为什么“男孩”文化正在引发一场人际关系的危机——与Niobe Way博士探讨

许多男孩在童年时期建立了深厚的友谊。但当他们进入青春期，情况发生了变化。他们变得更不愿意向他人敞开心扉，拥有亲密、丰富友谊的数量也减少了。今天我们将与一位心理学家对话，她花了数十年研究男孩的友谊和情感发展，探讨为什么会发生这种变化，这对男孩、男性以及其他人意味着什么。男孩在童年和青少年时期学到了哪些关于男子气概的东西？

Many boys form deep friendships in childhood. But as they become teens, something changes. They become more reluctant to open up to others, and report fewer close, rich friendships. Today we're going to talk to a psychologist who has spent decades studying boys' friendships and emotional development about why that happens and what it means for boys and men and for everyone else. What do boys learn about masculinity through their childhood and teen years?

这些教训如何影响他们长大后的心理健康和人际关系？男孩文化中的规范和理想又如何影响女性和女孩？父母和教育者能做些什么，帮助我们所有人保持与自己和他人的情感连接？欢迎收听《Speaking of Psychology》，这是美国心理学会旗舰播客，探讨心理科学与日常生活之间的联系。我是金·米尔斯。

How do those lessons affect their mental health and relationships as they grow up? How do the norms and ideals of boy culture affect women and girls as well? And what can parents and educators do to help us all stay emotionally connected to ourselves and each other? Welcome to Speaking of Psychology, the flagship podcast of the American Psychological Association that examines the links between psychological science and everyday life. I'm Kim Mills.

今天的嘉宾是尼俄柏·魏博士，纽约大学心理学教授兼“人类连接科学”实验室主任。她的研究聚焦于文化如何塑造儿童发展，尤其是男孩和年轻男性，以及如何培养连接、对抗孤独。她撰写了100多篇学术论文和书籍。她的最新著作是《Rebels with a Reimagining Boys, Ourselves, and Our Culture》。

My guest today is Doctor. Niobe Wei, a professor of psychology and director of the Science of Human Connection Lab at New York University. Her work focuses on how culture shapes child development, especially in boys and young men, and how to foster connection and combat loneliness. She is the author of more than 100 academic articles and books. Her newest book is Rebels with a Reimagining Boys, Ourselves, and Our Culture.

她之前的著作《男孩的友谊与连接危机》启发了奥斯卡提名电影《亲密》。魏博士，感谢您今天做客。

Her previous book, Boys Friendships and the Crisis of Connection, was the inspiration for the Oscar nominated movie Close. Doctor. Wei, thank you for joining me today.

哦，我很高兴来到这里，谢谢你的邀请。

Oh, I'm so delighted to be here and thank you for the invitation.

在您的新书和研究中，您提到了“男孩文化”。您用这个术语指什么？什么是男孩文化？

In your latest book and in your research, you talk about boy culture. What do you mean by that term? What is boy culture?

嗯，这很有意思。所以“男孩文化”——我想让你的听众清楚，这里的“男孩”是带引号的，不是真正的男孩。意思是，这是一种对男孩的刻板印象，不是真实的男孩。重要的是，我接下来要说的是，这是由真正的男孩教给我们的。

Well, this is an interesting thing. So boy culture and I I wanna make it very clear to your listeners that boy is in quotation, not boy culture. Meaning, it's a stereotype of a boy. It's not a real boy. And the important part of this is what I'm about to say is it's taught to us by real boys.

所以真正的男孩告诉我们，我们是如何以刻板印象的方式定义男孩，这不仅伤害了他们，在某些情况下甚至害死了他们。我想把话说得严重些，因为后果确实很严重。所以，男孩文化本质上是一种与刻板印象中的男孩相符的文化，只看重他们的“硬”面：只追求独立，不在乎连接；只想坚忍，不在乎自己的脆弱；甚至没有脆弱的能力；没有所谓的女孩和女人拥有的“软”技能。他们只有“硬”技能，事实上，他们的“软”技能——他们在情感上和关系上相比女孩和女人是“无能”的。这些都是对男孩的刻板印象。根据我近四十年来对所有性别身份年轻人的研究，关键在于，男孩和年轻男性在讲述一个故事，而我们没有倾听。

So real boys tell us what how we've stereotyped boys in a way that's not only damaging them, but in some cases killing them. And so I wanna be very dramatic about it because the the results are very dramatic. And so boy culture is essentially a culture that that aligns with the stereotype of a boy that only values their hard side, so only wants autonomy, doesn't care about connection, only wants to be stoic, doesn't care about their own vulnerabilities, doesn't even have the capacity to be vulnerable, that doesn't have the soft skills that so called girls and women have. They just have their hard skills, and in fact, their soft skills, they're sort of, you know, emotionally and relationally unintelligent compared to girls and women. That's all part of a stereotype of a boy that according to my almost forty years of research with young people, and it's been all gender identities, the point is that the boys and young men are telling a story we're not listening to.

我们从他们那里了解到，他们不仅拥有这种智能，而且拥有与其他所有人一样多的这种智能。我们刻板地认为他们在情感和关系上不聪明、不渴望情感亲密的友谊，正是这一点在伤害他们，导致他们自杀、杀人、实施大规模暴力。顺便说一句，我最后想说的是，你的回应。回应是，你不仅在我研究中的男孩和年轻男性那里听到这一点，你还能从大规模枪手的宣言中看到一模一样的说法。

What we learned from them is they not only have that intelligence, they have that intelligence as much as all other humans. And the fact that we've stereotyped them as not being emotionally and relationally intelligent and not wanting emotionally intimate friendships is what's damaging them, what's leading them to suicide and homicide and mass violence. And by the way, I just wanna finally end with the the your response. The response, You learn that not only from boys in my research boys and young men in my research, you learn it from the manifestos of mass shooters. So they say the exact same thing.

他们只是更孤独的孩子，最终走向暴力。但关键是，这是同一个故事。自1987年我在哈佛做研究生开始研究社会情感发展以来，他们就一直向我讲述这个故事。

They're just more isolated kids, so they end up committing violence. But the point is it's the same story. And they've been telling this story to me since 1987 when I began to do research on social emotional development at Harvard as a grad student.

那么，当男孩从童年走向青春期时，他们的友谊会发生什么变化？为什么这些纽带似乎会削弱他们？这会对男孩和年轻男性造成什么后果？

So what happens to boys' friendships as they move from childhood to adolescence? Why do the ties seem to weaken them? And then what are the consequences for boys and young men?

Kim，我喜欢你的问题。谢谢你。它们真的触及了你。你显然读过我的书，能被问这些问题真是太好了。所以事情是这样的，我在《Deep Secrets》中报告过，那是我大约十三年前写的上一本书。

Kim, I love your questions. Thank you. They're really getting into you. You clearly read my book, and it's beautiful to be asked these questions. So this is what happens, and I report this in Deep Secrets, my previous book that was written about thirteen years ago.

发生的事情是——再次强调，我所说的一切，都是通过倾听男孩和年轻男性学到的。所以这不是我的理论，而是我的发现，直接来自男孩之口。作为一名发展心理学家，我要告诉所有听众，他们完全知道这是什么意思，这对我的听众来说很不寻常——我长期跟踪同一批孩子。所以我们团队从11、12岁开始跟踪这些年轻人，一直到18、19岁。

What happens is and boys, again, everything I say, I learned from listening to boys and young men. So it's not my theory. It's my finding, but it's directly from the mouths of boys. What happens as I'm a developmental psychologist, and for all the listeners, they know exactly what that is, which is unusual for my audience, which is I follow the same kids over time. So I follow you know, our teams have been following young people from the ages of 11, 12, to when you know, following them all throughout 18 and 19.

