すべてはこの厄介な日本語という言語環境に起因する。この厄介さの何が困るかといって、まず第一は多くの学者たちが勉強をしないということである。かつて六、七年ほど以前、サイデンス・テッカーだったかドナルド・キーンだったかが日本文学研究の成果でなにかの賞を受けたとき、ある日本文学の長老が「外国人による日本文学研究は、いかによくできたものでもいつもなにか学生が一生懸命よくやりましたというような印象を与える」というようなことをあるコラムで書いた。これもいわば内輪話に属するものをなんの検証(考え)もなく漏らしてしまったという類のものだが、このうっかりの吐露は一面の真実を有している。『スイミングプール・ライブラリー』(アラン・ホリングハースト著、早川書房)の翻訳と、現在訳出を終えたポール・モネットの自伝『Becoming a Man(ビカミング・ア・マン--男になるということ)』(時空出版刊行予定)の夥しい訳註を行う作業を経てわたしが感じたことは、まさにこの文壇長老の意味不明の優越感と表面的にはまったく同じものであった。すなわち、「日本人による外国文学研究は、いかによくできたものであっても、肝心のことがわかっていない小賢しい中学生のリポートのような印象を与える」というものだったのである。フィクション/ノンフィクションの違いはあれ、前二者にはいずれも歴史上実在するさまざまな欧米の作家・詩人・音楽家などが登場する。訳註を作るに当たって日本のさまざまな百科事典・文学事典を参照したのだが、これがさっぱり役に立たなかった。歴史のある側面がそっくり欠落しているのだ。
ユダヤ系アメリカ人の伝統継承月間だった5月末、ユダヤ系オンラインサイトの記者に「イスラエルに関してコメントを」と請われ、勢いで「とっととパレスチナから出て行け(get the hell out of Palestine)」と答えてしまったヘレン・トーマスさんが記者引退に追い込まれました。私もワシントン出張の際に何度か会ったことのある今年で御年90歳の名物ホワイトハウス記者でした。
Both sides confirmed the intention to locate the replacement facility at the Camp Schwab Henoko-saki area and adjacent waters, with the runway portion(s) of the facility to be 1,800 meters long, inclusive of overruns, exclusive of seawalls.
日本語では「1800mの長さの滑走路」とある部分が英語では「the runway portion(s) of the facility to be 1,800 meters long」と、runway portion(滑走路部分)(s)となっています。つまり、複数形にもなり得ると書き置いているわけです。これはつまり、2006年の「現行案」と同じV字型滑走路に含みを持たせる表現でしょう。いったん土俵を割るとどこまでもずるずると下がってしまう、日本外交の粘りのなさがここにも現れてしまうのでしょうか。
Despite the contention over the base, most anger has been directed at Mr. Hatoyama’s flip-flopping on the issue, not the United States. Opinion polls suggest most Japanese back their nation’s security alliance with the United States.
(米軍基地をめぐる論議にも関わらず、怒りの向きはほとんどが米国ではなく、言を左右した鳩山首相へと向かっていた。世論調査ではほとんどの日本人が米国との安全保障同盟を支持している)
だから、「主食」っていう概念もよくわからないんです。私たちは学校で「日本人の主食はご飯です」って教わりましたが、でも、そういうのを英語でなんと言うのか、そもそもそういう叙述が有効なのか、どうもしっくり来ないんです。We, the Japanese, live on rice. なんですけど、この live on というのが英語で使うかというと、「アメリカではパンが主食です」ってふうに言えるのか、また、live on の次にくるのがパンなのか肉なのかもじつはよくわからない。少なくとも「ご飯」とか「お米」とかがすんなり出てくるようには常識にはなっていない感じです。
CNET Japan
文:David Carnoy(CNET News) 翻訳校正:矢倉美登里、長谷睦
2010/01/21 12:24
Amazonが「Kindle Digital Text Platform(DTP)」を利用する作家や出版社に支払う印税を、電子書籍の表示価格の70%に引き上げると発表した。今回の動きは、米国時間1月27日にタブレット型端末を発表する可能性が濃厚なAppleに対する先制攻撃なのかもしれない。70%という印税率は従来の35%から大幅な引き上げとなるが、「App Store」でアプリを販売する開発者にAppleが支払う売上配分と同じであり、これは偶然の一致ではなさそうだ。
じつはこれには伏線があります。1月6日のNYタイムズに、ジョセフ・ナイが、この人はハーバード大の名誉教授でリベラル派の国際学者といわれてる人で、民主党のカーターやクリントン政権で外交や軍事政策に関わった専門家でもあるんですが、この重鎮が、普天間移設問題に関して寄稿して「some in Washington want to play hardball with the new Japanese government. But that would be unwise(ワシントンの一部には、日本の新政権に対して強硬な姿勢をとりたがっている連中がいるけれども、そりゃバカだ)」といって、「忍耐強く交渉にあたるよう求めた」(朝日新聞)のです。
Even if Mr. Hatoyama eventually gives in on the base plan, we need a more patient and strategic approach to Japan. We are allowing a second-order issue to threaten our long-term strategy for East Asia. Futenma, it is worth noting, is not the only matter that the new government has raised. It also speaks of wanting a more equal alliance and better relations with China, and of creating an East Asian community — though it is far from clear what any of this means.
