關於 make an attempt to中文 ，我們在網路上蒐集到這些相關的討論、資訊與評價

(打英文還是輕鬆+快多了😉 中文版下面有連結)

Why taking the SAT or ACT when you’re not ready is a terrible mistake.

For several years now, I’ve noticed that many of my students who study at international schools tend to take an SAT test just to “test the waters.”

This is such a bad move it’s not funny!

What’s so bad about it?

American admissions officers dislike students who only focus on tests. So, even if you manage to get a high score after you’ve taken the SAT too many times, you might be rejected anyway.

Your SAT score is so important! Please do not waste any opportunity to get a high score!

I read the following quote on Dartmouth’s website:

“We don't recommend excessive testing. Making the most out of your high school opportunities is more important than repeatedly taking standardized tests."

Is it only Dartmouth?

Actually, this kind of statement isn’t unique to Dartmouth - it’s pretty standard. Most of the top universities say exactly the same thing. This causes many people to believe that colleges don’t really care much about your SAT score.

Nothing could be further from the truth!

All you have to do is to look at the average SAT/ACT scores that enrolling students receive. As an example, successful applicants to Dartmouth average around 1500 (out of 1600). That’s pretty high! What do they mean then?

They mean that students need to focus on non-academic pursuits AS WELL AS getting a very high score on their SATs.

So, you definitely need a high SAT score, but you can’t look like you care that much. If you take a test before you’re ready, there will be a record of your lower-than-ideal score. You’ll naturally need to retake the exam a second, third, and, possibly, fourth, time.

Let’s say that you do achieve your ideal score on the fourth or fifth attempt. How will the admissions officer view you when you have exactly the same score as another applicant who only took the test twice or three times? Who will they select?

Naturally, they will not choose you because you look like a testing machine.

In the US, everybody knows that it’s foolish to take the SAT or ACT more than three times. That means that you should NEVER waste an attempt. You should be ready before you ever take the test.

So, what should you do?

First, “test the waters” in a safe environment: your home.

You can do some practice questions on Khan Academy to get a feel for the test. Then, when you feel ready to tackle the whole test, do one of the Official Tests found on Khan or CollegeBoard:

https://www.khanacademy.org/mission/sat/exams

https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/sat/practice/full-length-practice-tests

Make sure you download the test, print it out and do it on paper. If you do it on the computer, you will NOT be simulating the real test.

Presently, there are a total of 9 released tests. CollegeBoard and Khan have released 8, and there is one more floating about on the internet. (As an aside, I actually use this test in my classes. I purposely avoid the other released tests because most schools use them and so do many students. I hate it when students say, “I’ve done that test before!”)

Simply using these tests will give you a good idea of what score you would get if you took the real test. And you can do this without risking being labelled a testing machine.

Also, as there are only 9 official tests out there, don’t waste them. Granted, there are other “official” tests online or in some schools, but these are usually riddled with errors or are incomplete. (I personally hate doing a test and not knowing which questions are faulty before doing it. Most of the time, students spend a lot of time trying to figure out the answers to questions that do not even have answers. It can be very frustrating.)

Another thing: of the nine, only 5 of them are previously administered tests. The first four “official tests” were designed before CollegeBoard switched from the old SAT to the new one in 2016. These four tests are quite easy compared to what is being tested now, so are not a great indicator of your future score. They are great for practicing question types - just understand that if you get a really high score on them it doesn’t mean that you will do just as well on test day.

Only tests 5-9 (also easier than the current tests) are the closest thing we have to the current SAT tests. Still, these are easier than the current test, especially in the reading section, so be aware that the reading will most probably be even tougher than what is in all of the officially released tests.

If you have any other questions related to how to prep for your SATs, feel free to leave a message below or PM me.

Enjoy your SAT studies!

本文的中文版:
https://brettlindsay.blogspot.tw/2018/01/satact.html

#SAT寒密班 (適合11年級 & 3月和5月的考生) https://goo.gl/17Uz1e

#SAT週六衝刺班 (針對3月和5月的考生)
https://goo.gl/3ZEEWj

#SAT暑密班 (適合10年級 & 10月和12月的考生) https://goo.gl/6Ypwsi

我哥之前因為陪朋友去考街頭藝人證照看到一些評審對街頭藝人的態度發聲 而上了新聞。我覺得他很勇敢的去做了一件對的事。

希望政府不會時間過了就不關心這些事情。希望我們都可以更客觀的去看藝術，尊重不一樣藝術和藝術家。我覺得以下我哥說的非常好，想跟大家分享。

想知道之前的事可看新聞連結：
http://www.storm.mg/article/270611

親愛的大家：


我想感謝所有支持我、以及給予我鼓勵意見的每個人；同時也要感謝熱情關注此事、協助揭露街頭表演者們應試處境問題的許多媒體與記者們。我很抱歉這些日子我保持著沉默—僅有一個原因：我並不希望這件事情，在台北市文化局正式給予溝通管道之前就發展到無法控制的程度；我很抱歉遲至今日我才發表這篇文章，但我確實需要一些時間來沉澱彙整我心中的感受和想法，而我也需要時間及一些協助使這篇文章能夠以中文來呈現。