也就是早期、中期和晚期青春期。我们听到的——这就是发展性研究，我要对所有理解它的优秀APA成员说——正是发展性研究讲述了“男孩文化”的影响，我来告诉你们为什么。因为在11、12、13岁时，男孩说话就像所有其他人一样。他们说话像女孩，但其实不是“像女孩”，而是像人类。

So early, middle, and then late adolescence. And what we hear, that's the developmental work, and I say this to all you wonderful APA members that get it, it's the developmental work that tells the story about the impact of boy culture, and I'll tell you why. Because at 11, 12, and 13, boys are talking like all other humans. They're talking like girls, but it's not really like girls. It's just like a human.

他们谈论对友谊的渴望。他们谈论对连接的渴望。他们说，如果没有亲密的朋友，他们会说“如果没有他，我会感到孤独，我想自杀”。他们直接把友谊与心理健康联系起来，直接把友谊与心理健康挂钩。

They talk about their desire for friendships. They talk about their desire for connection. They say things if I wasn't if they have close friendships, they say if I didn't have him, him, I would I would feel all alone. I'd wanna kill myself. They link it directly to mental health, their friendships directly to mental health.

他们展现出——每次谈到这个我都起鸡皮疙瘩，太美了——他们展现出关系智慧，能够观察人类世界并理解愤怒之下永远是受伤的感情。他们直接说：“我可能对你生气，但其实是因为我觉得你羞辱了我，这伤了我的心。”

They reveal their and this just gives me the chills every time I talk about it. It's so beautiful. They reveal their relational intelligence, their capacity to look at the human world and understand that underneath anger is always hurt feelings. They say that directly. You know, I I may be I may be pissed at you, but it's really that I feel like you dissed me, and it hurts my feelings.

他们懂。他们拥有非凡的关系智慧，理解人类世界及其矛盾，理解我们如何伪装情绪等等，他们不明白为什么我们要他们做别的而不是做一个人。然后随着长大，压力来了——要“像个男人”，这对心理学家至关重要——不仅要“像个男人”，还要“成熟”，Kim，要“长大”，我们要求他们基本上把所谓的软技能、软需求藏起来。这不是性别身份，而是人类需求，但我们把它性别化为女性化和软弱。

They get it. They have this extraordinary relational intelligence of getting the human world and the contradictions and the way we fake emotions and all those kinds of things to try to and they don't understand why we would ask them to do anything else but be a human. And then as they get older and the pressure is to man up, and this is the critical thing for a psychologist, not only to man up, but to mature Kim, to become a grown up, we ask them to basically take their soft skills, their soft so called soft needs. It's not a gender identity. It's a human need, but we gender it as feminine and soft.

我们告诉他们把这些藏起来。事实上，这些技能并不重要，也不是我们真正看重的。我可以告诉你为什么我知道——因为我们重视认知智能，我们不以同样方式重视情绪智能和关系智能。所以男孩收到关于男子气概和成熟的信息——要关注分离而不是连接。

We tell them to go underground with that. In fact, those skills are not really important, and they're not really something that we value. And we I can tell you why we I know that is because we value cognitive intelligence. We don't value emotional intelligence and relational intelligence the same way. So boys get these messages about manhood and maturity, you know, to focus on separation rather than connection.

对吧？自主、独立胜过相互依赖。你知道，男孩们接收到这个。当然，每个人都在接收，但男孩接收得尤其深刻，因为它还与 masculinity 绑定。

Right? Autonomy, independence over interdependence. We you know, boys are getting that. Of course, everybody's getting that. But boys are getting it profoundly because it's also linked to masculinity.

然后他们开始断开连接。现在回答你的问题：他们开始断开与自己想要和需要的东西的连接，也就是他们的友谊。于是心开始下沉——你 literally 能从他们的语言里听出来，太不可思议了。

And then they start to disconnect. This is answer now answer your question. They start to disconnect from what they want and what they need, which is their friendships. So they heart start to go under you literally hear it in their language. It's incredible.

他们在青春期早期到中期那种温柔、优美、富有情感的语言，开始变得像刻板的男生说话：无所谓、我不在乎、没事、都好。

Their language that was soft and beautiful and emotional in early to middle adolescence starts to sound like a stereotypic guy. It doesn't matter. I don't care. It's okay. It's all good.

都好。我不需要朋友。或者，那些仍愿意保持温柔的男孩会说：我很难维系友谊，很伤心，因为我曾经拥有这些友情，现在却失去了。

It's all good. I don't need friends. Or or if I you know, the more tender boys that are willing to still be tender, they'll say things like, I struggle to hold on to my friendships. It's sad because I used to have these friendships. I no longer have them.

然后，最惊人的是，有些孩子直接点名“男孩文化”。他们说：要是当女生就好了，那样就不用无情无义。他们直接说出来。或者会说：我现在长大了，已经足够成熟。

And then some of them, this is what's the most amazing, they name boy culture. They say things like, it might be nice to be a girl because then I wouldn't have to be emotionless. I mean, they name it. Or they say, you know, I'm I'm grown up now. I'm you know, I've matured enough.

我不需要再分享感受。Kim，我的意思是——但我想特别告诉APA社区的听众，这不是我凭空提出的关于男孩文化的理论，这是孩子们亲口说的。他们直接说：在一个只看重我坚硬一面、不珍视我柔软一面的文化中长大，真的让我对自己、也常常对他人感觉糟糕。

I don't need to share my feelings. I mean, Kim. I mean, that's but it's not you know, what I wanna communicate to our listeners, especially the APA community, it's not this is not a theory that I'm coming up with about boy culture and boys. This is told directly from the mouths of babes. They're You saying it directly that growing up in a culture that only values my hard side and doesn't value my soft side, my soft capacities, actually causes me to feel terrible about myself and oftentimes feel terrible about others.

所以我们既需要坚硬也需要柔软。我要说一句大实话：我们既思考也感受，却把思考性别化为男性、感受性别化为女性，这是第一个错误。

And so the idea is we need our hard and soft. I'm going to say the really obvious thing. We think and feel. We've gendered thinking as masculine and feeling as feminine. That's our first mistake.

心理学家必须听进去——你们是世界上最适合听我讲这些的人——我们既思考也感受，我们既渴望自主也渴望联结，这在发展理论里早就有了。

And psychologists really have to hear this. This is the best audience of my work in in the world. They have to hear it, that we think and feel. We want autonomy and connection. We've had that in developmental theory for ages.

关键是，Bowlby早就说过，联结与自主是相互促进的。但在流行文化和育儿方式里，我们往往只强调坚硬的一面，尤其对男孩和年轻男性。所以，被男孩文化教导着长大——把“男孩”当成一种刻板印象——真的会伤害男孩。

But the point is, Bowlby had that. Right? Bowlby was talking about that back in the day, about a connection and autonomy as as mutually you know, they work together. But in pop culture and the way we raise our children, we tend to only emphasize the hard side, especially with our boys and young men. So the idea is growing up in a culture taught to us by boys, growing up into a boy culture where boy is a stereotype, literally harms boys.

我在新书《叛逆者》里说，这最终伤害的是我们所有人。因为现在女孩也开始“man up”。我们在中美数据里都发现，女孩甚至比男孩更急着“man up”。她们接收到这样的信息：如果只强调自己的硬核——独立、敢言——她们就能被认真对待。

And then what we I I say in my new book, rebels, it actually harms all of us. Because now you get girls, and I have to say this, girls are emphasizing manning up as two. And we're in fact finding in our data in China and as well as patterns in The United States that girls are starting to man up more than boys. Meaning, they got the message that if they emphasize their sort of kick ass self, you know, their desire for independence and their determination to speak out, which they should have that determination. But if they only value their hard side, they get their foot in the door.

所以，男孩文化伤害所有人。对男孩的伤害尤其特殊，因为它连着“男子气概”而不只是“成熟”。但对女孩、年轻女性、非二元性别者也一样，因为整个文化把人性的一面凌驾于另一面，而我们只有同时拥抱两面，才是真正完整的人。

People take them seriously. And so the idea is that boy culture is hurting everybody. It's just hurting boys in a particular way because it's linked to manhood and not just maturity. But for girls and young women and non gender binary, want to talk about them too. Non gender binary kids are just as impacted because it's an entire culture that privileges one side of our humanity over the other when we need both sides of our humanity to be fully human.