たとえ鳩山氏が結果的に基地計画で折れたとしても、われわれは日本に対してより我慢強く戦略的なアプローチをしていかねばならない。われわれがいまやっていることは東アジアのためのわれわれの長期的戦略を二次的な問題で脅かしているという事態なのである。普天間は、そんなものは屁みたいなもんだし、日本の新政権が持ち出してきた数多くの問題の1つでしかない。新政権が言っているのはより平等な同盟関係とか、中国とのよりよい関係とか、東アジアのコミュニティの創造だとか、まあ、意味ははっきりとはわからないまでもそういうことなのだ。
When I helped to develop the Pentagon’s East Asian Strategy Report in 1995, we started with the reality that there were three major powers in the region — the United States, Japan and China — and that maintaining our alliance with Japan would shape the environment into which China was emerging. We wanted to integrate China into the international system by, say, inviting it to join the World Trade Organization, but we needed to hedge against the danger that a future and stronger China might turn aggressive.
東アジア戦略に関して1995年にペンタゴンの報告書を手伝ったときに、われわれの見据えたことはこの地域に3つの大国が存在しているという現実だった。すなわち、米国、日本、中国である。われわれが日本との同盟関係を維持することが中国が台頭してくるその環境を決定づけるのである。われわれは中国が国際的なシステムの中に入ってくるよう望んでいた。たとえば世界貿易機関(WTO)に参加するなどして。しかしわれわれは同時に未来のより強大になった中国が好戦的に変わる危険にも備えなくてはならなかったのだ。
The new tone also stems from a growing realization in Washington and Tokyo that the base issue cannot be allowed to dominate an alliance crucial to both countries at a time when a resurgent China is remaking Asia, signing trade deals and staking claims to ocean resources.
ワシントンと東京で、再び台頭してきた中国がアジアを再構築し貿易問題をまとめ海洋資源の所有権を主張しようとしているとき、米日両国にとって死活の問題である同盟関係を基地問題などで右往左往させてはならないという認識が育ってきて、(日米間の亀裂、不協和音とは違う)あらたな傾向が出てきた。
(中略)
But Tuesday, Clinton was understanding.
火曜日(12日=日米外相会談の日)、クリントンは(日本の立場を)理解していた。
"We are respectful of the process that the Japanese government is going through," she said. "We also have an appreciation for some of the difficult new issues that this government must address," including the widespread opposition to the U.S. military presence on Okinawa.
「日本政府が経験している過程はわれわれも尊重している」と彼女(クリントン)は言った。「またこの(日本の)政府が困難で新たな問題のいくつかに取り組んでいることも私たちは評価している」と。その問題には沖縄の米軍の駐留に対する広い反対意見のことも含まれている。
SEEN from Tokyo, America’s relationship with Japan faces a crisis. The immediate problem is deadlock over a plan to move an American military base on the island of Okinawa. It sounds simple, but this is an issue with a long back story that could create a serious rift with one of our most crucial allies.
When I was in the Pentagon more than a decade ago, we began planning to reduce the burden that our presence places on Okinawa, which houses more than half of the 47,000 American troops in Japan. The Marine Corps Air Station Futenma was a particular problem because of its proximity to a crowded city, Ginowan. After years of negotiation, the Japanese and American governments agreed in 2006 to move the base to a less populated part of Okinawa and to move 8,000 Marines from Okinawa to Guam by 2014.
The plan was thrown into jeopardy last summer when the Japanese voted out the Liberal Democratic Party that had governed the country for nearly half a century in favor of the Democratic Party of Japan. The new prime minister, Yukio Hatoyama, leads a government that is inexperienced, divided and still in the thrall of campaign promises to move the base off the island or out of Japan completely.
The Pentagon is properly annoyed that Mr. Hatoyama is trying to go back on an agreement that took more than a decade to work out and that has major implications for the Marine Corps’ budget and force realignment. Secretary of Defense Robert Gates expressed displeasure during a trip to Japan in October, calling any reassessment of the plan “counterproductive.” When he visited Tokyo in November, President Obama agreed to a high-level working group to consider the Futenma question. But since then, Mr. Hatoyama has said he will delay a final decision on relocation until at least May.
Not surprisingly, some in Washington want to play hardball with the new Japanese government. But that would be unwise, for Mr. Hatoyama is caught in a vise, with the Americans squeezing from one side and a small left-wing party (upon which his majority in the upper house of the legislature depends) threatening to quit the coalition if he makes any significant concessions to the Americans. Further complicating matters, the future of Futenma is deeply contentious for Okinawans.
Even if Mr. Hatoyama eventually gives in on the base plan, we need a more patient and strategic approach to Japan. We are allowing a second-order issue to threaten our long-term strategy for East Asia. Futenma, it is worth noting, is not the only matter that the new government has raised. It also speaks of wanting a more equal alliance and better relations with China, and of creating an East Asian community — though it is far from clear what any of this means.
When I helped to develop the Pentagon’s East Asian Strategy Report in 1995, we started with the reality that there were three major powers in the region — the United States, Japan and China — and that maintaining our alliance with Japan would shape the environment into which China was emerging. We wanted to integrate China into the international system by, say, inviting it to join the World Trade Organization, but we needed to hedge against the danger that a future and stronger China might turn aggressive.
After a year and a half of extensive negotiations, the United States and Japan agreed that our alliance, rather than representing a cold war relic, was the basis for stability and prosperity in the region. President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Ryutaro Hashimoto affirmed that in their 1996 Tokyo declaration. This strategy of “integrate, but hedge” continued to guide American foreign policy through the years of the Bush administration.
This year is the 50th anniversary of the United States-Japan security treaty. The two countries will miss a major opportunity if they let the base controversy lead to bitter feelings or the further reduction of American forces in Japan. The best guarantee of security in a region where China remains a long-term challenge and a nuclear North Korea poses a clear threat remains the presence of American troops, which Japan helps to maintain with generous host nation support.
