Michelle Wu’s Motherhood in Her Historic Boston Mayoral Win波士顿新任市长创历史：为人母助力赢选举

林恩·奥布赖恩·哈尔斯坦 郑秀君

The election of Michelle Wu as Bostons new mayor is historic. Wus election， as NPR noted， “broke a 199-year streak of white， male elected city leaders.” Much of the local and national coverage of Wus election also documented Wus history-making intersectionality1 in terms of both race and gender. Boston.com wrote that Wu， who would be sworn in as mayor on November 16， would “become the first woman， person of color， and Asian American elected as mayor of Boston.”

But this focus on Wus win is missing an additional shaping factor in her identity： she is also a mother who insists that being a mother is another central formative factor of her identity， politics， and campaign. Until her motherhood is also recognized in these intersectional descriptions， the historic nature of Wus win will remain incomplete and dishonors her commitment to making mothering both visible and a key shaping factor of who she is as a politician and as Bostons mayor-elect.

Of course， there have been politicians who are mothers—Hillary Clinton， Wus own mentor， Elizabeth Warren. As Seth Kovan and Sonja Michel suggest in their book Mothers of a New World， many women “transformed motherhood from womens primary private responsibility into public policy.”

By the 1980s in the United States， many privileged well-educated women began to take advantage of the large-scale social changes that resulted from the 1960s and 1970s. Unfortunately many of those women were told that in order to be successful， they either had to forgo motherhood or keep motherhood invisible or secondary to their professional life and only part of their private identity.

As I was working on a PhD in the late 1980s and early 1990s， both my MA advisor and PhD advisor were childless women. Both shared with me that they had been told， both explicitly and implicitly， that “successful” academics were unencumbered by family responsibilities. In fact， my MA advisor told me that she made a decision to be childless in order to become a successful scholar.

Fortunately for me， however， neither discouraged me from becoming a mother someday. But I was counseled throughout my early career to wait until after I received tenure， advice， I might add， that many graduate students continue to hear today. Equally important， and especially early in my career after I became a mother， as with other professional women I felt pressure to keep my “private” and “professional” lives separate. After I turned my intellectual interest in feminist thinking and writing toward motherhood， however， I began resisting these pressures to keep quiet about motherhood， to resist separating motherhood as a central shaping factor of who I am as a human， a professor， a thinker， and a writer.

What is exciting and important to me about Wu， then， is that she has resisted this mothering-isnt-one-of-the-central-factors-of-my-identity model. She has embraced the idea that her lived experiences of caregiving—first as a daughter， then as a mother—are pivotal to her identity as a human and a politician， and as such， must be made explicit and visible. Indeed， in my reading of Wu， she has been clear and direct about how her lived experiences—as a woman of color， as an Asian American， and as a mother—have informed her leadership， politics， and policy decisions. On her campaign website， under “Meet Michelle，” Wu describes herself： “Im a mom， a daughter of immigrants， and I fiercely believe that we can solve our deepest challenges through building community.” In her final passage in this section， she writes， “This work is deeply personal for me. As a mom to Blaise and Cass， every day I feel the urgency of families fighting the system to hear us， and to build communities that are healthy， safe， and resilient.”

Back when she was City Council president and in the midst of a reelection campaign in 2017， three months after the birth of her second son， Cass， Wu wrote an editorial titled “City Council President： Why Im Bringing My Baby to Work” for CNN. “Women especially are often asked to choose between being a mother and being a leader，” it said. “Without adequate policy support， too many women face not only financial barriers to balancing motherhood and leadership， but cultural stigmas too.” After fully acknowledging that she understands how privileged she is and that many parents do not have the same options she did， Wu continued： “In bringing my baby to work， I am happy to be a visible reminder of how messy and difficult it is to be a working parent.”

I am advocating for a particular kind of maternal “getting it done” modeled by Wu. As Wu also noted in her CNN editorial： “I know that many parents do not have the options I do. It motivates me further to fight for better solutions especially for moms who dont have the option of bringing their babies to work or the resources to make other arrangements.”

Wus maternal embrace is unlike the kind of uber-2mom， neoliberal maternal embrace and suggestion that “good-mother politicians” get things done on their own， based on their own determination and individual will. Rather， it is rooted in a visible maternal embrace that motivates political leaders to be community-focused， rather than individually focused， and to fight for the family supports that the United States continues to so desperately need.