在我採取更進一步的行動之前，我其實未曾預料到這件事情在媒體與社交媒體上的感染力如此龐大；我受寵若驚的感動能夠聽見發自你們每個人內心的聲音，而我也著實感到抱歉，面對著如潮水般湧來的各種訊息，似乎超過我所能負荷。請原諒我未能夠逐ㄧ去回應每個人的訊息，但我真的想讓你們知道，你們每ㄧ個人都讓我感到不可思議、帶給我深深的感動及感謝。

我不認為自己是一個勇敢的人，我也自知自己並非街頭藝人的代表或者發言人。但我是一個藝術創作者，一個表演藝術家，一個教育者，而最重要的，我身為一個 "人"。我的家人、朋友及師長們，總是教導我應該為正確的事情挺身而出。

我明白事情有時候總是不像我們所期待的永遠是非分明。但發生在5月21日星期天的街頭藝人評審事件，是對藝術群體的一種「極不尊重」。不論反面評論者所提出的藉口、理由或是文化差異等緣由，這些應試的表演者們，很顯然是被視為次等公民，或者（經驗與技能不夠成熟？）的學生等級。而與此同時，同樣非常清晰的是，街頭藝人評審制度或許是立意良善，但其審查過程的執行層面，卻是嚴重缺失連連。

藝術並非一種特權的這件事情如今已完全被遺忘。台北市文化局本應提倡所有具有文化及藝術可能性的事情，但它並未做到這ㄧ點。很顯然的，一個「對表演者的基本尊重」並不存在 — 許多表演者都如此感覺，有些人則深感受傷。

就算是得到全世界所有理應被如此對待的原因及理由，他們仍然感受到自己的不被尊重；因為這就是事實。

再一次的我想強調我並不是認定台北市文化局與該評審是一個「壞人」，我想強調的只是這個評審街頭藝人表演的執行環節，究竟有多麼的不妥當與糟糕。

我試著回應一個反面評論者所提到的觀點：若街頭藝人證照是ㄧ場「考試」、考試就會有考試的規則。評審無需與應試者惺惺相惜，掉頭就走是因為模擬街頭現場環境以及時間到了。再一次的，在我描述現場狀況的前ㄧ篇文章中，大家或許還記憶猶新：許多表演者根本沒有完整的短至一分半鐘的時間可以好好表演，遑論是超過2-5分鐘的時間限制了。

而這樣的回應是否也指出了另一個值得我們去思考的問題： 為什麼我們會將它視為一種「考試」，而不是ㄧ個表演者的「試鏡」呢？

首先，這些表演者們並不是學生。事實上，許多人更可能是一個專業的音樂家、舞者、或者正從事著表演藝術的人。當然，我不否認也可能會有些正在學習中的族群。但，最重要的是，當他們「在屬於他們應得的演出時間與機會裡 (而且還是付費才有的），他們就是ㄧ個真正的表演者。」

他們不應該被看待成一個不成熟的學生或者次等的公民。而就算一個人擁有著學生的身分，這個身分也不應該影響或侷限他或她，作為一個藝術創作者的身分及所有可能性。「藝術家」並非是透過一個人的職業身分或者社會地位來定義的。

所謂「考試」的這個字眼指涉著ㄧ個學術教育機構，而我們都知道台北市文化局所應該扮演的角色與作用，並非一個學術性的教育機構，也並非是用來教育藝術創作者們該知道些什麼？該怎麼表現？藝術教育及審美的養成也從來不是在追求填鴨式教育裡的ㄧ個標準答案。將街頭藝人的徵選視為「考試」的視角，或許本身就有待商榷。

評審的場所是在一個公共場合，許多居民與遊客都會圍觀欣賞著表演，其中有些人或許不了解藝術；因而這些人也許會將在場的評審們，視做為某種藝術的衡量標準；試問，當這些人看到評審對待表演藝術家的行為與態度，當他們看到評審總是任意打斷演出，並且掉頭就走不帶ㄧ句回應時，人們日後還能懂得尊重街頭表演藝術家嗎？

沒錯，我們都知道這是一場「考試」，我們也很清楚這些手上拿著計分表的人們就是評審；因此，事實上評審們根本無需「模擬」街頭現場那些會隨時走掉的陌生人們。

這些評審以及相關單位的人員，理應提倡藝術，並且作為ㄧ種示範與典範，讓普羅大眾都能夠看到該如何去欣賞ㄧ場演出。一個表演者並不會因為他選擇在街頭表演，就因此比不上一個在大舞台演出的藝術家。我自己就曾在世界各地超過百個不同的絢麗舞台演出過，但我仍然汗顏自己可能也不比這些街頭藝術家們來的優秀。

我曾擔任過ㄧ些國際比賽的評審，我也曾舉辦過專業的試鏡；我從來沒有聽過關於尊敬一個人的這件簡單事情，會需要在時間充裕的前提下才能夠發生。

如果一點表情會洩漏出評審成績的好惡，其實也真的可以不用笑或是無需在表演結束時說一聲謝謝。而評審也真的「不需要」與考證照的街頭藝人感覺惺惺相惜，因為這些都不是我想討論的重點。

我在意的是，表演者所需要的，只不過就是一個對人與對一個演出者的「基本尊重」而已。這樣的尊重存在與否，如人飲水冷暖自知，在人與人的接觸中就能直接感受的到，著實無需仰賴規則或語言的贅述。