Sometimes Japanese officials quietly welcome “gaiatsu,” or foreign pressure, to help resolve their own bureaucratic deadlocks. But that is not the case here: if the United States undercuts the new Japanese government and creates resentment among the Japanese public, then a victory on Futenma could prove Pyrrhic.
年末、TBSや東京FMや大阪MBSラジオなど、いろんなラジオ局から大統領がオバマになったアメリカの1年を振り返ってのコメントを求められました。オバマは「Change」と「Yes, we can」で大統領になったが、アメリカは変わったのか、うまく行っているのか、という質問です。それを5分とかで喋れと言われてもなかなかきちんと説明できなかったので(MBSは25分くれました、感謝)、ここでちょっと詳しくおさらいしてみることにします。
毎年10月11日は米国では「全米カミングアウトの日 National Coming-Out Day(全米カミングアウトの日)」とされています。もっとも、これはべつに政府が定めた記念日ではありません。アメリカのゲイ・コミュニティが、まだ自分をゲイだと言えない老若男女に「カム・アウトする(自分が同性愛者だと公言する)」ことを勧めようと定めた日です。今はゲイだけでなくLGBT(レズビアン、ゲイ、バイセクシュアル、トランスジェンダー)と総称される性的少数者全体のカムアウトを奨励する日として、この運動はカナダや欧州にも広がっています。
その制定21年目に当たる今年の10月11日(日)、快晴のワシントンDCで数万人の性的少数者とその支援者を集めて「The National Equality March(平等を求める全米政治行進)」が行われました。日本ではほとんど報じられませんが、性的少数者たちの人権問題は米国では最大の国内的政治課題の1つです。
ところで National Equality March のこの「平等」とは、現在最大の議論の的である「結婚権の平等」をめぐってスローガン化しました。同性愛者たちも同じ税金を払っている米国民なのだから、同性婚も異性婚と同じく、平等に認められて然るべきだという議論です。そこから、これまで取り残してきた「雇用条件の平等」や「従軍権の平等」も含めて、LGBTの人権を異性愛者たちと等しく認めよという大マーチが企画されたわけです。
もっとも、(前エントリーでも書きましたが)電子版でも「オプ・エド」という投稿ページでの掲載でしたから、鳩山氏の「寄稿」と勘違いするのもそう非難できません。でもなんだか変だった。なんでまたこんな時期(選挙直前の8月27日付)に唐突にこんなものをNYタイムズなんかに“寄稿”したのか意味がわからなかったからです。さらにおかしなことに、文末に「 Global Viewpoint/Tribune Media Service」と付記があった。これは通信社の配信を示唆します。テキストの冒頭には確かに「By Yukio Hatoyama」とあったが、それは筆者名のことであって寄稿ではないのではないか、と気づくべきでした。まあ、批判のネタを見つけたと気が急いたのでしょう。
とにかくあの“寄稿文”、NYタイムズの体裁では著者が By Yukio Hatoyama ってなってて、しかもOP-ED(opposite editorial page)っていう普通は寄稿などを載せるページに掲載してあるから、最初に報じた毎日が「鳩山側が寄稿した」ってとるのはまあ、宜なるかな、なんですがね、しかし、そういう寄稿文にしては不思議なことに、最後に「Global Viewpoint/Tribune Media Service」って添え書きがあるんですわ。これ、普通、コピーライトとか書き添える位置なんです。
ですから、私としては、この、何気なく付記されている「Tribune Media Servise」がサービス(仲介)したんじゃないのかね、って思ってる。鳩山論文の英文はもともとあるわけだから、それをトリビューンの部局が鳩山事務所の了解を取るか取らずか、これは重要ってことで配信頒布した。で、トリビューンかNYタイムズが(読売は「同紙」って書いてたけど、わたしとしてはトリビューンが配信してるならふつうは前者だろうなあと思う)字数の関係でずいぶんと端折って(じゃっかん、英単語の入れ替えもあるようだけど)、アメリカに関係する議論のありそうな部分だけを抜粋した。鳩山事務所としてはそこまで明確に抜粋引用の条件を提示していなかった(これは甘いけどね)、って感じなのではないのだろうか?
しかし、それにしても、NYタイムズが「By Yukio Hatoyama」として彼が直接寄稿したような体裁にしたのは、これはほんと、まずいと思う。 それも、最後の「Global Viewpoint/Tribune Media Service」の付記を、何の説明もしていないというのも、姑息な感を否めない。それとも、こういうの、今までたくさんやっていて、慣例になっていることで、わたしがたまたま見逃し続けていたってことだけの話なのかもしれないですが。
Forty years ago, patrons and supporters of the Stonewall Inn in New York City resisted police harassment that had become all too common for members of the lesbian, gay, bisexual, and transgender (LGBT) community. Out of this resistance, the LGBT rights movement in America was born. During LGBT Pride Month, we commemorate the events of June 1969 and commit to achieving equal justice under law for LGBT Americans.
LGBT Americans have made, and continue to make, great and lasting contributions that continue to strengthen the fabric of American society. There are many well-respected LGBT leaders in all professional fields, including the arts and business communities. LGBT Americans also mobilized the Nation to respond to the domestic HIV/AIDS epidemic and have played a vital role in broadening this country's response to the HIV pandemic.
Due in no small part to the determination and dedication of the LGBT rights movement, more LGBT Americans are living their lives openly today than ever before. I am proud to be the first President to appoint openly LGBT candidates to Senate-confirmed positions in the first 100 days of an Administration. These individuals embody the best qualities we seek in public servants, and across my Administration -- in both the White House and the Federal agencies -- openly LGBT employees are doing their jobs with distinction and professionalism.