所以，它影响着我们每一个人。

So it's impacting all of us.

正如你所说，你已经关注这个问题很长时间了。我是在七十年代的女性运动中成长起来的，当时我们觉得我们在努力为男性提供更多选择。这不正在发生吗？我的意思是，我们实际上不就是在给男性更多情绪表达的空间吗？我们对他们的期望更高了。

As you said, you've been looking at this for a long time now. I came up during the feminist movement in the seventies, and we felt like we were trying to give men more options. Isn't that really happening? I mean, aren't we actually trying to give men more space to be emotional? We're expecting more of them.

这还没被接受吗？

Isn't that sinking in?

所以在某些方面，这很有意思。我对此有复杂的回应，因为我总是基于数据来回答。所以我必须反映数据。所以在某些方面，是的。我来告诉你数据在哪里。

So in some ways, it's interesting. I have a complicated response to that because I actually always base my answers on data. So I always have to reflect the data. So in some ways, yes. So I'll tell you why, where the data is.

我们确实在进行这样的对话。这些关于男性友谊、男孩友谊、友谊重要性的对话，第51分会就是研究男性的分会吗？男性气质？我想是的。是的。

We are definitely even this conversation. These conversations about men's friendships, boys' friendships, the importance of friendships, division 51 is that the division for men? Masculinity? I think Yeah. Yeah.

第51分会实际上把友谊作为保护因素，部分是基于我的工作。我想我是目前唯一一个研究男孩友谊纵向数据的人。但重点是政策已经改变了。我们开始认识到友谊对男孩、对年轻男性很重要。所以我们确实在改变政策。

Division 51 actually created friendship as a protective factor based on my work, in part by my work, certainly. But I'm one of the I think I'm the only one at this point that's looked at longitudinal studies of friendships among boys. But the point is that policy has been changed. You know, we're starting to recognize that friendships matter for boy for everybody, but for boys and young men. So we're definitely doing policy changes.

你知道，电影也在拍。奥斯卡提名的电影也在拍。我的意思是，我们开始认识到友谊不仅对女性重要，对每个人包括男孩和男人都重要。所以这是好的变化。没有变的是，因为我们看不到我们游弋的水域，我说情况其实更糟了，那就是我们仍然更重视“硬”的一面而不是“软”的一面。

You know, movies are being made. Oscar nominated movies are being made. I mean, basically, we are starting to recognize that friendships matter not just for girls and women, but for everybody, including boys and men. So that's a that's a good change. What's not changed, because we're not seeing the waters in which we swim, and I'm saying it's getting worse, actually, It's that we're privileging our hard sides over our soft sides.

我们仍然把软技能与女性气质联系在一起。而我们对女性气质的刻板印象，你会发现这很有趣，其实变得更刻板了，像是1950年代我母亲那一代。所以当我让纽约大学的学生——这在《反叛者》书里有——告诉我什么是男性气质和女性气质时，我下巴都掉了。因为他们对男性气质的定义是：负责任、聪明、坚忍、是个好人。而对女性气质的定义——里面有几条好的，比如善良。

We're still linking somehow soft skills with femininity. And our stereotypes about femininity, you'll be finding this interesting, is actually getting more stereotypic in a sort of 1950s, my mother's generation. So when I asked my NYU students this is in the book, in Rebels to tell me about masculinity and femininity, my jaw dropped. Because their definitions of masculinity were like being responsible, being intelligent, being stoic, being a good person. And then the definitions of femininity I mean, there was a couple good things in there by be about being kind.

但基本上，是关于肤浅、爱说闲话。我的意思是，女性气质里负面形容词的数量远多于男性气质。我看着我的学生，大约四五十人，男女都有，这门课女生居多。我说，你们怎么了？我说，你们听起来像我母亲那一代对女性气质的看法，你懂我意思吗？

But, basically, it was about being superficial, being sort of catty. I mean, basically, the the number of adjectives that were negative in femininity were much more than the number of negative adjectives with masculinity. And I looked at my students, it's about forty fifty students, men and women, you know, mostly women in in this particular class. And I said, what is going on with you? I said, you guys sound like my mother's generation of femininity and you know what I mean?

就是把女性气质看成软弱，把男性气质看成强大，不仅是身体强大，还有智力强大。我的意思是，这到底是怎么回事？我觉得在我们这个彼此脱节、看不见自己的社会里，我们看不见我们在偏硬轻软，我们真把软技能当成女性化的。我们真把思考当成男性化的。我们甚至觉得这是生物决定的。

Sort of making femininity weak and masculinity strong, and not only strong physically, but strong mentally. I mean, it's like, what is going on with you? And I think what's happening in our disconnected society that doesn't see itself, right, it doesn't see that we're privileging the hard over the soft, we actually think soft skills are feminine. We actually think thinking is masculine. Mean, we actually think it's it's even we even think it's biological.

对吧？我们以为男人天生更聪明，女人天生更懂情绪。我们其实越来越糟，因为性别对立加剧，我们彼此愤怒，就把自己埋进性别刻板印象里。我们以为那些用“他们”称呼自己的孩子——这其实是个很激进的群体，因为他们拒绝整个性别二元——我们以为问题是性别代词，而不是男性气质和女性气质的定义。而对我来说，这是在放大那些拒绝性别二元的孩子们的声音。

Right? That, you know, that men are inherently smarter and women are inherently more emotional attuned. That we that basically, we're just getting worse Because as the gender divides exacerbate because we're so angry at each other, we just hunker down into our gender stereotypes. And we think that kids that are identifying with they, which is interesting because they're a very radical group of kids, because they're rejecting the whole gender binary, we're thinking the problem is the gender pronoun rather than the definitions of masculinity and femininity. And to me, that's a lifting up of the voices of kids who have rejected the gender binary.

所以我是在为那些声音发声。但我抨击的是那些仍然认同“他”和“她”的人，他们基本上把这些身份最负面的刻板印象实体化了。最后我想说，Kim，我作为女性主义者的批判——因为我也是女性主义者，我从小被当作女性主义者养大，我有一个女性主义者母亲。

So I'm lifting up their voices. But I'm attacking the people who still identify with he and she that basically have reified the most negative stereotypes with those identities. So the final thing I want to say, Kim, my critique as a feminist because I too am a feminist. I was raised as a feminist. I had a feminist mother.

我并不是在批判男性气质。我的书不是在批判男性气质。因为“硬”和“软”——我们渴望并具备坚强、隐忍、竞争的能力，甚至在必要时用暴力保护我们的孩子，对吧？你明白我的意思吗？

Is that I'm not critiquing masculinity. My book is not about critiquing masculinity. Because basically, the hard and the soft, our desire our capacity to be strong and stoic and competitive and even to defend our children with violence. Right? You know what I mean?

保护他们是件积极的事，对吧？我们在需要反击时能够反击，这也是积极的事。我批判的是一种文化，它只看重这种能力，却不看重另一种能力——Kim，对你情感的敏感、真正在意你的想法和感受、想要建立联系并对你的经历产生人际好奇。我们在心理学里甚至不研究这个。

Defend them is a positive thing. Right? Our capacity to fight back when we need to fight back, that's a positive thing. What I'm critiquing is a culture that only values that capacity and not the capacity, Kim, to be sensitive to your feelings and to actually care about what you think and feel and to actually want to connect and be curious, interpersonally curious about your experiences. We don't even study that in psychology.