我作為一個藝術創作者和教育者，穿梭各地工作超過15年的職業生涯經驗，或許會因此被視為一個外國人，但我的身分就是一個台灣公民。身為一個39歲的成年人，我可以分辨何謂尊重，而表達尊重甚至不需要浪費到任何一秒鐘。如果一個人會需要至少五分鐘以上的充足時間才有可能表達出對另外一個個體的尊重的話，那他可能需要重新再思考一下，尊重對他而言意謂著什麼？


再度回應一位也曾擔任過街頭藝人評審的老師所提出來「中途要求更換曲目或要求表演者改唱另ㄧ種語言的歌」的理由，是因為評審們不會希望一個街頭藝人一整年下來只會唱同一種語言、甚至是只唱同ㄧ首歌。

我所思考的是當一個街頭藝人遵守規定，付費且努力準備去應試時，他ㄧ定會準備了符合完整時間長度的、同時也是自己最擅長、最喜歡或者是最期待能被看見的那些內容；表演一首歌曲或者ㄧ種風格並不代表他就只會唱那ㄧ首歌；而且就算是當做他只會唱ㄧ種語言、ㄧ首歌，如果他能把這首歌反覆演繹的淋漓盡致時, 又有什麼不好呢？

難道我們不曾注意到百老匯的音樂劇就是同樣的那幾部，而獅子王也已經在舞台上展演了20年了嗎？許多同樣內容重複的音樂劇票房始終歷久不衰，持續帶給觀眾們心靈的滿足。而人氣歌手愛黛兒從頭到尾也只會用英文唱歌，而且幾乎都是類似的曲風，我們可曾在乎過她有沒有能力去唱中文歌呢？

ㄧ部舞蹈作品光在荷蘭本土就能有至少五十場大大小小的演出機會。但在台灣，ㄧ部作品如果能有五個場次的演出，可能已經算是很長壽了。這樣的環境迫使藝術創作者們必須不斷快速的「生產新作」，而將舊有積累的作品與經驗拋在腦後。就所有對於藝術的挹注與投資（不僅僅是金錢）來說，這樣的情況對藝術的生產是ㄧ種過度消耗與浪費，也並未真正教育到民眾如何去看待藝術的價值。

而最終，這樣的評審過程與態度並不僅僅是對街頭表演藝術者的不尊重，同時也是對於藝術的不尊重。

台北市文化局星期ㄧ曾經聯絡過我，親切向我表示將與我進一步聯絡並討論這件事情；他們要求我先將評審的照片拿掉—我答應取下照片，但前提是他們必須確實誠意的允諾一個面對面的溝通。這幾天我也暫時迴避了一些報導媒體的詢問（還請大家見諒）只因我衷心希望能先與台北市文化局及該評審當面談一談。我ㄧ直等待，但我也持續的看到了相關機構或人員回應給媒體的諸多理由與藉口； 自從將照片從網路上取下之後，直到今日都沒有人再跟我連繫過。慢慢的我突然明白星期一的那通電話，或許純粹只是ㄧ個希望我能將照片取下的操作手法，而並非真的試圖去了解整個經過以及解決問題。我對這個本應提倡藝術與文化的機構感到無比失望。

我知道我並非一個公眾人物，而我也不能代表所有想要考取街頭藝人執照的表演者們；自從我的臉書網頁訊息爆炸之後，我就不斷的在思考這件事情，我反覆思考自己是否該繼續爭執此事，這似乎並非與我切身相關的事情，然而，身為一個藝術教育者，我卻又感受到深切的責任。

經過反覆的思考以及與朋友們的討論，我意識到不論我們的展演形式如何不同，我們同樣都是表演藝術群體中的一分子。台北市文化局最後很可能將持續充耳不聞，而這位被我所抱怨的評審也可能繼續做他這些年來ㄧ直在做的事—用他ㄧ貫的態度。除非他們願意傾聽與改變，否則我無法改變任何人。

我真心相信有些事情值得改善，也可以改善。我必須強調我並不是想要攻擊或羞辱任何人。我只希望能有機會去討論如何讓審查的過程變的更適當。我看到台灣有許多優秀的藝術家，但環境對藝術和藝術家的不尊重不但打擊同時也限制了他們的發展；更遺憾的是，這一切可能是在許多疏忽之中造就出來的環境。

許多評審過程如果能夠在尊重藝術的前提之下思考和進行，事情或許會截然不同。
只要有一點點可能去拋開面子的問題，或許也就有機會明嘹我們所期待的結果其實是一樣的。

事實上我之所以說了這麼冗長的話語，並非是要不尊敬所謂的評審或師長，而正是因為我對藝術的尊敬，使我更深切的關注身為一個教育者所代表的意義。今天我看到了街頭表演藝術家是如何被不當的對待，而很顯然的我也不會是唯一的目擊者。某個程度上我的聲音似乎被放大了，但我也知道我的聲音並不是唯一的一個，我是許許多多的聲音中的ㄧ份子。

William

---------

Dear All,

I would like to thank you for all the encouraging messages and supportive comments. I would also like to thank all the journalists and reporters who are passionate about this issue and are so willing to expose the problem that was faced by these street performers. I am sorry that I have been quiet but with a reason: I don’t want it to get much bigger than it already was until I talked to the Taipei Cultural Affair. I apologize that it took me a while, but I needed some time to gather my thoughts and help to translate my writing into Chinese.

