的亲情纽带来自于母亲。

父母同等的养育固然伟大，但是妇女，从哺乳、抚育到安抚的拥抱，能够以男性做不到的方式养育子女。

就这样，因为我们珍视孩子，所以妇女就该位居其后。

孩子们需要她们。

但是儿童中心论只能解释到这一步为止。

如果船上没有孩子又会怎样呢？你现在是在泰坦尼克III号轮上，这次是一群未婚者的航游。

没有孩子，没有父母。

瞧！撞上了冰山！快上救生船！马上行动！
我的镜头设计是这样的：男士们出于完全非理性的英雄主义，应让女士们优先上船。

而女士们出于纯粹女权主义者的自尊，应予以拒绝。

结果呢？僵局。

这部电影怎么结局呢？它应该怎么结局呢？快，轮船正在下沉。

Unit 2
What does the word feminist mean to you? A man-hating female who gets offended at common courtesy? Someone who insists that women can and
should do everything men
do? A person who sees
women's strengths and
abilities as different from
men's, but equally
valuable? Or someone
who's sensitive to the unfair treatment that women
have suffered for centuries and wants to correct it? The feminist movement has made great progress in ensuring women equal legal rights, but social critics in most countries agree that there's still a long way to go. The three texts in this unit explore some of the difficulties that both men and women encounter along the road to equal rights. Text A challenges us to examine our priorities and attitudes more closely, while Texts B and C contemplate some
of the complications of putting our visions of equal rights into practice in everyday life.
Text B Unjust Desserts
Cindy Blake
The first time I went out to dinner on a date, I was 17 years old. The
18-year-old boy in question took me to a fancy restaurant and, at the end of the meal, paid the bill with a flourish. I was thrilled. He seemed fairly pleased himself. It didn't occur to me to offer to split the bill. In those days, life was simple. And wonderful. Men paid.
Then what was once called Women's Lib came along and females of my generation claimed that we wanted equality. We didn't want doors opened for us, we didn't want bills paid. Suddenly, being wined and dined was considered insulting, part of the male conspiracy to keep us in our places. So we got out our chequebooks and went Dutch. What a huge mistake that was. If I had carried on assuming I'd be paid for, I would not only have saved a lot of money, but a lot of worry as well. I used to spend entire meals wondering what to do when the bill arrived. Should I offer to pay half? If I don't, will he expect me to kiss him
or ...? And if he's paying, can I still have the lobster? How fair is it of me even to offer to pay half when I know I'll be disappointed in him if he accepted? And what if he's got less money than me, should I pay for it all?
My unattached female friends, who all used to believe in the shared-bill policy, now say that the only time they would pay for themselves is if they were out with one of those men you meet through dating agencies. “Sometimes I think about saying I'll put in my share,” one of them told me, “But paying for yourself is one way of signaling that you don't fancy the man. Of course, if he
asks me to, I'll split the bill with him, but I'm afraid that signals something to me: the fact that he's tight-fisted.”
Women my age have double standards where money is concerned. We want equal treatment and equal opportunities, but we have a deep-rooted, illogical and romantic desire to be taken care of emotionally and financially. We hide this feeling because we know it's old-fashioned and sexist, but it exists nonetheless, even among women who are highly successful earners.
During my university days, I started getting tired of political correctness. I hated splitting the bill for two pieces of takeaway pizza, and secretly longed for some man to whisk me away to restaurant. So I was thrilled when I was asked out to dinner by one of the heirs to the Rockefeller fortune. This was my dream come true. I wouldn't have to worry about what I ordered, or who paid. He was a nice man in his late twenties; a nice man with millions in the bank. When he told me that he'd booked an expensive French restaurant, all I could think of for days was how romantic the evening would be.
Shortly after we sat down, he began talking about how many people took advantage of his wealth. “Everyone just assumes I'll pay for everything,” he frowned. I frowned along with him. I knew I'd have to offer to split the bill. At the time, I had a low-paid job in a book-shop. If he accepted my offer, I calculated that I'd effectively lose two weeks' salary. By the time the bill arrived, I had heard so many stories of how difficult it was to be rich, that I wildly offered to pay for the entire meal. I was sure he would politely refuse and pull out his credit card. He very politely accepted and, to my horror, handed me the bill.
My 14-year-old daughter is regarded by her brothers as a junior feminist. But when I asked her recently if she would expect a boyfriend to pay
for dinner out, she replied, “Absolutely, that's his job.” Sorry, men, but she's right. That is your job -- at least on the first date.
不公平的甜点
辛迪·布莱克
我第一次约会外出吃饭是在我17岁的时候。