我们甚至不认为“人际好奇”是个概念。你明白吗？我的意思是，这太不可思议了，但它是一切人际联系的根基。而男孩文化如此脱节，是因为我们看重智力好奇而非人际好奇。Kim，我们将要进行心理学领域有史以来第一项关于人际好奇发展的研究，你想想这意味着什么。

We don't even think interpersonal curiosity is a thing. We you know what I mean? I mean, it's incredible, but it's at the root of all human connection. And that's how disconnected boy culture is cause we value intellectual curiosity over interpersonal. And we're now about to do the very first study of the development of interpersonal curiosity in the field of psychology, Kim, and think what that means.

你与他人建立联系所必需的技能——这种女性化的技能，它本身不是“女性”的，但被女性化了——是一种人类技能，发展心理学家却根本没认真对待。所以对我来说，这确实是一个我们看不见的文化问题，而且我们在这方面反而退步了。

The very skill that you need to connect to other people, the feminine skill, it's what's not feminine, but it's been feminized. It's a human skill. Developmental psychologists haven't even taken seriously. So to me, it's it's really is a cultural problem that we're not seeing, and we've gotten worse in that respect.

我们先短暂休息一下，回来后我们将与魏博士谈谈，为什么一些男孩在学业和职场上正面临具体困境，这是否与男孩文化有关。我们看到的是，男孩正在挣扎，他们在学校、职场、人生里程碑等具体方面正落后于女孩。为什么会这样？这与男孩文化有什么关联？

We're going to take a short break, and when we return, we'll talk with Doctor. Wei about why some boys are struggling in concrete ways in school and the workforce, and whether that's tied to boy culture. What we're seeing is that boys are struggling and they're falling behind girls in some very concrete ways in school, in the workforce, life milestones. So why is that happening? And how is that tied to boy culture?

故事很简单：一切都归结于男孩文化——如果你只推崇“硬”而贬低“软”，那你就只推崇“硬”专业和“硬”学科。我们已经知道，硬科学优于软科学，STEM 和商业领域优于其他一切，尤其是优于护理、教学、心理学等。我指的是心理学里非神经科学的那些“软”分支，比如临床与应用心理学。

It's a very simple story. It all comes down to boy culture, which is if you only privilege the hard over the soft, that means you only privilege the hard professions and the hard disciplines. And we already know that the hard sciences over the soft sciences, STEM fields, and business fields over everything else, but certainly over nursing, teaching, psychology. I mean, all you name it. And not neuroscience in psychology, but, you know, the soft form of psychology, clinical applied psychology.

所以问题在于，我们事事都把“硬”置于“软”之上——事事如此。不仅在我们的思维与感受上，也在我们的职业和学科里。如果在一个世界里，进入“软”职业（如教学等）、对诗歌和人文学科感兴趣——我要说一件听起来荒谬的事，但这正说明我们文化变得多么缺乏智慧。

So the idea is that we have a hard over soft in everything. Everything. Everything. Not just our human thinking and feeling, but in our professions and in our disciplines. And if you have a world in which going into the soft professions, teaching, etcetera, and being interested in poetry and humanities I'm gonna say something that sounds ridiculous, but this is how unintelligent we've become as a culture.

如果我们认为想当教师、想当护士、想写作、想写诗是“娘们”的事——想想人类历史，我们竟把想写诗当成娘们的事——如果我们把这跟性别身份挂钩，那不仅伤害女孩和女性，也会伤害男孩和男性。大学就变得没那么有趣了。先撇开大学贵得离谱的事实，对所有工人阶级乃至中产阶级的男孩和年轻男性来说，如果付不起学费，又看到“我选的专业甚至赚不到钱”，那我还上大学干嘛？

If we think that's a girly thing, right, to wanna be a teacher or to wanna be a nurse or to wanna write or to wanna write poetry I mean, think about the history of our world that we think it's a girly thing to wanna write poetry. If we think it's linked to a gender identity, that's gonna not only be damaging to girls and women, it's gonna be damaging to boys and men. And college becomes less interesting. And I'm gonna put aside college is also obscenely expensive. So for all working class boys and young men or even middle class boys and young men who can't afford college and then see if I'm not even gonna do a major that allows me to make money, why would I even go to college?

先把这个放一边，因为显然这也是现实：如果我对STEM和经商没兴趣，上大学干嘛？对吧？但它（大学）不会帮我赚钱，我还不如现在开始挣钱。但即使拿富家子弟来说，现实是，如今上大学，你能选的那些“能让你成功、能让你拿到体面薪水”的专业，已经被局限在STEM和商科了。

So I'm gonna put that aside for a second because that's obviously going on too. Like, why would I go to college if I'm not interested in STEM and going into business? Right? But but, you know, it's not gonna help me make money, so I might as well just start making money now. But if even if we take the the rich kids, the reality is that going to college, your your assortment of what you can do that will make you successful and that will allow you to have actually a decent salary is now limited to the STEM fields and business.

我能证明我观点的方法是：我们有很多项目让女孩和女性进入STEM领域，却没有任何项目让男孩和男性进入“软职业”——比如护理、教学、社会工作。我们没有任何鼓励措施，尤其是有色人种男性，去做这些我们极其需要的职业。所以这解释了大学里的现象，也解释了为什么男性更难找到工作，因为如果教书一小时只给10美元，你为什么要去？

And how I can prove my point is that we have lots of programs to get girls and women into STEM fields. We have nothing, nothing to get boys and men into the soft professions, you know, into nursing, into teaching, into social work. I mean, we have nothing to encourage them, especially men of color, of course, to do these professions that that we are desperately in need of. So it explains the the the college thing. It explains why men are having a harder time finding work because they why would you go into teaching if you if you get paid $10 an hour?

当然，我在夸张，但关键是，我们不仅不看重这些职业，还不给它们能维持生活的工资。所以，既然连生活工资都拿不到，你为什么要去？女性还是会想办法，部分原因是，如果她们出身上层，往往能从父母那里获得支持，对吧？

I mean, you know, obviously, I'm I'm exaggerating, but the point is is we not only don't value these professionals, we don't pay them a living wage. So why right? Why would you go into them if you're not getting paid a living wage? Women still figure it out, but in part because, you know, they oftentimes have the help from their parents if if they're upper class. Right?

她们能从父母或伴侣那里获得帮助。性别动态就是这样：男人更被期待赚大钱，女人则可以去做收入不高的工作。我们仍然有这种性别模式，所以这真的解释了一切。

They have help from their parents, or they can have help from a partner. You know? I mean, just the gender dynamics just play out in that so that it becomes more of the responsibility for the man to bring in the big bucks, so that the woman can do something that doesn't make very much money. And we still have that gender dynamic. So that really explains it.

对了，我还想说最后一点——关于“男孩文化”的另一点，我总是忘，但非常关键。在一个“更好”的体系里，不仅人的品质有等级，人本身也有等级，我们都在拼命往上爬。

Right? And I I wanna say one final thing that I didn't say. One other thing that's about a boy culture, and this is an important point. I always forget this, and it's a critical point. In a better is not only a hierarchy of human qualities, it's a hierarchy of humans where we're all trying to get on top.

所以，如果社会把人分成三六九等，有些人被认为比其他人更有价值——男人高于女人，富人高于穷人，白人高于有色人种——如果我们都在这种“往上爬”的社会里，这就是男孩文化的一部分。这种等级观非常不成熟，而我正是在指出它的幼稚：我们竟觉得某些人更值得被关怀，这会造成伤害。特朗普的支持者，Kim，你知道的——

And so if you have a hierarchy of humans where some people are considered more valuable than other humans, so men over women, rich over poor, white people over people of color. I mean, if you have that kind of society where we're all trying to get on top, that's part of boy culture. Right? Because it's a deeply immature hierarchy, by the way. And so I'm alluding to the immaturity of it that we think some humans are more worthy of care than others, that's gonna cause damage because the Trump supporters you know this, Kim.

他们觉得被压到了等级最底层，自己的需求被忽视。而特朗普说：嘿，你们重要，你们重要。他其实没做到，但 rhetoric 就是“你重要”。

The Trump supporters felt like they were being put on the bottom of a hierarchy, that their needs didn't matter. And Trump said, hey. You matter. You matter. You know, like, I'm gonna he's not gonna he didn't he's not doing it, but I'm just saying his rhetoric was, you matter.