The LGBT rights movement has achieved great progress, but there is more work to be done. LGBT youth should feel safe to learn without the fear of harassment, and LGBT families and seniors should be allowed to live their lives with dignity and respect.
My Administration has partnered with the LGBT community to advance a wide range of initiatives. At the international level, I have joined efforts at the United Nations to decriminalize homosexuality around the world. Here at home, I continue to support measures to bring the full spectrum of equal rights to LGBT Americans. These measures include enhancing hate crimes laws, supporting civil unions and Federal rights for LGBT couples, outlawing discrimination in the workplace, ensuring adoption rights, and ending the existing "Don't Ask, Don't Tell" policy in a way that strengthens our Armed Forces and our national security. We must also commit ourselves to fighting the HIV/AIDS epidemic by both reducing the number of HIV infections and providing care and support services to people living with HIV/AIDS across the United States.
These issues affect not only the LGBT community, but also our entire Nation. As long as the promise of equality for all remains unfulfilled, all Americans are affected. If we can work together to advance the principles upon which our Nation was founded, every American will benefit. During LGBT Pride Month, I call upon the LGBT community, the Congress, and the American people to work together to promote equal rights for all, regardless of sexual orientation or gender identity.
NOW, THEREFORE, I, BARACK OBAMA, President of the United States of America, by virtue of the authority vested in me by the Constitution and laws of the United States, do hereby proclaim June 2009 as Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, and Transgender Pride Month. I call upon the people of the United States to turn back discrimination and prejudice everywhere it exists.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand this first day of June, in the year of our Lord two thousand nine, and of the Independence of the United States of America the two hundred and thirty-third.
BARACK OBAMA
**
次は国務長官声明。
"Forty years ago this month, the gay rights movement began with the Stonewall riots in New York City, as gays and lesbians demanded an end to the persecution they had long endured. Now, after decades of hard work, the fight has grown into a global movement to achieve a world in which all people live free from violence and fear, regardless of their sexual orientation or gender identity.
"In honor of Gay and Lesbian Pride Month and on behalf of the State Department, I extend our appreciation to the global LGBT community for its courage and determination during the past 40 years, and I offer our support for the significant work that still lies ahead.
"At the State Department and throughout the Administration, we are grateful for our lesbian, gay, bisexual and transgender employees in Washington and around the world. They and their families make many sacrifices to serve our nation. Their contributions are vital to our efforts to establish stability, prosperity and peace worldwide.
"Human rights are at the heart of those efforts. Gays and lesbians in many parts of the world live under constant threat of arrest, violence, even torture. The persecution of gays and lesbians is a violation of human rights and an affront to human decency, and it must end. As Secretary of State, I will advance a comprehensive human rights agenda that includes the elimination of violence and discrimination against people based on sexual orientation or gender identity.
"Though the road to full equality for LGBT Americans is long, the example set by those fighting for equal rights in the United States gives hope to men and women around the world who yearn for a better future for themselves and their loved ones.
"This June, let us recommit ourselves to achieving a world in which all people can live in safety and freedom, no matter who they are or whom they love."
It will be interesting to see what, if any, statement Obama releases this month considering that most of his campaign promises to LGBT citizens remain unfulfilled.
"In consideration of our entire customer base, we exclude 'adult' material from appearing in some searches and best seller lists. Since these lists are generated using sales ranks, adult materials must also be excluded from that feature.
われわれの全体の顧客基盤を検討した結果、「アダルト」な物品は一部の検索やベストセラーリストから除外しています。これらのリストはセールスランク(販売数順位)を基に作られているため、アダルトな物品もまたその扱いから外されることになります。
"Hence, if you have further questions, kindly write back to us.
そういうわけで、まだご質問がある場合は恐れ入りますがまたメールをどうぞ。
"Best regards, Ashlyn D Member Services Amazon.com Advantage"
敬具、アマゾン・コム・アドヴァンテージ、メンバーサービス部 アシュリン・D
まあ、理由説明になっちゃいませんね。
というか、除外対象のアダルト分類というのもいい加減で、LAタイムズによれば
アネット・ベニング主演で映画にもなったオーガスティン・バロウズの「ハサミを持って突っ走る(Running with Scissors)」(アルコール中毒の父と夢想家でレズビアンの母が離婚、精神科医の家で暮らすことになった少年オーガスティンの奇妙な日々を描く青春回顧録)
リタ・メイ・ブラウンの現代レズビアン小説の嚆矢「ルビーフルーツ・ジャングル(Rubyfruit Jungle)」
ヴィクトリア朝のレズビアンを描いたラドクリフ・ヒルの古典的名作「孤独の泉(The Well of Loneliness)」
ミシェル・フーコーの「性の歴史、第1巻(The History of Sexuality, Vol. 1)」
E.M.フォスターの「モーリス」(2005 W.W. Norton版)
アナイス・ニンの「小鳥たち」
ジャン・ドミニク・ボービーの「潜水服は蝶の夢を見る(The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)」(1997 Knopf版)
ゲイの自伝として初めて全米図書賞を受賞(1992年)したポール・モネットの「Becoming A Man(男になるということ)」
ホモフォビアの社会的研究書である「The Dictionary of Homophobia: A Global History of Gay & Lesbian Experience(ホモフォビアの辞書;世界のゲイ&レズビアンの体験の歴史)」
等々……
ところが外れてないのは
デビッド・セダリスの「すっぱだか(Naked)」
ヘンリー・ミラーの「北回帰線(Tropic of Cancer)」
ブレット・イーストン・エリスの「アメリカン・サイコ」
ウィリアム・バローズの「裸のランチ(Naked Lunch)」
アナイス・ニンの「愛の日記:近親相姦(Incest: From 'A Journal of Love)」
ミシェル・フーコーの「性の歴史、第2巻〜第3巻」
E.M.フォスターの「モーリス」(2005 Penguin Classics版)
ジャン・ドミニク・ボービーの「潜水服は蝶の夢を見る(The Diving Bell and the Butterfly)」(2007 Vintage International版)
等々……
Finally tonight as promised, a Special Comment on the passage, last week, of Proposition Eight in California, which rescinded the right of same-sex couples to marry, and tilted the balance on this issue, from coast to coast.