那个请我的18岁男孩带我去了一家高级餐馆，饭后，他很潇洒地付了账。

我很兴奋。

他看上去也心满意足。

当时我压根儿没想到要提出支付一部分餐费。

那时候，生活是简单的，美妙的。

付钱的都是男人们。

随后便出现了所谓的妇女解放运动，我这一代的女性宣称我们要平等。

我们不想要别人给我们开门，我们不想让别人为我们买单。

突然间，被请喝酒和吃饭被认为是一种侮辱，是男人们使我们安分守己的阴谋的一部分。

所以我们便取出自己的支票簿，各付各的账。

那真是一个天大的错误。

要是我继续认为别人会替我付账，我不仅会省下许多钱，还会省去许多麻烦。

我曾经常常整顿饭都在琢磨着账单来了该怎么办。

我是否应该表示愿意付一半？如果我不表示，他会期待我吻他或……？如果全由他付，我仍然可以吃龙虾吗？我提议我付一半合理吗？尽管我知道他如果同意我的提议我是会对他很失望的。

如果他带的钱比我少又该怎么办，我应该付全部的钱吗？
我那些还没有结婚的、以前都信奉AA制做法的女友们，现在都说她们只有在同一个通过婚姻介绍所认识的男子出去时才会付自己的账单。

“有时候我想说我来付自己的那一份，”她们中的一个告诉我，“但自己付钱是表示你不喜欢这个男子的一种方式。

当然，如果他要我付，我会同他平摊餐费，但恐怕这也向我表明了一些什么：他很吝啬。

”
我这个年龄的女人在钱的问题上有着双重标准。

我们想要平等的待遇和平等的机会，但我们有一种根深蒂固、不合逻辑、浪漫主义的欲望：在感情上和经济上被别人关照。

我们掩饰这种感情，因为我们知道它是不合乎潮流的、歧视女性的，但是它却仍然存在，甚至存在于那些非常成功的职业妇女之中。

在我上大学时，我开始厌倦那种“正确思想观念”。

我厌恶为两块外卖的匹萨饼而各付各的钱，私下里巴望着有一位男士风驰电掣般地把我带到餐馆去。

所以当洛克菲勒家产的一位继承人邀请我出去吃饭时我真是激动万分。

这是我的美梦成真啊。

我不必为点什么菜，或者谁付钱而担心。

他是一个30岁不到的出色男子；一个有几百万存款的出色男子。

当他告诉我他已经预定好一家昂贵的法式餐馆时，我好几天所能想到的就是那个夜晚该会有多么浪漫。

Unit 2
What does the word feminist mean to you? A man-hating female who gets
offended at common
courtesy? Someone who
insists that women can
and should do everything
men do? A person who
sees women's strengths
and abilities as different
from men's, but equally valuable? Or someone
who's sensitive to the unfair treatment that women have suffered for centuries and wants to correct it? The feminist movement has made great progress in ensuring women equal legal rights, but social critics in most countries agree that there's still a long way to go. The three texts in this unit explore some of the difficulties that both men and women encounter along the road to equal
rights. Text A challenges us to examine our priorities and attitudes more closely, while Texts B and C contemplate some of the complications of putting our visions of equal rights into practice in everyday life.
Text C Will You Go Out With Me?
Laura Ullman
I know that dating has changed dramatically in the past few years, and for many women, asking men out is not at all daring . But I was raised in a traditional European household where the notion of my asking a man out on a date is considered wildly naughty . Growing up, I learned that men call, ask and pay for the date. But during my three years here at Berkeley, I've learned otherwise.
Berkeley women have brightened their social lives by taking the initiative with men. My girlfriends insist that it's essential for women to participate actively in the dating process. “I can't sit around and wait anymore,” my roommate once blurted out (脱口而出). “Hard as it is, I have to ask guys out -- if I want to date at all !” This is great: More women are having more fun by inviting men out, and men say they're delighted and relieved that dating no longer depends only on their willingness to take the first step. So why am I digging my nails into my hand trying to muster up (鼓起) courage to ask you out?
I keep telling myself to relax. Dating is more casual today. A college date can be as harmless as studying together. It's easier, cheaper and more comfortable for everyone that way. Students have fewer anxiety attacks when they ask somebody to play tennis than when they plan a formal dinner date. They enjoy last-minute “Let's make dinner together” dates because they not only avoid problems over what to wear and how to act, but also don't have time to agonize (痛苦).
Casual dating also encourages people to form healthy friendships before they get involved in serious relationships. My roommate and her boyfriend were friends for four months before their chemistries clicked . They went to movies, got together with mutual friends and took turns paying for their dinners out. “It was like going out with a girlfriend,” my roommate once laughed, blushing. This sort of friendship lets men and women relax and get to know each other more easily.
But if we do go out for a meal, who pays? This is still confusing everyone. You aren't sure whether I'll get the wrong idea if you treat me for dinner, and I'm not sure I won't offend you if I insist on paying for myself. John whipped out his
wallet（钱包）on our first date before I could suggest we go Dutch. During our after-dinner stroll he told me he was interested in dating me on a steady basis . After I explained I was more interested in a friendship, he wanted to know why
I'd let him pay for my dinner. “I've practically given up treating women on dates,” he complained. “When you let me pay, I thought it meant something special!”
Larry, on the other hand, was hurt when I offered to pay for my meal on our first date. When I took out my wallet and asked how much I owed him, he looked at me as if I had addressed him in a foreign language. Larry muttered, “Uh, well, you really don't owe me anything, but if you insist ... nsist, I thought, I only offered! To Larry, my gesture was a sign of rejection.
But there's no time now to worry about John and Larry --here you
come! Now remember: I believe in equality. I believe in women taking the initiative. It improves my social life, it's more fair and more fun for everyone. Dates are no big deal --this is modern American-style casual dating, and it's easy, and it works . No magic formula guarantees you'll say yes -- I just have
to relax, be myself and ask you out in a relaxed, unthreatening manner . If my friends are right, you'll be flattered (感到荣幸).
Sliding into your desk, you tap my shoulder and say, “Hi, Laura, what's up?”
“Good morning,” I answer with nervous chills (寒战). “Hey, how would you like to have lunch after class on Friday?”
“I'd love to,” you say.
It works “We have a date,” I smile.
你愿意和我一起出去吗？
劳拉·厄尔曼
我知道在过去几年里男女约会已发生了巨大的变化，对许多女士来说，请男士出去已不再是什么胆大妄为之举。