所以对我来说，我们必须打破这个等级。男孩和年轻男性给我们的启示是：这不是某个群体的错，而是整个文化在制造一种文化——它说“当个女孩可能不错，那样我就不会被要求无情”。连女权主义者也会犯这错，我也批评自己人——

And so to me, it's it's like we have to disrupt the hierarchy. And, you know, and that's what boys and young men teach us is that it's not it's not someone's group's fault. It's our whole culture that's creating a culture that says it might be nice to be a girl because then I wouldn't have to be emotionless. And and that it's the only valuing we you know, feminists do this too. I'll I'll blame my own group.

我们试图把等级颠倒，把自己放顶上，别人放底下。那一刻可能感觉良好，但解决不了长期问题，也解决不了暴力，因为没人愿意被压在“人类等级”的底层。而且，一旦他们拿得到武器——我常跟学生说——不幸的是，他们可能会试图杀了你。

We flip the higher we try to flip the hierarchy and put ourselves on top and other people on bottom. That may feel good at the moment. It's not gonna solve the long term problem. It's not gonna solve the violence because nobody wants to be on the bottom of a hierarchy of humanness. And when they have access to weapons, as I always tell my students, unfortunately, they might try to kill you.

对吧？因为没人愿意被压在最底层。我们从大规模枪击案里学到的就是这一点，Kim。

Right? Because nobody wants to be put on the bottom. And we learned that from mass shooters, by the way, Kim.

你花了很多时间和精力研究有色人种男孩和男性，以及工人阶级背景的人。为什么聚焦这些群体？

Now you've spent a lot of time and effort studying boys and men of color and those from working class backgrounds. Why focus on those groups?

这是因为他们能讲故事。心理学家明白这一点，社会学家更明白。通常，那些不处于权力中心的人说出的话最有洞见。我很早就学到这一点，当时我是哈佛人类发展学博士生，在波士顿的公立学校做研究。很多时候，你听到的故事，甚至那些被我基于波士顿的研究而忽略的深度秘密，它们讲述的其实更真实，因为他们能看见自己。就像白人富裕男性有时很难看见自己，因为他们是“标准”，所以他们看不见自己的特权。

It's because they tell a story. Psychologists know this and sociologists definitely know this. Oftentimes, the people that are not in the center of power tell the most insightful things. And I learned that early in the day when I was a doctoral student in human development at Harvard and I was working in public schools in Boston, that oftentimes the stories you would get, you know, even deep secrets that was written off based on, in part, my studies in Boston, They tell a story that's more truth telling because they see themselves. It's like white rich men sometimes have a hard time seeing themselves because they're the norm so that, you know, they don't see their own privilege.

他们也看不见，你知道，他们也被“男孩文化”伤害的方式，顺便说一句。他们看不见。但当你去和边缘的男孩、年轻男性交谈——我称之为权力边缘，被种族、社会阶层，被我们所划分的各种界限——他们更愿意向权力说真话。他们看得见。他们感觉得到。

They don't see the way, you know, the the way they've been damaged by boy culture too, by the way. They don't see it. But when you talk to boys and young men on the fringe, what I call on the fringe of power, by race, by social class, right, by, you know, all sorts of divisions we have, they're much more willing to speak truth to power. They see it. They see it.

他们感觉得到，因为他们就活在其中。你知道，当个女孩可能也不错，那样我就用不着无情了。我们现在也许能从白人特权男孩那里听到这些，因为这已成为文化的一部分。但通常，我们得不到——我不觉得我在八九十年代能得到那样的数据，当时男孩们会如此清晰地指出“硬”被置于“软”之上，也指出人性的等级，当然，因为他们被压在底层，所以他们清楚是什么让他们被挡在白人世界、富人世界之外，无法登顶。所以，对我来说，工薪阶层年轻人和有色人种孩子——我想对所有心理学家说——他们讲述的故事往往是主流心理学没讲过的，因为我们过去、甚至现在，即便过去二十年我们已多元化，我们仍然主要把发展研究放在特权社区的孩子身上，各种美国特权社区。

They feel it because they live it. You know, it might be nice to be a girl because then I wouldn't have to be emotionless. You know, we may now get that among white privileged boys because it's been so part of the, you know, the culture. But usually, what we don't I I don't think I would have gotten that data back in the, you know, in the late eighties, early nineties, where boys had been so clear about the privileging of the hard over soft, but also the hierarchy of humanness, of course, because they're they're you know, they've been put on the bottom, and so they're basically aware of what keeps them in the in the outside world, in the white world, in the rich world, sort of not having access to the top. So the idea is that, to me, the working class young people and the kids of color, and I wanna say this to all psychologists, they oftentimes tell us the story that mainstream psychology has not told because we've been focused too much even now even though I know we've diversified in the last two decades, even now, we still heavily focus our developmental research on kids in privileged communities, right, in in various kinds of American privileged communities.

有时种族多元，但关键是社会经济层面是中上层。所以，当我们局限于此，我们不仅错过了领域里的声音，更错过了——这是重点，Kim——我们错过了对人类发展至关重要的洞见。要想在理解自我的历史上获得新洞见，唯一的方法就是倾听那些与我们不同的人。

Sometimes it's racially diverse, but the point of it's it's socioeconomically middle and upper class. So the idea is when we when we limit it, it's not just that we're missing voices in the field. We're missing and this is a big thing, Kim. We're missing insights about human development that are necessary. The only way we're gonna have new insights in the history in our understanding of ourselves is by listening to people that are not ourselves.

我想用我父亲的一句话收尾。我18岁时对美国青少年感兴趣，一直如此。他说，Niobe，如果你对美国青少年感兴趣，去中国生活吧。他的意思是，如果你只看见自己，你就看不见自己。

I want to end the response with one more insight from my father, actually. He said when I was 18, I was interested in American adolescents. I've always been interested in American adolescents. And he said, Niobe, if you're interested in American adolescents, go live in China. And his point was, you can't see yourself if you only see yourself.

对吧？你得看见某些——不是某些东西，而是某些与你不同的人，才能看见自己。

Right? You have to see something someone. Right? Not something. You have to see people who are different from you to see yourself.

而且，心理学家——我要批判一下心理学界，尤其是发展心理学研究——我们曾以为，如果能看见自己，就能成为更好的研究者。对吧？我们搞那种“匹配”。但事实是，我们没意识到，我们会更清楚地看见自己。不只是他们。

And and psychologists I'm gonna I'm gonna I'm gonna critique the field of psychology in some ways, research psychology, especially developmental psychology, is that we have assumed that if we can see ourselves, that makes us a better researcher. But the right? We do that sort of matching thing. But the reality is we won't we fail to understand that we will see ourselves even more. Not just them.

如果我们是白人，我们不会因倾听有色人种孩子而更看见他们；我们反而会因倾听有色人种孩子而更看见自己。我们会通过倾听那些不是我、没有我这种背景的孩子，来理解人类发展，理解“成为我”意味着什么。所以，对我来说，心理学里这一点很重要：对有色人种和工薪阶层家庭孩子的研究，不只是对他们的研究。

We won't see kids of color more if we're white. We'll actually see ourselves more by listening to kids of color. We'll understand human development, in fact, of what it means to be me by listening to kids who aren't me, and who don't have the same background. And so to me, it's an important point in psychology. The studies of kids of color and from working class families are not just studies of kids of color and working class families.