Before I go on any further, I never expected my story would go viral on the media and the social media. I am humbled and touched to hear from many of you. All the messages I’ve received have been overwhelming. I am not able to reply to all of them, but I’d like you to know that I am honored, thankful, and touched by every single one of them.

I do not consider myself as a brave person, nor do I consider myself a representative for the street performers. BUT I am an artist, a performer, educator, and most of all I am a human being.I have always been taught to stand for what’s right by my family, friends and mentors.

I understand things are not as black and white as we all wish sometimes. However, what happened on Sunday 21st of May was a disgrace to the art community. Regardless of all the excuses that were given or cultural differences, it was very obvious these performers were treated like lower-class citizens; if not, students. It was also very clear that the intention might be well, but the execution of the busker’s exam was done horribly.

Somehow the idea that ART is NOT a privilege had been forgotten. Taipei Cultural Affair is supposed to be advocating for all things cultural and artistic but it was not conveyed that day. It was very clear the respect was not there. Many felt it and some got their feelings hurt. Even with all the excuses there are in the world, many experienced the disrespect. That was the truth. Again I have to emphasize that I believe Taipei Department of Cultural Affair and its adjudicators are good people, but the execution of the exam was poor.

It brings to the question…. why is it called an exam? Shouldn’t it be an audition?

These performers were not students when they took the exam. Some of them were actually professional musicians, dancers, or performers. Just because one is a student, it doesn’t make him or her less of an artist. Artists are not defined by their social status or occupation.

The term exam suggests an educational institution, but we know Taipei Department of Cultural Affair is not an educational institution. They do not decide what these artists need to know. These performers were not given any materials to study, thus the term exam is very misleading.

The exam took place in a public space. Many tourists and residents were there to enjoy the event. Many do not understand arts. So they may look up to these adjudicators as role models who are experienced in the arts. When they saw how this exam was being done, do you think they would have any respect for these performers afterwards? They saw these adjudicators interrupting the performers and left without saying a “thank you.” We all knew it was an exam, we all knew these people were adjudicators. They did not need to pretend to be street spectators who just walk away. They all carried their score boards in their hands.

Just because a performer performs on the street, it doesn’t make that performer any less of a performer than someone who is performing on big stages. I myself have performed over hundreds of stages around the world and I do not dare to think myself better than these performers.

I have judged a handful of international competitions. I have also held professional auditions. I have never heard an excuse that respect can’t be shown when time is limited. You do not need to smile to simply say “thank you.” Since when, a smile means “I favor you.” What a performer need is respect. Over the 15 year span of my professional career as an educator and artist, and 39 years of being a human being, I know what respect looks like. It doesn’t take more than a second to show it. If it takes longer than 5 minutes to show what respect is, I think you may need to rethink what respect means to you.

Another excuse that was presented was that they don’t want a street artist performs only one kind of songs or genre throughout the year. Don’t they know broadway musicals? Lion King has been performed over 20 years. They’ve been doing the same musical numbers for years to sold out audiences. Adele has been singing the same genre of music and always in English. Does it matter that she doesn’t sing in other genre or sing in Chinese?

One dance production in the Netherlands can be performed up to 50 performances within the Netherlands itself. In Taiwan, a dance work only performed 5 times the most. They are forced to constantly create new works and leave the old works behind. That is a waste of arts funding and it doesn’t educate the public on the value of the arts. These performers is old enough to decide what they want to show these judges with their limited time.

In the end it wasn’t just disrespectful to the performers, but also to the arts.

I was contacted by the Taipei Cultural Affair on Monday, the representative spoke nicely promising that they would discuss further with me. He asked me to take the adjudicator’s picture down, I agreed with the condition of meeting in person to further discuss what could be done better. I have refused to talk to reporters for the last few days. I have been waiting but I then heard the excuses given to the media. Since I’ve taken down the picture of the head adjudicator, they haven’t made any attempt to contact me. I came into a realization that when they made the call, it wasn’t to address the problem but simply to manipulate me to take down his picture. I’m disappointed at this institution that was supposed to promote the arts and culture.

I realized I am not a public figure, nor am I responsible for the well being of all artists who want to get a busker license. After my Facebook post went viral, I’ve been thinking so much about this issue. I kept going back and forth questioning whether I should keep fighting for this. It doesn’t feel like my fight, but at the same time I feel responsible as an art educator.

I truly believe this can be fixed. I need to emphasize, I am not attacking anyone. And I don’t want to shame anyone. I want to start a discussion how to make it better. Taipei has some of the best performers I’ve seen, yet the lack of respect for the arts and artists has suppressed their ability to excel. And ironically, it’s often done unintentionally.

If the exam is done based on respect for the arts itself, things might have come out differently. And just maybe if we all let go the “face” culture, we could possibly see further to realize that we are all wanting the same thing.

I saw mistreatments towards performers that day. It was very obvious I wasn’t the only one witnessing it. It was not that I don’t respect these adjudicators/teachers, but because I respect the arts and the meaning of a teacher that is why I had to speak up. Somehow my voice had been amplified this week. But my voice wasn’t and isn’t singular. I am simply a voice amongst many.