吴弭当选波士顿市长具有重要历史意义。美国国家公共广播电台称，吴弭胜选“终结了波士顿连续199年由白人男性任职市长的局面”。在报道吴弭的胜选时，不少当地及美国国家媒体也分析了她的种族和性别在这一历史性事件中的交织影响。Boston.com称，即将在（2021年）11月16日宣誓就职的吴弭“将成为波士顿历史上第一位女市长，第一位有色人种市长，也是第一位亚裔市长”。

不过，这种对吴弭胜选的关注忽略了塑造她身份的另一因素：她同时还是一位母亲，她坚称身为人母对自己的身份认同、政治观念、竞选活动同样有着重大影响。在分析多重身份的交织影响时，只有把她的母亲身份也考虑进去，她获选的历史性意义才会完整，她的承诺才能兑现：让大家看到母亲这一角色，并使之成为塑造她作为政治人物（包括波士顿新当选市长）的一个要素。

当然，世间不乏身为人母的政治家，比如希拉里·克林顿和吴弭的导师伊丽莎白·沃伦。正如塞思·科万和索尼娅·米歇尔在《新世界的妈妈们》一书中所说，许多女性“将母亲身份从女性的主要私有責任转变为公共政策”。

到了20世纪80年代，美国许多出身特权阶层、受过良好教育的女性开始从60年代和70年代的大规模社会变革中获益。可惜的是，这些女性中有许多被告知，要想成功，她们要么干脆不做母亲，要么必须将母亲身份隐藏起来或置于事业之后，只把它当作她们私人身份中的一部分。

当我在20世纪80年代末和90年代初攻读博士学位时，我的硕导和博导都是未曾生育的女性。两位老师都曾告诉我，她们都听到过“‘成功学者不为家庭责任所累”这种言论，只不过有些人说得直白，有些人说得委婉。事实上，我的硕导告诉我，她为了取得学术上的成功才决定不生育。

所幸，她们俩的经历没有使我打消当妈妈的念头。但在我职业生涯早期，始终有人建议我要等拿到终身教职后再决定要不要孩子。另外提一句，很多研究生时至今日还在听到这样的建议。同样重要的是，特别是我在处于事业初期当了妈妈以后，我和其他职场女性一样为了把私人生活和工作分开而感到有压力。不过，当我把学术兴趣从女权主义思想和写作转向母亲身份后，我开始抵抗压力，这些压力源于避而不谈我的母亲身份，源于把我的母亲身份从塑造我作为人、教授、思考者以及作家的核心因素中剔除。

因此，吴弭令我激动的重要一点是，她抵抗这种思维模式，即“当妈妈不是塑造我身份的核心因素之一”。她坚信，她的生活经历中关于育儿的部分（先是作为女儿，然后又成为母亲）对她为人和从政很关键，她认为必须对这一部分直言不讳。其实，在我看过的吴弭写的文章里，她一直都直截了当地谈论自己作为有色人种女性、亚裔美国人及一位母亲的经历如何影响了她的领导才能、政治观点和政策决定。在她的竞选网站“走进吴弭”这一栏目中，吴弭这么描述自己：“我是一位妈妈，也是移民人家的女儿，我深信我们可以通过建立社区来解决我们面临的最严峻的挑战。”在该栏目的最后一段，她写道：“这份工作和我的个人生活息息相关。身为布莱斯和卡斯的妈妈，我每天都感受到家庭与社会体系的抗争已迫在眉睫，只有当这种抗争变为现实，我们的声音才会得到倾听，健康、安全、具有韧性的社区才能得以建立。”

2017年，吴弭担任市议会议长，在次子卡斯出生3个月后的一次竞选连任活动中，她为美国有线电视新闻网撰写了一篇题为《我为什么带着孩子上班？市议会议长如是说》的社论。“女性尤其经常被迫在当妈妈和当领导之间做选择。” 文章写道，“没有足够的政策支持，太多女性不仅仅面临平衡当妈妈和当领导之间的经济阻碍，还面临文化污名。”吴弭明白自己有多幸运，而许多做父母的人没她那么多选择，完全承认这点后，她继续写道：“我带着孩子上班，能让大家清楚看到做一名要育儿的上班族是多么棘手和困难，这让我很高兴。”

我提倡吴弭示范的那种母亲式“全力办好”的做事理念。吴弭在那篇写给美国有线电视新闻网的社论中还写道：“我知道许多做父母的人没有我所拥有的选择。这更激励我努力寻找更好的解决方案，特别是为了那些没法带着孩子上班或没有其他办法安顿孩子的妈妈们。”

吴弭关于母亲身份的看法不同于“超级妈妈”和新自由主义式的观点，后者建议“好妈妈型政治家”应依靠个人决心和意志独立做事。吴弭不一样，她将对母亲身份的拥护搬上台面，激励政治领导人以社区而不是个人为中心，为美国仍然迫切需要的育儿支持而努力。

（译者为“《英语世界》杯”翻译大赛获奖者）

1 intersectionality各（歧视的）交叉性，指（具有多重社会身份的个体遭受的）各种歧视（性别、性取向、经济社会地位、种族、婚姻状态）相互关联、互相影响的状态。

2 前缀，同über-，（用于名词前）极度的，超级的，极好的，极成功的。