Some parameters, as preface. This isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics, and this isn't really just about Prop-8. And I don't have a personal investment in this: I'm not gay, I had to strain to think of one member of even my very extended family who is, I have no personal stories of close friends or colleagues fighting the prejudice that still pervades their lives.
And yet to me this vote is horrible. Horrible. Because this isn't about yelling, and this isn't about politics. This is about the human heart, and if that sounds corny, so be it.
If you voted for this Proposition or support those who did or the sentiment they expressed, I have some questions, because, truly, I do not understand. Why does this matter to you? What is it to you? In a time of impermanence and fly-by-night relationships, these people over here want the same chance at permanence and happiness that is your option. They don't want to deny you yours. They don't want to take anything away from you. They want what you want—a chance to be a little less alone in the world.
Only now you are saying to them—no. You can't have it on these terms. Maybe something similar. If they behave. If they don't cause too much trouble. You'll even give them all the same legal rights—even as you're taking away the legal right, which they already had. A world around them, still anchored in love and marriage, and you are saying, no, you can't marry. What if somebody passed a law that said you couldn't marry?
I keep hearing this term "re-defining" marriage. If this country hadn't re-defined marriage, black people still couldn't marry white people. Sixteen states had laws on the books which made that illegal in 1967. 1967.
The parents of the President-Elect of the United States couldn't have married in nearly one third of the states of the country their son grew up to lead. But it's worse than that. If this country had not "re-defined" marriage, some black people still couldn't marry black people. It is one of the most overlooked and cruelest parts of our sad story of slavery. Marriages were not legally recognized, if the people were slaves. Since slaves were property, they could not legally be husband and wife, or mother and child. Their marriage vows were different: not "Until Death, Do You Part," but "Until Death or Distance, Do You Part." Marriages among slaves were not legally recognized.
You know, just like marriages today in California are not legally recognized, if the people are gay.
そう、ちょうど、カリフォルニアの結婚が今日、もしゲイならば、法的に認められなくなったのと同じです。
And uncountable in our history are the number of men and women, forced by society into marrying the opposite sex, in sham marriages, or marriages of convenience, or just marriages of not knowing, centuries of men and women who have lived their lives in shame and unhappiness, and who have, through a lie to themselves or others, broken countless other lives, of spouses and children, all because we said a man couldn't marry another man, or a woman couldn't marry another woman. The sanctity of marriage.
What is this, to you? Nobody is asking you to embrace their expression of love. But don't you, as human beings, have to embrace... that love? The world is barren enough.
It is stacked against love, and against hope, and against those very few and precious emotions that enable us to go forward. Your marriage only stands a 50-50 chance of lasting, no matter how much you feel and how hard you work.
And here are people overjoyed at the prospect of just that chance, and that work, just for the hope of having that feeling. With so much hate in the world, with so much meaningless division, and people pitted against people for no good reason, this is what your religion tells you to do? With your experience of life and this world and all its sadnesses, this is what your conscience tells you to do?
With your knowledge that life, with endless vigor, seems to tilt the playing field on which we all live, in favor of unhappiness and hate... this is what your heart tells you to do? You want to sanctify marriage? You want to honor your God and the universal love you believe he represents? Then Spread happiness—this tiny, symbolic, semantical grain of happiness—share it with all those who seek it. Quote me anything from your religious leader or book of choice telling you to stand against this. And then tell me how you can believe both that statement and another statement, another one which reads only "do unto others as you would have them do unto you."
You are asked now, by your country, and perhaps by your creator, to stand on one side or another. You are asked now to stand, not on a question of politics, not on a question of religion, not on a question of gay or straight. You are asked now to stand, on a question of love. All you need do is stand, and let the tiny ember of love meet its own fate.
You don't have to help it, you don't have it applaud it, you don't have to fight for it. Just don't put it out. Just don't extinguish it. Because while it may at first look like that love is between two people you don't know and you don't understand and maybe you don't even want to know. It is, in fact, the ember of your love, for your fellow person just because this is the only world we have. And the other guy counts, too.
This is the second time in ten days I find myself concluding by turning to, of all things, the closing plea for mercy by Clarence Darrow in a murder trial.
But what he said, fits what is really at the heart of this:
しかし彼の言ったことは、この問題の核心にじつにふさわしい。
"I was reading last night of the aspiration of the old Persian poet, Omar-Khayyam," he told the judge. It appealed to me as the highest that I can vision. I wish it was in my heart, and I wish it was in the hearts of all: So I be written in the Book of Love; I do not care about that Book above. Erase my name, or write it as you will, So I be written in the Book of Love."