Sincerely,
William Lü

Taipei National University of the Arts 國立台北藝術大學
寶藏巖國際藝術村 Treasure Hill Artist Village
Taipei National University of the Arts
臺北表演藝術中心 Taipei Performing Arts Center
National Theater and Concert Hall, Taipei
中正紀念堂 Chiang Kai-shek Memorial Hall
National Taiwan University of Arts
Department of Cultural Affairs, Taipei City Government

【亞洲究竟何時才會通過同性婚姻？】（中譯）

Foreign Policy 於日前（11/30) 刊出專文報導台灣婚姻平權法案進程，文章以伴侶盟發起「婚姻平權革命陣線」，於 2014/10/5 彩虹圍城行動中，群眾把婚姻平權四個大球推入立院作為開頭。精要勾勒了近年來台灣婚姻平權發展簡史，並詳盡分析了目前法案風雲詭譎的政治情勢，報導也委婉但明確點出，婚姻平權法案的通過與否，正在考驗著蔡總統的領導能力與政治誠信。

原文 參見
http://foreignpolicy.com/2016/11/30/marriage-equality-in-taiwan-isnt-a-done-deal-tsai-ing-wen-legislation-lgbt-taipei/?wp_login_redirect=0
作者/LINDA VAN DER HORST
2016年11月30日
中文翻譯：Tasha Chang

標題：When Will Asia Finally Have Same-Sex Marriage?
亞洲究竟何時才會通過同性婚姻？？
Taiwan is on the verge of becoming the first Asian government to legalize marriage equality. But the public is deeply divided.
台灣即將成為亞洲第一個同性婚姻合法化的國家，但輿論仍高度分歧。
In October 2014, a crowd at an LGBT rights rally in Taipei, one of many, lobbed four large red balloons emblazoned with the Chinese characters for marriage equality into the fenced courtyard of Taiwan’s legislature. At that time, a comfortable majority of Taiwanese supported same-sex marriage; a number of polls in the self-governing island of 23 million indicated as much, with one showing as many as 71 percent in favor. But several initiatives to amend the law to achieve marriage equality, first mooted in 2003, have not been successful. Two years later, three marriage equality bills now sit on legislators’ desks; although international media have been quick to announce that Taiwan stands on the cusp of being the first government in Asia to achieve marriage equality, the island’s public seems deeply divided. In the latest poll on the subject, released on Nov. 29, 46 percent of respondents supported marriage equality, while 45 percent opposed it. Meanwhile, Taiwan’s lawmakers and its civil society have been more cautious than recent headlines in Western media suggest.

2014年10月，在架起拒馬的立法院外，有一大群為了同志權益發聲的群眾，高推著四顆分別寫著「婚」、「姻」、「平」、「權」四字的紅色大球，推往立法院的方向。當時，在有著2,300萬人口的台灣，有絕大多數民眾都支持婚姻平權，幾個民意調查也顯示同樣的結果，其中有個調查的支持度甚至還高達71%。然而，最早於2003年所發動，接續欲修法以達成婚姻平權的數個提案，最後都無疾而終。兩年後，三套版本的婚姻平權法案現正擺在立法委員的案前等待審議。雖然國際媒體迅速下了判斷宣告台灣即將成為亞洲第一個達成婚姻平權的國家，但台灣的民意似乎仍高度分歧。最近一次於今年11月29日公布的一份調查指出，46%的受訪者支持婚姻平權，另有45%的受訪者表示反對。同時，相較於西方國際媒體樂觀的報導走向，台灣的立法委員與公民社會的態度反而較為小心謹慎。

Island-wide marriage equality initiatives have been unsuccessful in spite of growing support over decades. Even without national legislation, many local governments in Taiwan now allow same-sex couples to participate in collective weddings and to record their partnership in household registries across the island, although neither action confers any legal rights.

過去數十年，即便婚姻平權的支持度越來越高，推動婚姻平權的行動卻屢遭挫敗。雖然中央尚未立法保障同志權益，台灣有許多地方政府已開放同性伴侶參與聯合婚禮並開放同性伴侶註記，然無論是聯合婚禮還是同性伴侶註記，皆未能給予同性伴侶法律上的權利。

To many, the election of President Tsai Ing-wen and her Democratic Progressive Party (DPP) in January portended a broader, deeper change. Tsai openly made statements that appeared to support marriage equality during and after her campaign. In an October 2015 Facebook video posted to coincide with Taipei’s annual LGBT pride parade, Tsai exclaimed, “Everyone is equal before love.” A year later, she posted a photo on her Facebook page showing a rainbow, adding that her “belief has not changed” post-election. In August, Tsai appointed the first transgender official in government, Audrey Tang, as executive councilor for digital policy, which looked like another step toward acceptance of different gender norms.

對於許多人來說，現任總統蔡英文與其所屬政黨民主進步黨（民進黨）在一月總統大選的勝選，預告了更大幅度、更深程度的改變。無論是在選舉期間或當選後，蔡英文數次公開發表支持婚姻平權的文章。2015年10月，為響應臺北的年度同志大遊行，蔡英文的臉書發表了一支影片，影片中的蔡英文說道：「在愛之前，大家都是平等的。」一年過後，她在臉書上發佈了一則彩虹橫跨天際的照片，補充道：「雖然我的身分變了，但是我相信的價值沒有改變」，強調選後立場沒有改變。今年八月，蔡英文內閣任命首位跨性別官員唐鳳擔任政務委員，督導數位經濟與開放政府。此舉看來又是另一個接納不同性別典範的舉措。

Since Tsai took office this May, pressure has been building on her to deliver.
自蔡英文五月就任後，要求實現承諾的壓力升高

Since Tsai took office this May, pressure has been building on her to deliver. Yet she has never explicitly promised that her administration would push for same-sex marriage legislation, and critics have feared that once in office, she would find herself unable to follow through on her progressive rhetoric. The party that Tsai leads, the DPP, “has neither devoted sufficient resources to communicate the issues of marriage equality nor to reconcile differences within the party,” Victoria Hsu, who heads the nonprofit Taiwan Alliance to Promote Civil Partnership Rights (TAPCPR), told Foreign Policy.