它们是对人类的研究，对“何以为人”以及阻碍我们人性的研究。我希望我们在这个领域转变观念，明白纳入女性——正如Carol Gilligan几十年前所说——不只是关于女性，而是关于人性。她出过一本书叫《人类的声音》，因为关系性的声音不是“女性的声音”，而是“人类的声音”。我们却常把非主流群体的声音视为只与他们有关，看不到对我们的相关性。我认为这是该领域的大错。

They are studies of humans and what it means to be human and what's getting in the way of our capacity to be human. And I want us to shift that in the field so that we understand that including women, as Carol Gilligan said decades ago, is not just about women, it's about being human. She came out with a book called In a Human Voice because the idea is the relational voice is not a is not a woman's voice, it's a human voice. And we we tend to take the non mainstream and make their voices distinct to them and not see relevance to us. But that's the big mistake in the field, I would argue.

刚才你提到去中国，你也确实去了，在中国做过研究。你发现那里的文化差异同样明显吗？那里的男性和男孩也面临同样的问题吗？

A moment ago, you mentioned going to China, and you've done that. You've done some research in China. You finding that similar to what you're seeing in the cultural differences that are really salient? Are men and boys having the same issues in that culture as well?

首先，我父亲是一位中国学者。所以我从24年起就经常去中国。他在80年代在中国生活了八年。他已经去世了，但我从他那里学到了很多关于中国历史的东西。现在我对中国了如指掌，因为我从小就被这位文学教授兼艺术专家的父亲灌输这些知识。

First of all, my father was a China scholar. So I've been going to China since '24. He lived there for eight years in the '80s. I've learned a lot he's passed now, but I've learned a lot about the history of China. I know China like the back of my hand at this point, having raised by a father who was inculcating that he was a literature professor and an art specialist.

但他总是说，基本上是欧洲人把中国的贡献大部分据为己有，并声称那是欧洲的。所以我就是在这种观念下长大的。你明白吗？带着一种感觉，这种从未得到应有认可的文化，实际上是欧洲启蒙运动的基础。总之，因为在中国待了很久，我开始与Hiro Yoshikawa等人以及陈欣银一起进行研究，Hiro Yoshikawa和陈欣银是两位发展心理学家。

But he was always saying, basically, the Europeans ripped off most of what China contributed and claimed it to be European. So that's how I was raised. You know what I mean? With the sense of, like, this culture that's never been given the credit was actually at the basis of the enlightenment for Europe. Anyway, so in that spending so much time in China, and then I began a study with Hiro Yoshikawa and others and Xinyin Chen, two developmental psychologists by Hiro Yoshikawa and Xinyin Chen.

我们于2006年2月启动这项研究，涉及1200个家庭，既有青少年队列也有婴儿队列。我们即将对两个样本进行二十年的跟踪调查。所以我们甚至在2006年2月就进入医院，在婴儿出生时对父母进行访谈并观察婴儿。他们现在20岁了。

We started it in 02/2006. It's a study of 1,200 families, both an adolescent cohort and a baby cohort. And we're still about to do the twenty year follow-up of both samples. So we even went into the hospitals in 02/2006, and we actually interviewed parents and observed babies when they were born. And they're now 20 years old.

对于青少年，我们进行了多次跟踪。我们终于获得了一笔外部资助。我们一直通过各种方式自筹资金。1200个家庭，研究社会经济背景如何塑造儿童发展。所以我们即将进行这二十年的跟踪调查。

And with adolescents, we've been doing repeated follow ups. And we finally got an external grant. We've been funding it ourselves in all sorts of ways. 1,200 families looking at the socioeconomic context and how it shapes child development. And so we're about to do this twenty year follow-up.

所以回到你的问题，我们跟踪了大约800名青少年，然后跟踪了大约500个婴儿家庭，他们现在已经是年轻人了。所以我们的数据中发现了一些让我非常沮丧的事情，尤其是因为我了解1980年代的中国，这给了我一些很好的洞察。基本上，从1980年代我1985年住在那里到2007年2月我长期住在那里收集数据，带着一个庞大的团队。我们与一个庞大的团队合作。中国已经变得更美国化了。

So to get to your question, we have about 800 adolescents we've been following, and then we have about 500 families of babies that we've been following who are now young adults. So what we find in our data is this is something that's very depressing for me, especially because I know China from the 1980s, which gives me some good insight. Basically, from the 1980s when I lived there in 1985 to when I lived there in 02/2007, because I ended up going there for a long time to just collect the data with a huge team. We work with a huge team. China has become more Americanified.

我的意思是，美国文化占主导地位。1987年，我给你举个例子，男人们会牵手。这不是性方面的事，只是人类之间的事。你经常能看到男人们牵手、拥抱，身体接触很多，甚至亲吻。基本上是朋友之间。

I mean, just American culture is dominant. In 1987, I'll give you an example, men held hands. It wasn't a sexual thing, it was just a human thing. You saw men holding hands all the time, hugging each other, being very physically, even kissing each other. Basically friends.

他们是朋友。而当我2007年回去，带着我的小孩住在那里时，你再也看不到那种行为了，因为那已经被视为同性恋行为。所以你再也看不到了。对吧？你再也看不到了。

They were friends. And when I went back in nineteen two thousand seven and lived there with my little kids, you never saw that because that had been identified as gay behavior. So you never saw that. Right? You never saw that.

所以你会发现，现在中国的传统男子气概是关于学识，传统意义上的，懂诗歌、懂文学、懂哲学。对吧？当然也要强壮，因为这在世界各地一直是男子气概的一部分。但在中国，它真的是关于了解世界、了解艺术。对吧？

And and so the idea is you start to see, you know, now masculinity in China traditionally was about being learned in the traditional sense, knowing poetry, knowing literature, knowing philosophy. Right? Being strong, of course, because that's always been a part of masculinity, but but in everywhere in the world. But but in China, it was really about knowing the world, knowing art. Right?

成为一个受过教育的人曾经是男子气概的一部分。然后大约从……我估算，这只是我在那里生活后的个人观点。大约从2月开始，当美国文化进入时，体育文化也随之而来，比如篮球，他们有姚明打篮球，开始传入，你 literally 看到美国男子气概渗透进中国。你还会看到……我再告诉你一个例子。在共产主义理论中，男女各顶半边天。

Being being basically an educated person was part of masculinity. And then starting in about I'm estimate this is now my opinion having lived there. Starting in about February, when the sort of American culture came in, sports culture came in, you know, basketball, they had Yao Ming who was playing basketball, it came started to come in, and you literally saw the infiltration of American masculinity into China. You also saw I'll tell you another example. In communism, communism as a theory believes that men and women hold up half the sky.

他们理论上相信性别平等。我不是说实际上有性别平等，天哪，绝没有。但我只是说理论上，对吧，理论上，性别平等是共产主义的理论。所以2006年我们访谈父母时，他们总是说男孩和女孩是一样的，他们有同样的需求。而且，尽管当时他们确实更偏爱男孩，但他们总是说男孩和女孩是一样的。

They believe in gender equality, theoretically. I'm not saying there was gender equality, God forbid. But I'm just saying theoretically, right, theoretically, that was gender equality was the was the theory of communism. And so when we would interview parents in 02/2006, they always talked about boys and girls are the same, that they have the same needs. And, you know, even though they privilege boys over girls, certainly at that time, they always talked about boys and girls being the same.

当我们采访同一个人，对吧？同样年龄但父母不同，十年后在我们的婴儿样本中，整个对话，Kim，都是关于男孩和女孩之间的差异。男孩你知道，在社交情感能力上不如女孩。而且，你知道，我的意思是，我们在美国所有的性别刻板印象都被重复了，Kim。听到这些真的令人震惊。

When we interviewed the same right? The same age but different parents ten years later in our baby sample, they were the whole dialogue, Kim, is about the differences between boys and girls. And boys have you know, aren't as socially emotionally competent as girls. And, you know, I mean, all the gender stereotypes that we have in The United States were being repeated, Kim. It was stunning to hear.