彼は裁判官に向かってこう言っています。「わたしは昨晩、昔のペルシャの詩人オマール・カイヤムの強い願いについて読んでいました」と。「それはわたしの想像しうる至高の希求としてわたしに訴えかけてきました。それがわたしの心の中にあったなら、そしてそれがすべての人々の心の中にもあったならと願わざるを得ません。彼はこう書いています;故に、我が名は愛の書物(the Book of Love)の中に刻みたまえ。あの天上の記録(Book above)のことは関知せず。我が名が消されようが、好きに書かれようが、ただしこの愛の書物の中にこそは、我が名を記したまえ」
もう1つ、直前のヒラリーの「涙目」が女性たちをかき立てたのかもしれません。おまけに夫のビルまでが元大統領としては掟破りのオバマ口撃に参戦したのですから、クリントン世代の発奮もあったかもしれません。何て言ったかというと「オバマは上院議員になってからの議会での投票行動はヒラリーとまったく同じだ。それが何で彼女を自分とは違う旧体制の政治家だと批判するのか。Gimme a break, そんなフェアリーテイルは聞いたことがない!」──ふつうは大統領職をやった人間がこんな非難の言辞は吐かないというので各局のニュースコメンテイターはかなり今朝から批判的にこれを報じていたんですよ。Gimme a break! というのもかなりきつい言葉なんでね。冗談も休み休み言え、みたいな。フェアリーテイルはおとぎ話=嘘っぱちって意味です。
ビル・クリントンが指摘したようにアイオワ・ショック後のヒラリーは「旧体制政治家」の代表のようにエドワーズにまで攻撃されました。「毎日どうしてやる気満々で元気でいられるの?」と一般有権者に質問されて「It's not easy, It's not easy...(たいへん、ほんと、たいへん)」と心情を吐露した一昨日のヒラリーは、男たちにいじめられて歯を食いしばって耐える女性でした。わたしなんぞ、見ていて「こういうヒラリーは初めてだな」と、べつに肩入れしてないけどなんだかかわいそうに思った。しかもそれさえも新聞に「うそ泣き」とか言われてね、これはたまったもんじゃないわなあ。これ、ぜったい女性への侮蔑だよ。おまけにあのやり取りの翻訳、日本の新聞、けっこう間違ってるんだもんね。
でもこれ、
"I have so many opportunities from this country. I just don't want to see us fall backwards, you know?"
"This is very personal for me. It's not just political. It's not just public. I see what's happening. And we have to reverse it,"
あたりの翻訳なんですね。
「Two years ago, I believed that civil unions were a fair alternative. Those beliefs, in my case, have since changed. The concept of a 'separate but equal' institution is not something that I can support.」
(2年前、私はシビルユニオンなら公正な別オプションだと信じていた。そうした信念はしかし私の場合、変わった。「別物の、しかし平等ではある」制度という考えは、私が支持できるものではない)
「I just could not bring myself to tell an entire group of our community they were less important, less worthy or less deserving of the rights and responsibilities of marriage than anyone else, simply because of their sexual orientation...I want for them the same thing that we all want for our loved ones. For each of them to find a mate, whom they love deeply and who loves them back. Someone who they can grow old together and share life's experiences.」
(我々のこのコミュニティのグループ全体に、彼らの重要性、彼らの価値、彼らの権利適性、彼らの結婚への責任感が、ただその性的指向を理由に、他の誰彼と比べて劣るものだとは、私にはどうしても言えなかった……私は、私たちのすべてが私たちの愛する者のために欲するのと同じものを彼らが得られるように求める。それは彼らが、深く愛し、同じように愛を返してくれる伴侶を見つけられるということだ。彼らがともに年を重ね、ともに人生の経験を重ねられるようなだれかを得られるということだ)
その模様が、YouTubeにアップされています。
しかしアメリカ人はこういう行動がうまいよね。
「Fire Pace, Hire Gays!(ペイスをクビにして、ゲイたちを軍に雇え)」なんてシュプレヒコール、ちゃんと韻を踏んでるんだもの。「Pace is immoral, Gays are fabulous」ってのも、不道徳はペースの方、ゲイはファビュラスなの!って意味ね。インピーチ・ブッシュというのもあります。これはブッシュを弾劾しろ、という意味。
"Well I've heard from a number of my friends and I've certainly clarified with them any misunderstanding that anyone had, because I disagree with General Pace completely. I do not think homosexuality is immoral. But the point I was trying to make is that this policy of Don't Ask, Don't Tell is not working. I have been against it for many years because I think it does a grave injustice to patriotic Americans who want to serve their country. And so I have called for its repeal and I'd like to follow the lead of our allies like, Great Britain and Israel and let people who wish to serve their country be able to join and do so. And then let the uniform code of military justice determine if conduct is inappropriate or unbecoming. That's fine. That's what we do with everybody. But let's not be eliminating people because of who they are or who they love."
"I believe homosexual acts between two individuals are immoral and that we should not condone immoral acts. I do not believe the United States is well served by a policy that says it is OK to be immoral in any way. As an individual, I would not want [acceptance of gay behavior] to be our policy, just like I would not want it to be our policy that if we were to find out that so-and-so was sleeping with somebody else's wife, that we would just look the other way, which we do not. We prosecute that kind of immoral behavior."
「私は、2個人間の同性愛行為は不道徳なものだと信じている。そうした不道徳な行為をわれわれは容認すべきではない。いかなる形でも、不道徳であってもよろしいのだというようなポリシーでこの国がうまく行くとは私は信じていない。一個人として、(ゲイ的行動の受容を)私たちのポリシーにしたいとは思わない。それはちょうど、だれそれがだれか他の人の奥さんと寝ているとわかりそうなときに、目を逸らしてわざと見ないようにするような、そういうことはしないし、そういうのをわれわれのポリシーにしたくないのと同じことだ。そういった種類の不道徳な行動は訴追するものだ」
"In World War II, a British mathematician named Alan Turing led the effort to crack the Nazis' communication code. He mastered the complex German enciphering machine, helping to save the world, and his work laid the basis for modern computer science. Does it matter that Turing was gay? This week, Gen. Peter Pace, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, said that homosexuality is "immoral" and that the ban on open service should therefore not be changed. Would Pace call Turing "immoral"?