蔡英文自今年五月就任後，要求她實現承諾的壓力不斷升高。然而，蔡英文卻從來沒有公開承諾她的行政團隊會推動婚姻平權的立法，批評者認為，一旦就任，蔡英文就無法堅持實現她過往曾發表過充滿進步性的言論。非營利組織台灣伴侶權益推動聯盟理事長許秀雯向《外交政策》表示，「蔡總統所領導的民進黨一直沒有真正投注夠多的資源在婚姻平權議題之上，或去溝通與化解黨內歧見。」

It was therefore a setback when Justice Minister Chiu Tai-san announced in August that his ministry still intended to introduce its own same-sex partnership bill — but only in 2017, after studying the impact of such a law on Taiwanese society. (In Taiwan, ministries can introduce bills into the legislature.) The effort dates back to the previous, more socially conservative Kuomintang (KMT) administration of Ma Ying-jeou and is an attempt to compromise between supporters of marriage equality and religious groups opposed. Proposing a separate law for same-sex partnership is politically easier, as it leaves the institution of marriage as currently constituted unchanged.

於是，當法務部長邱太三在八月宣布，經過研究相關法律對於台灣社會的影響，法務部仍傾向在2017年推出同性伴侶法時（台灣的行政部門可自行推出法案送進立法院審議），對於同志社群來說是一大挫敗。推行同性伴侶法可溯及較為保守的國民黨馬英九政府當權時期，用意在面對支持婚姻平權的群眾與反對婚姻平權的宗教團體中取得妥協。對於當政者而言，推動同性伴侶專法因未修改現行婚姻制度，在政治上的壓力較小。

In the absence of strong top-down leadership on the issue from Tsai, momentum for the bills currently under consideration has come from the bottom up. Audrey Ko, the chief editor of Womany, an online media outlet focused on gender issues and LGBT rights, says a stigma remains for gays and lesbians in Taiwan, one her company seeks to dispel. Other organizations, such as the Taiwan Tongzhi (LGBT) Hotline Association, perform peer counseling and advocacy work. Even corporations are chipping in; in March, McDonald’s released a commercial in which a son comes out to his father in one of its restaurants. (The father accepts it.)

缺少蔡英文「從上而下」貫徹的領導力，對於三個版本婚姻平權法案的支持聲量多來自「由下而上」的力量。關注性別與同志議題的線上媒體女人迷總編輯柯采岑表示，臺灣的同志族群還是被污名化，而女人迷就是想要破除此種污名；其他的組織例如台灣同志諮詢熱線協會則提供同志諮詢服務與倡議。企業也紛紛響應婚姻平權的議題。今年三月，在麥當勞發表的電視廣告中，有一個兒子在麥當勞向自己的父親出櫃（而父親也接受他了）。

This summer, a number of Taiwanese pop artists organized a benefit concert to raise awareness for marriage equality; tickets sold out in minutes. Pop superstar Jolin Tsai performed a lesbian-themed song for the occasion. In the music video for the song “We’re All Different, Yet the Same,” she makes the case for marriage equality by describing the plight of a woman whose partner of more than 30 years is hospitalized; the woman is unable to sign a consent form for emergency surgery because she is legally not a spouse or family member.

今年夏天，有多個臺灣流行音樂藝人組織了一場為婚姻平權而唱的公益演唱會，演唱會門票一開賣就在幾分鐘內售罄。流行樂天后蔡依林在該場演唱會中也演出以女同志為主題的歌。在她的「不一樣又怎樣」的MV中，描述了一對相守30年的女同志伴侶，其中一位因病住院，然她的伴侶卻無法在她需要進行緊急手術時簽署手術同意書，因為她的伴侶並不具有配偶或是親屬的身份。

A real-life version of this tragedy triggered public outcry and reinvigorated support for marriage equality. On Oct. 16, 67-year-old French professor Jacques Picoux fell to his death from the top of a 10-story building in Taipei, police said. He is thought to have committed suicide after depression caused by the death of his partner due to cancer; Picoux was unable to make medical decisions for his partner in his final days, as Picoux had no legal status. In a response to this outcry, legislators from the DPP and the KMT, as well as the caucus of the New Power Party (NPP), a young activist organization, all introduced similar marriage equality bills.

此種悲劇的真實案例引發了社會上強烈的抗議聲浪，推動婚姻平權運動更進一步。在今年10月16日，據警方表示，67歲的法國籍教授畢安生（Jacques Picoux）從位於台北的10樓住家一躍而下身亡。據悉，他有可能是因長期伴侶因癌症過世所引發的憂鬱症而自殺。當畢安生的伴侶在癌症末期時，因他沒有法律地位而無法替伴侶做醫療決定。為了回應關於婚姻平權的呼聲，民進黨與國民黨的立委以及由年輕的社運組織所組成的時代力量的黨團都推出了類似的婚姻平權法案。

All three proposals would amend the Taiwan Civil Code to open marriage to same-sex couples, but they differ in how to do so. DPP legislator Yu Mei-nu’s proposal introduces a general provision extending to same-sex couples the right to marriage, as well as other family law rights that accompany married status. But it leaves further gendered language across the civil code intact. The proposals of KMT legislator Hsu Yu-ren and the NPP would make references to “husband and wife” and “father and mother” gender-neutral throughout all relevant civil code provisions. These latter two proposals have great symbolic meaning, because they remove a heterosexual presumption from the code, but the legal effect is likely no different than Yu’s proposal.