他们在重复我们的刻板印象。而纵向数据之所以如此惊人，是因为我在2006年的青少年父母中没有听到这些。我在2016年的青少年父母中听到了，他们听起来像美国人。你知道吗？他们在性别刻板印象上真的听起来像美国人。

They were repeating our stereotypes. And the reason why the longitudinal data is so stunning is I didn't hear that in the parents in 2006 of adolescence. I heard it in the parents of adolescence in 2016, where they sounded American. You know? They literally sounded American in their gender stereotypes.

所以现在你看到中国的学校。我的意思是，令人震惊的是，它们试图阻止男孩表现得像女孩。对吧？不要太软弱。而且你看到整个学校都有课程来增强男子气概，以美国意义上的男子气概，意味着运动、健身、强壮，基本上重视数学、科学和商业。

And so now you're getting schools in China. I mean, it's stunning, that is trying to prevent boys from acting like girls. Right? So being so soft. And you're getting entire schools that have curriculum to enhance masculinity in an American sense of what masculinity means, meaning playing sports, being fit, being built, right, and basically valuing math and science and business.

我的意思是，就像，哦我的天。看到文化中的这种变化，正是我写《Rebels with a Cause》这本最新书的动力。因为我意识到我亲眼见证了这种变化，因为我父亲在八十年代生活在中国。然后我又回到中国生活了一段时间。我 literally 能看到这种变化，然后我们在我们的数据中看到了，在我们二十年的数据中。

I mean, it's like, oh my god. And to see that change in the culture is really what the impetus with writing Rebels with a Cause, my latest book. Because I realized I have literally witnessed the change because I happened to have a father living in China in the eighties. And then I went back to China to live there for a while. And I could literally see the change, and then we saw it in our data, in our twenty year data.

所以我会说是的。现在回答你的问题，我们绝对看到了相同的模式，因为它源于我们把思考和感受赋予了性别身份。这是我们的第一个错误。如果你把思考变成男性化，感受变成女性化，一个来自另一个星球的姐妹，Kim，会看着我们说，你们这些人怎么了？你们这些人怎么了？

So I would say yes. Now the answer to your question is absolutely we see the same patterns because it stems from we given a gender identity to thinking and feeling. And that is our first mistake. If you make thinking masculine and feeling feminine, a sister from another planet, Kim, would look at us and say, what's wrong with you people? What's wrong with you people?

你们怎么能创造一个繁荣？我现在听起来有点傻，但我只是感受到了它的深刻。你知道，男孩和年轻男性在说，不要把思考和感受赋予性别身份。这是人类的事。不是性别身份。

How can you create a thrive? I'm sounding a little silly at the moment, but I'm just getting the profundity of it. You know, that boys and young men are saying, don't give a gender identity of thinking and feeling. It's a human thing. It's not a gender identity.

对吧？想要友谊不是性别身份。对吧？想要情感上亲密的联系、关系，没有性别身份。这是人类的需求和人类的能力。

Right? To want friendships is not a gender identity. Right? To want emotionally intimate connections, relationships does not have a gender identity. It's a human need and a human capacity.

想想我们在西方传统中所有的友谊历史，亚里士多德。我的意思是，我们有一整个历史上被珍视的男性友谊，对吧，在西方世界的历史中，东方世界也一样。你有一整个历史上被珍视的男性友谊。而不知怎么的，在二十世纪，我们开始给它赋予性别身份，你知道，这对我来说真的很有趣。让我们稍微换个话题

And think about all the history of friendships we have in the Western tradition, Aristotle. I mean, we have a whole history of male friendships that we valued, right, in the history of the Western world, same in the Eastern world. You have the whole history of male friendships being valued. And somehow in the twentieth century, we began to give it a gender identity, you know, which is just fascinating to me. Let's switch gears a little

聊聊可能的解决方案。因为在你最近的工作中，你一直在研究如何帮助人们保持彼此之间的联系，包括你所谓的“带着好奇心倾听”。那么这是什么意思，为什么它很重要？

bit and talk about possible solutions. Because in your recent work, you have been looking at ways to help people stay more connected with each other, including what you call listening with curiosity. So what does that mean, and why is it important?

大约十年前，我和我的同事Joseph Nelson，他现在已经是斯沃斯莫尔学院的正教授，他很久以前是我的学生，我们决定采用我一直在采访的方法，Joseph和我一直在教学中使用。我们在教授“带着好奇心倾听”的方法。当时我们没这么叫。给博士生做论文。我从2006年，抱歉，1995年就开始教这个，他过去十年左右一直和我一起教。

What we tried to do about ten years ago with my colleague Joseph Nelson, who's now a full professor at Swarthmore, he was a former student of mine a long time ago, We decided to do the method that I had been interviewing in, and Joseph and I had been teaching in. We were teaching the method of listening with curiosity. We didn't call it that at the time. With doctoral students to do their dissertations. And I've been teaching it since 2006 2000 and sorry, 1995, and he's been teaching it with me for the past ten years or so.

当我们把这种倾听方法教给博士生、让他们在论文里做访谈项目时，总会收到这样的反馈：魏博士，你意识到这不仅仅是一种研究方法。学会这套方法后，它彻底改变了你的人际关系。我当时只是敷衍地点头，心想，好吧。

And we would get in that class with doctoral students when we teach this method of listening as to do an interview project for your dissertation. We would get the feedback like, doctor Wei, you realize it doesn't just it's not just a research method. It totally changes your relationships when you learn the method. And I would be like I was sort of passing it off. I was like, okay.

好吧，这挺有意思，但我并没有真正往心里去。后来，男孩们说出了深藏的秘密，人们问：你是怎么让男孩那样开口的？你知道我的意思吧？因为那些引述太美了。

Okay. That's interesting, but I wasn't really thinking about it. And then the boys the deep secrets came out, and people said, how did you get boys to talk like that? Like you know what mean? Because so many of the quotes are so gorgeous.

他们问：你是怎么让男孩那样说话的？我说，这不是什么秘密药水，而是一种方法——部分源于我在哈佛读博时从卡罗尔·吉利根和林恩·迈克·布朗那里学到的。它的核心是用好奇去倾听他们说了什么，而不是照着访谈提纲走流程，或者只是用刻板印象去印证。举个例子，我是对心理学家说的：比如，当他们在访谈中流露出对朋友的脆弱时，我们不会追问。

And they said, how did you get boys to talk like that? And I was like, I it wasn't a secret potion. It was really a method that I learned in part from Carol Gilligan and Lynn Michael Brown at Harvard when I was a doctoral student. And it was really a way of listening with curiosity to what they were saying rather than just basically going through an interview protocol or just affirming my stereotypes by for ex I'll give example because I'm speaking to psychologists. For example, not following up on the questions where they reveal a kind of vulnerability with their friends.

作为心理学家，我们在访谈里不会追问那个点，因为我们甚至听不到那个故事——我们只想找到“男孩就该通过运动之类方式互动”的预设模式，于是直接忽略。可一旦你意识到？对吧？所以这套方法的关键是带着好奇去听，理解他们如何看待自己，而不是用我们的刻板印象去框定他们。

What we would do as psychologists is we wouldn't follow-up with that if we were interviewing them because we think that we wouldn't even hear the story because we're looking for the way we think boys relate to each other, which is just through sports and whatever it is. So we wouldn't even follow-up with that question. But when you know? Right? So the idea is that the method is really about listening with curiosity to what they're saying to understand how they see themselves, not how we stereotype them to be.

到了大约2015年，约瑟夫和我突然有了大顿悟：为什么只教博士生？为什么不教给年轻人，让他们直接拥有想要的关系？于是我们去了下东区的一所男校，开始教七年级、12岁的孩子，结果震惊——你猜怎么着，金？

Then in about two thousand fifteen, Joseph and I had this big insight together. Why are we just teaching it to doctoral students? Why aren't we teaching it to young people so they can actually have the relationships that they want? So we went into this boys' school on the Lower East Side. We started teaching to seventh graders, 12 year olds, and we were blown away because guess what, Kim?