Since 1993, I have had the rich satisfaction of knowing and working with many openly gay and lesbian Americans, and I have come to realize that "gay" is an artificial category when it comes to measuring a man or woman's on-the-job performance or commitment to shared goals. It says little about the person. Our differences and prejudices pale next to our historic challenge."
**
Q We're out of time, but a couple of issues I want to raise with you. Your daughter Mary, she's pregnant. All of us are happy. She's going to have a baby. You're going to have another grandchild. Some of the -- some critics, though, are suggesting, for example, a statement from someone representing Focus on the Family:
"Mary Cheney's pregnancy raises the question of what's best for children. Just because it's possible to conceive a child outside of the relationship of a married mother and father, doesn't mean it's best for the child."
(Q;もう時間がないんですが、もう1つ2つお訊きしたい。あなたの娘さん、メアリーのことです。妊娠なさった。とてもうれしいことです。赤ん坊が生まれるんですからね。あなたにまたお孫さんができるわけです。ただ、批判する人も、まあ、何人かいて、例えばですね「家族の価値」を標榜する代表者なんかからは「メアリー・チェイニーの妊娠は子供たちにとって何が最良なのかという問いを提起している」と声明を出したりしています。つまり結婚している母親と父親の関係の外で子供が生まれてもいいと思われたりして、それは子供にとってベストなことではない、と)
Do you want to respond to that?
(そういう発言について何か言いたいですか?)
THE VICE PRESIDENT: No, I don't.
(副大統領;いや、言うことはない)
Q She's obviously a good daughter --
(もちろんとても素晴らしい娘さんで……)
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I'm delighted -- I'm delighted I'm about to have a sixth grandchild, Wolf, and obviously think the world of both of my daughters and all of my grandchildren. And I think, frankly, you're out of line with that question.
(遮るように=筆者註)(うれしいことだ……6人目の孫が生まれようとしてるのだから、それはうれしいことだ、ウルフ、それにもちろん、娘2人の世界のことや私の孫たちみんなのことを考えるとね。で、思うに、率直に言えば、きみのその質問はルール違反だ)
Q I think all of us appreciate --
(たじたじになって)(いや、みんな評価すると思いますが、その……)
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I think you're out of -- I think you're out of line with that question.
(きみは論点から……その質問は、論点から逸れていて訊くべきことではないと思う)
Q -- your daughter. We like your daughters. Believe me, I'm very, very sympathetic to Liz and to Mary. I like them both. That was just a question that's come up and it's a responsible, fair question.
(しどろもどろ状態で)(あなたの娘さん、あなたの娘さんたちを気にかけているのです。私を知ってるでしょう、私はリズにもメアリーにも、とても、とても同情的だ。2人とも大好きです。これはただのふつうの質問ですよ。ふつうに頭に浮かんだ質問。それを責任をもって公正に質問しているのです。
THE VICE PRESIDENT: I just fundamentally disagree with your perspective.
(わたしは基本的に、そのきみの考え方には同意しない)
**
以上。そんなけ。
すごいでしょ。はは。
この"out of line"というのは、「線を越えてる」「はみ出している」「出過ぎだ」「分(ぶ)をわきまえない」「常軌を逸している」「規則違反だ」っていう、かなりきつい意味の婉曲な言い回しですわな。つまりね、ほんとはチェイニー、「たわごとだ」「何を言ってるんだ、バカ」「言って良いことと悪いことがあるぞ」という脅しをしてるわけです。脅し。でも、本質は何かというと、このおやじ、逃げてるんだ。都合が悪くなるとこうして脅して逃げる。
フセインの処刑を報じるCNNが、awaiting the first picture of the excution released というテロップを映しながら中継をしていた。アンダーソン・クーパーが「手に入り次第、お見せします。もちろん局内で内容を検討した上、事前に警告もおこなってから放送します」といっていた。見せねばならないんだろうな。
そういえば先月は「乳がん啓発月間(breast cancer awareness month)」でした。タイムズスクエアのビルボードでもシンボルカラーのピンク色の啓発広告が目立ちました。キャンベルスープの赤い缶詰がピンク色になったり、ハードロックカフェがピンク色のピンを配ったりポラロイドがピンクのカメラを出したり、ほら、ぜんぶ自分のところの商品と関係づけたり販促とつなげたりしてるでしょ。昨年のハリケーン・カトリーナ災害ではFedexやMTVなどの企業が共同でキャンペーンを張ってボランティアを募り、休み期間の大学生らを大量にニューオリンズなどに送り込んだなんてこともありました(でもFedexって同性パートナーになんの保障もしてないわりとアンチゲイな企業です)。アップルがiPodの赤を発売してその売上の10ドル分をエイズ基金に寄付するという手法なんかはまんまズッポリとこれにあたりますよね。これは大人気で新たに8GB版も出したというニュースがまだ新しい。じつはこれ、「(PRODUCT)RED」というキャンペーンにアップルがのっかったもので、他にもアメックスの赤いカードとか、モトローラの赤い携帯とか、コンヴァースのシューズとかエンポリオ・アルマーニの赤い時計とかもあるんですわ。企業が乗り出すとほんとに社会の注目度が上がるし、それに顧客も応えるという双方向のコミュニケイティヴな関係がだんだん出来上がりつつある、という感じでしょうか。
テッド・ハガード(50)=写真上=という、全米3000万人もの信者を有する「福音派(Evangelical=エヴァンゲリオンの語源ですね)」のトップが、まあ、キリスト教保守派の総本山とも言うべき「全米福音教会協会(the National Association of Evangelicals=NAE)」の会長さんなんですけど、日本でいえば創価学会の池田大作みたいなひとですかね、このひとが、なんと3年間にわたって男性エスコート(プロの男娼です)と性的関係を続けていたってことを、このエスコートがばらしちゃったのです。うわっ、なに、それ? です。それだけでなくて、このハガードが覚せい剤(メタアンフェタミン)などの麻薬を使ってることも、「私のファンタジーは18歳から22歳くらいの大学生の男の子たち6人といっしょにセックスすることだ」なんて話してたこともばらしちゃった。おまけに「アート」と名乗ってこのエスコートに残していた伝言メッセージ(ボイスメール)も公開されました。麻薬を100ドルとか200ドル分、いますぐ手配できないかって言う話です。
英語版のウィキペディアでも以下の通りです。