這三個提案都主張修改民法將婚姻制度對同性伴侶開放，但對於如何開放則各有其詮釋。民進黨尤美女的版本採用一概括條款(註：新增民法971-1條)使同性配偶適用夫妻、父母子女等相關權利義務，但保留了民法中「性別化」的法律用語，未加修改。國民黨立委許毓仁與時代力量黨團的版本則將「夫妻」、「父母」等現行民法中的用語性別中立化。許毓仁與時代力量的版本，將異性戀預設的用語「性別中立化」而具有重大的象徵性意義，但若在法律適用結果而論，三個版本並無太大差異。

There is still a long legislative road to travel before Taiwan can become the first Asian government to legalize same-sex marriage. The bills passed their first reading on Nov. 17, but the DPP caucus whip has said the proposed bills will next be reviewed on Dec. 26. During the review process, any legislator can introduce a competing same-sex partnership act. Even if the bills were to enter a second reading, they could still face a boycott and be removed from the agenda. The bills will only become legislation after passing three readings.

臺灣要成為亞洲第一個將同性婚姻合法化的國家，仍有一大段立法之路要走。婚姻平權三版本的民法修正案都在今年11月17日通過了立法院一讀，而民進黨黨團總召表示，下一次審議的時間為12月26日。在審查過程中，任何一位立法委員都可以提出同性伴侶法作為對案。即便三個版本的婚姻平權法案進入了二讀，也還是有可能面臨杯葛而無法排進立法院的議程中。這三個版本的法案要通過三讀才有可能正式成為法律。

As these bills went through their first reading in the legislature this month, thousands of people protesting against marriage equality, and only several hundred rallying for it, gathered on Taipei’s streets.

當三個版本的法案本月在立法院通過一讀後，上千名反對婚姻平權的民眾走上台北街頭集結，當天支持婚姻平權而上街的民眾僅數百人。

As these bills went through their first reading in the legislature this month, thousands of people protesting against marriage equality, and only several hundred rallying for it, gathered on Taipei’s streets. Opposition to marriage equality in Taiwan largely comes from small but well-organized and vocal conservative religious groups. Four people reportedly even managed to storm into the legislative meeting room, shouting that the “legislators are monsters” and would want to change Taiwan “into an AIDS island.”

這三個版本的法案本月都在立法院通過一讀，為此，上千名反對婚姻平權的民眾走上台北街頭集結，然當天上街支持婚姻平權的民眾卻只有數百人。在台灣，大部分反對婚姻平權的民眾來自規模小但組織嚴密且發言聲量大的保守宗教團體。據報載，甚至有四名反對修法的民眾嘗試要衝進立法院司法及法制委員會的會議室，高喊著：「立委都是怪獸」、台灣要變「愛滋島」。

It is hard to tell whether the legislature will pass a same-sex marriage bill this time, says Hsu of TAPCPR, partly because of internal opposition within the DPP and KMT. (The NPP caucus fully supports its bill but only holds five seats in legislature.) Tsai has reiterated that the bills are “clear evidence” marriage equality has support across all parties. But even Yu, who introduced the DPP bill, says she is only cautiously optimistic about the chances of passing a marriage equality law.

台灣伴侶權益推動聯盟理事長許秀雯表示，現在沒有辦法預知立法院是否會通過婚姻平權法案，情勢走向如何，真的很難說。因為主要政黨國民黨及民進黨的立委雖然都有提出婚姻平權民法修正案，但這兩個黨裡面也都有反對者（時代力量雖然全黨都支持婚姻平權，在立法院內也只有五個席次）。蔡英文總統數度表示，不同版本婚姻平權法案的推出，即為此議題獲得跨黨派支持的「明證」。然而，即便是推出民進黨版本婚姻平權法案的尤美女立委也表示，對於婚姻平權是否能過關成為法律，她仍只抱持審慎樂觀的態度。

Outside lawmakers’ offices, the battle for public support continues. If anything, it seems to be waning precisely at the time when it will be most needed. “More and more people are confessing that they love gays but that they don’t support same-sex marriage,” said Ko, because they believe allowing same-sex partners to get married will harm traditional family values. She is therefore unsure whether Taiwan will manage to pass a bill in the next year. At least, Ko added, “people are talking [about it], and it is not a taboo anymore.”