他们比博士生做得还好，因为它连着人天生的好奇心，而我们把好奇心从学生身上一点点磨掉了。等读到博士，他们已经没多少好奇了，对吧？他们只关心“什么是好问题”，而不是“什么是真问题”。第一次给七年级上课时，我们让博士生去采访这些孩子，作为课程的一部分。博士生惊呆了。

They were better at it than the doctoral students because it's connected to your natural curiosity, and we stamp the curiosity out of our students. So they basically, by the time they're doctoral students, they have no more curiosity. And, right, they're only about what's a good question rather than what's a real question. So we had the doctoral students interview the seventh graders as part of the the lesson in the first time we taught it to seventh graders. And the doctoral students were stunned.

他们说：七年级学生比我们强太多了。我说——那就是我们的大顿悟：我们与生俱来的、五岁孩子般的好奇心，金，正是人类连接的秘方。因为它意味着带着惊奇和好奇去倾听，不仅了解你经历了什么、你如何定义爱、以及我们在乎的信任、关系、友谊，而且通过倾听你，金，我也更清楚自己怎么定义这些。

They said, the seventh graders are so much better than we are. And I said and that was our big insight. That basically, this curiosity that we're born with, our five year old curiosity, is our secret sauce, Kim, to human connection. Because it's about actually listening with wonder and curiosity about what not only and remember, this leads back to the other theme. Not only what you experience and what how you define love and all the things that we care about, trust and relationships and friendships, But it helps me understand by listening to you, Kim, how I define that.

因为当你讲述“亲密友谊”对你意味着什么时，我开始明白我自己的定义——我在比较，对吧？把我的反应和你的反应对照。有时相似，有时不同，这种差异在我倾听时反而让我更清楚。我并不是说好奇倾听只是为了认识自己，而是说你要意识到：通过倾听别人，你也在认识自己。我们的文化如此脱节，还以为连接就是不停讲自己，其实不是。

Because, ultimately, as you talk about what you mean by a close friendship, I begin to understand what I mean because I'm comparing, right, my response to your response. So sometimes there'll be similarities, but sometimes there'll be differences that's, you know, that's clarifying for me as I listen. So I'm not saying that the point of listening with curiosity is just to learn about yourself, but I'm saying to recognize that you learn about yourself through listening to somebody else. And we are such a disconnected culture that we think connection is just talking about ourselves. It's not.

连接不是靠讲自己建立的。于是我们都在讲自己，以为这样就能连接，当然行不通。任何五岁小孩都会问：光讲自己的故事凭什么就能连接？我们得对彼此的故事真正好奇。

It's not we don't form connection through talking about ourselves. So we're all talking about ourselves, you know, thinking it's gonna form connection. And, of course, it doesn't. And any five year old would say, why would that form connection to just share your story? We have to actually be curious in each other's stories.

“带着好奇去倾听”项目我们已经做了八年，我简单说一下。我们得到了斯宾塞基金会、陈·扎克伯格倡议的资助，他们投资说：围绕它给学校开发一套课程。于是我们做了26节课的完整课程。

So the Listening with Curiosity project, we've done it. I'll do this very quickly. We've done it for about eight years now. We got funded by Spencer Foundation, Chan Zuckerberg Initiative, who basically invested in it and said, build a curriculum around it for schools. We built a 26 lesson curriculum.

我们一直在学校开展这项工作，取得了显著成效，也发表了相关研究。只需搜索我的名字就能找到我们的成果。我们发现，培养好奇心不仅与各种社会情感技能、幸福感相关，还能提升学业投入度，并增强共同人性意识。

We've been doing it in schools. We have great impact. We've been publishing on it. You can find our work just by looking at my name. And we find that cur fostering curiosity is linked to all sorts of social emotional skills as well-being, as well as academic engagement, as well as a sense of a common humanity.

它能增进你与不同背景他人的联结感。因此，我们正在筹建一个完整的“社会健康研究所”，将围绕这一框架和方法培训人们。我们希望把它打造成一个全球虚拟研究所，因为大量教育工作者、家长和孩子都想接受这一方法和框架的培训，我们正在建设它。最后我想说，我们还在建设一个“青少年联结设计科技中心”，因为我决心推广“联结设计科技”这一概念。

It improves a sense of connectedness to others who are different from you. So interpersonal curiosity, we're now creating a whole institute called the Social Health Institute that's gonna be training people in the framework and method, around we wanna get it. It's a it's a virtual institute around the world because we have so many educators and parents and kids who wanna be trained in the method and the framework. So we're building that. And the final thing I wanna say is we're building a center for youth in connection by design technology because I'm determined to to introduce the concept of connection by design technology.

各位家长请听好，科技本身不是问题，问题在于我们设计科技的方式如此有毒，以至于友谊变成了我获得多少点赞、有没有网红或粉丝。我们可以创造一种科技，真正培养我们天生的人际好奇心，也就是所谓的“联结设计科技”，促进人与人之间的真实连接。只要我们愿意，甚至可以用人工智能来促进人际连接。我们正在开发一款名为Agape的应用，过去一年里每周都与青少年共同设计。今年八月将推出最小可行版本，通过我提出的“带着好奇心倾听”实践来培育友谊、弥合分歧，并将其游戏化。

Technology is not the problem, I wanna tell you all parents that are listening. It's the way we've designed technology that's so toxic so that friendship becomes how many likes I get or whether I have influencers or followers. We can create a technology that actually fosters our natural interpersonal curiosity, that actually is what we're calling connection by design technology that fosters human to human connection. We can even use AI to foster human to human connection if we want to, and we're building it with a with an app we're building now called Agape that we've been working with teenagers for the last year every week to codesign it. We're coming out with an MVP of the app in August that basically nurtures friendships and bridges divides by using my practices of listening with curiosity, and we gamify it.

这样它就变得有趣又吸引人，孩子们可以获得“倾听积分”等各种奖励。但这件事本身就很有趣。青少年参与共创，确保它保持趣味。关键在于，我们需要营造一种亲社会文化，可以通过家庭、学校、科技等多种方式实现，对吧？

So it becomes fun and engaging, and kids learn get listening points and all sorts of things. But it's a fun thing to do. But kids have teenagers have helped us create it, so made sure it it stays fun. But the point is we need to create a prosocial culture, and there's lots of ways of doing it in your homes, in your schools, through technology. Right?

我们只需认识到，Kim，问题在于反社会文化，因此解决方案就是亲社会文化。如果我们天生是社会性动物——事实如此——那么反社会文化就是文化与天性冲突。解决之道是创造亲社会文化，使其更好地契合我们的社会本性。

We just need to recognize the problem, Kim, is an antisocial culture, and thus the solution, right, is a prosocial culture. If we're social by nature, which we are, then our antisocial culture, it's a culture nature clash. And the solution is to create a prosocial culture so that it aligns better with our social nature.

Wei博士，这次对话非常精彩。我认为您的工作极其重要，我会持续关注后续进展。感谢您做客节目。

Well, Doctor. Wei, this has been really interesting. I think your work is quite important, and I'm going to stay tuned to see what comes next. Thank you for joining me.

非常感谢您。

Yeah, thank you so much.

您可以在我们的网站speakingofpsychology.org，或在Apple、Spotify、YouTube及任何播客平台收听《Speaking of Psychology》往期节目。如果喜欢，请订阅并留下评价。如有意见或未来节目创意，可发邮件至speakingofpsychologyapa.org。《Speaking of Psychology》由Lee Weinerman制作。感谢收听美国心理学会的节目。

You can find previous episodes of Speaking of Psychology on our website at speakingofpsychology.org or on Apple, Spotify, YouTube, or wherever you get your podcasts. And if you like what you've heard, please subscribe and leave us a review. If you have comments or ideas for future podcasts, you can email us at speakingofpsychologyapa dot org. Speaking of Psychology is produced by Lee Weinerman. Thank you for listening for the American Psychological Association.

我是Kim Mills。

I'm Kim Mills.