但我是在一个传统的欧洲家庭中长大的，在那儿，我想要约一位男士外出的念头会被认为是极不规矩的。

我在成长的过程中得知，约会时总是男人打电话，提出邀请并掏钱包。

但在伯克利这儿的三年中，我了解到的却是另一回事。

伯克利的女士们通过与男士们主动交往而活跃了他们的社交生活。

我的女友们坚持认为，女士积极参与约会过程是至关重要的。

“我再也不能坐在那
儿干等了，”有一次，我的室友脱口而出。

“虽然难以开口，但我还是得请男人们出去--如果我真想约会的话！”这真是好极了：越来越多的女性通过邀请男性外出获得了越来越多的乐趣，而男士们也说他们感到高兴宽慰，因为约会不再仅仅取决于他们是否愿意迈出第一步。

所以，我又何必要握紧拳头鼓起勇气才能邀你外出呢？
我不停地告诉自己要放松。

如今的约会随意多了。

大学生的约会可以像在一起学习一样没有害处。

这样对每个人都更容易，更实惠，更舒服。

大学生请某个人一起打网球时不会像计划一次正式的正餐约会时那么焦急不安。

他们喜欢临时决定的“让我们一起吃饭”的约会，因为他们不仅避免了穿什么、如何举止等问题，而且也没有时间苦苦担心。

非正式的约会也能促进人们在开始正式的关系之前建立健康有益的友谊。

我的室友和她的男友在坠入爱河之前做了四个月的普通朋友。

他们去看电影，与共同的朋友聚会，外出吃饭时轮流买单。

“就像同一个女友出去一样，”一次，我的室友红着脸笑着说。

这种友谊让男人和女人都感到轻松，也更加容易相互了解。

但如果我们真的出去吃饭，谁来付钱呢？这仍在困惑着每个人。

你不能肯定如果你请我吃饭，我是否会误解你的意思，而我也说不准如果我坚持自己付钱，是否会得罪你。

在我们第一次约会时，约翰还未等我提出各付各的账，就突然掏出了钱包。

饭后散步时，他告诉我他想固定与我约会。

在我解释说我更对友谊感兴趣之后，他想知道为什么我刚才让他为我付账。

“我在约会时，差不多已经不再请女士们吃饭了，”他抱怨道。

“当你让我付钱时，我还以为这有着某种特殊的含义呢！”
而另一方面，拉里在我们第一次约会时却在我提出自己付账时而感情受到了伤害。

当我掏出钱包，问我该付他多少钱时，他看着我，好像刚才我在用外语同他说话。

拉里咕哝道，“嗯，好吧，你真的什么都不用付我，但如果你一定要……”一定要！我心想，我只是提出而已。

在拉里看来，我的姿态就是一种拒绝的表示。

但是现在已经没有时间去为约翰和拉里烦恼了--因为你来了！请记住：我相信平等。

我相信女性可以主动。

它改善了我的社交生活，对每个人来说都更公平、更有趣。

约会并不是什么了不起的大事--这是现代美国式的随意约会，它简便，而且有效。

没有神奇的公式能保证你说行--我只需放松，是怎么样就怎么样，用一种轻松的、不咄咄逼人的方式邀你外出。

如果我的朋友们说的不错，你会受宠若惊。

我悄悄地走近你的课桌，你拍拍我的肩膀说，“嘿，劳拉，什么事？”
“早上好，”我紧张地打了一个寒战，回答道。

“嘿，星期五下课后愿意同我一起去吃午饭吗？”
“愿意，”你说。

成功了“我们约定了，”我微笑着说。