在立法委員的辦公室外，爭取民意支持的戰爭仍未停歇。若真要說，此時此刻婚姻平權運動最需要的是什麼？大概就是更多的支持。女人迷總編輯柯采岑表示，「有越來越多人坦白表示，他們愛同志但是不支持婚姻平權」，因為他們認為，若同性伴侶可以結婚，將損害傳統家庭價值。」她也說，不確定臺灣能否在明年內通過婚姻平權法案。她補充：「但至少，大家都開始討論（婚姻平權法案）了，這再也不是禁忌了。」

購買實體專輯：
已完售，感謝大家的支持！

Follow Xiangyu on Twitter https://instagram.com/notXiangyu
Follow Ransom-Notes on Twitter https://twitter.com/ransom1992

0:00　星星之火　A Single Spark
2:52　延續和決裂　Continuity and Rupture
6:02　流言蜚語　Rumors and Slanders
8:56　夢　Dream
11:26　這不是請客吃飯　This Is Not a Dinner Party
14:50　社會主義還是人類滅絕　Socialism or Human Extinction

Spotify: https://open.spotify.com/album/5LXDWD9UWMinJpuGXfOHF9
Apple Music: https://music.apple.com/album/1475720641
KKBox: https://www.kkbox.com/tw/tc/album/Po-XjuEwvaj3s0F3XnGK009H-index.html
虾米音乐： https://www.xiami.com/album/5021315036

專輯介紹： https://tw.news.yahoo.com/%E5%98%BB%E5%93%88%E5%8F%8D%E5%B8%9D%E5%9C%8B-%E9%8D%BE%E7%BF%94%E5%AE%87%E8%AA%AA%E5%94%B1%E6%98%9F%E6%98%9F%E4%B9%8B%E7%81%AB-063724380.html

繼 2018 年金音獎入圍的《炮打司令部》後，中文嘻哈界絕無僅有的共產主義饒舌歌手鍾翔宇與英國製作人 Ransom-Notes 馬不停蹄地聯手炮製出六首歌的新專輯《星星之火》，相較於上張專輯還有如〈保力達B〉、〈偶像的手冊〉等比較詼諧幽默的歌曲，這張專輯顯得更加嚴肅而深入的闡述自己的意識形態。

即使如此，這張專輯並沒有流於自我重複的說教，而是透過自己在美國成長過程親眼目睹的（台灣媒體跟好萊塢電影不告訴你的）具體事實，鍾翔宇戳破所謂的「美國夢」，一層一層爬梳嘻哈音樂如何失去最初的反抗精神、分析爭取勞動權益的困境甚至環保議題。很難想像這麼龐大的知識量被鍾翔宇精巧的放在一張不到 20 分鐘的專輯當中，這樣大膽的嘗試絕對值得你靜下心搭配歌詞細細玩味。搭配 Ransom-Notes 充滿黃金年代風格的編曲，讓嚴肅的歌詞不再難以下嚥。而鍾翔宇精心設計的多韻和不時的好笑 punchline，也展現他想讓歌曲直面普羅大眾的誠意。

批判美國的霸權和當今的社會經濟制度等於動搖了非常多人的基本信念，鍾翔宇也深知這一點。然而看到不公不義的事實而站出來發聲，這是讓鍾翔宇之所以愛上嘻哈的浪漫初衷。《星星之火》這張專輯就如同他的偶像，英國嘻哈詩人 Lowkey 的 “Soundtrack to the Struggle” 一樣，是貨真價實的革命之聲，所有真心想衝破世界當今所面對的困境的人，肯定能從鍾翔宇的音樂中得到啟發。


Shortly after his 2018 album "Bombard the Headquarters" was nominated best hip hop album by the Golden Indie Music Awards, Xiangyu, one of the few openly communist rappers in the Sinosphere, together with his comrade Ransom-Notes from the UK, began working on "a Single Spark." In comparison to his previous album, which contains comedic songs like "Paolyta B" and "the Idol's Handbook," "a Single Spark" takes on a more serious tone and delves deeper into Xiangyu's ideology.

Despite the comparatively somber tone, this new album avoids repetitive preaching. Through sharing his personal experiences and the things he saw growing up in the United States, Xiangyu debunks the so-called "American Dream." Using materialist dialectics, he tells us how hip hop has lost its rebellious essence, and also analyzes power dynamics and touches on topics such as the environment. It is difficult to imagine how Xiangyu and Ransom-Notes were able to condense such a vast expanse of knowledge into an album less than 20 minutes in length. You will not be disappointed should you decide to sit down and listen to such a bold album while studying the lyrics. Reminiscent of hip hop's golden age, Ransom-Notes' beatmaking provides the listener with the sugar that makes the pill easier to swallow. Xiangyu's carefully constructed rhymes and the occasional humorous punch line demonstrate his sincere attempt to make his agitprop more accessible to the layperson.

Criticizing US hegemony and the socioeconomic order of today is tantamount to shattering the fundamental beliefs of many, and Xiangyu is acutely aware of this. The fact that hip hop can serve as a platform for pointing out injustices is what attracted Xiangyu to the genre in the first place. "A Single Spark" is similar to "Soundtrack to the Struggle" by Lowkey, one of Xiangyu's influences, in the sense that it is truly revolutionary in content. Those who genuinely seek to transform the predicaments plaguing our world today will certainly find inspiration in Xiangyu's music.

作詞：鍾翔宇
編曲：Ransom-Notes
錄音：鍾翔宇
混音：鍾翔宇、Ransom-Notes
母帶後期製作：Glenn Schick
繪圖：Bijan Nader Sharifi

Lyrics by Xiangyu,
Beats by Ransom-Notes,
Recorded by Xiangyu,
Mixed by Xiangyu and Ransom-Notes
Mastered by Glenn Schick,
Artwork by Bijan Nader Sharifi.

#星星之火 #鍾翔宇 #aSingleSpark