「Luxuria identifies using the English word "transgender" and prefers feminine pronouns, titles, and adjectives.」
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Vladimir_Luxuria)
「英語でのトランスジェンダーという言葉を使って自分をアイデンティファイしている」、つまり、自分はトランスジェンダーだと言っているわけです。
NYタイムズの劇評(10/14付け)は「Obviously, “Hell House” is a bring-your-own-irony sort of affair.(言うまでもなく、「ヘルハウス」は自らこの劇の皮肉を気づくためのもの)」と結んでいます。まあふつうそうでしょう。これで信仰に帰依しちゃうようなナイーヴなひとはとてもニューヨークでは生きていけないもの。ちなみにこの劇団、例のトム・クルーズの没頭する変形キリスト教集団「サイエントロジー」をおちょくった「A Very Merry Unauthorized Children’s Scientology Pageant」なんて劇をやってたりするようなところですし。
(ところで「hold your hand」の「hold」、日本語にならないって書いてて気づきました。握るのともちょっとちがう=ちなみに握手の英語はshakehandsで、これは取った手を揺する行為を指した言葉。Hold は「つなぐ」でも「取る」でもない、「保持する」って感じね。大和言葉、なし、ってホントかよ)
***
State's Highest Court Rules Against Gay Marriage
July 06, 2006
The state's highest court ruled Thursday that gay marriage is not allowed under state law.
In a 4-2 decision, the State Court of Appeals rejected arguments by same-sex couples throughout the state who said that state law violates their constitutional rights.
The court said New York's marriage law clearly limits marriage to between a man and a woman and any change in the law should come from the Legislature.
The case involved several lawsuits representing 44 gay and lesbian couples in the state.
Associate Judge Robert Smith wrote in the majority opinion wrote: "By limiting marriage to opposite-sex couples, New York is not engaging in sex discrimination. The limitation does not put men and women in different classes, and give one class a benefit not given to the other."
In a dissenting opinion, Chief Judge Judith Kaye said: "I am confident that future generations will look back on today's decision as an unfortunate misstep."
The cases decided Thursday were filed two years ago when high court judges in Massachusetts ruled same-sex couples there have the same rights to wed as straight couples.
Gay rights groups called the ruling a sad day for New York families, saying they are disappointed but that they are not giving up.
"It's so disheartening and so difficult to hear that the courts can't protect us, and we have to turn to the people," said plaintiff Cindy Blink.
They say they hope to have a gay marriage bill in front of state lawmakers by next year.
Both Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Governor George Pataki said they do not believe that same-sex marriage should be regulated by the courts.
Instead, they say it is a matter of changing the state's existing marriage law, a move that must be made in Albany.
"I haven't read the entire decision, but I just think it's right that any change in what has been the law of this state for over 200 years should be made by the elected representatives of the people and not by the court," said the governor.
"It's not the state's business who you can marry, and now, having said that, I also believe that it is up to the legislature to have laws. The governor and I will enforce whatever laws are on the books. And so I will personally campaign to change the law," said the mayor.
Democratic front-runner for governor Eliot Spitzer says he also supports gay marriage, which means if elected this fall, he could push for a law change.
The issue also has its detractors, including State Senate Majority Leader Joseph Bruno. He has said he will oppose any effort to legalize gay marriage.
前述したように、映画は温暖化に関するアル・ゴアの講義をそのままなぞるようにして進みます。講義の冒頭での自己紹介で、彼はまず自分の肩書きを「the Former Next President of the United States(前・次期合衆国大統領)」とイッパツ笑わせてから、地球温暖化の凄まじい推移と影響とを写真やグラフを多用して視覚的にわかりやすく解説してゆくわけです。
さらに寄付を集めて他の雑誌や新聞にも、同様の広告を打つようです。
で、コピーは
「We agree with everyone who named 'Brokeback Mountain' best picture」
「わたしたちは、ブロークバック・マウンテンを最優秀映画賞に決めたすべての人々に賛同します」
あるいはかねてから言われていたように、「ブロークバック」を、アカデミーの会員のご老人たちは観てもいないのではないか、という説。
アカデミーというのは映画に関係するすべての職業の人から構成されていて、現在の会員は6000人くらい。そのうち投票するのは4500人とか5000人なんですが、ほかの賞のグループ、監督協会とか評論家協会とかよりも高齢化が進んでいて、そこに候補作品のDVDが送られてくるという仕組みです。それで自分で見る。日本にも何人も会員はいて、そこに字幕付きのも送られてます。
だが、このカウボーイ同士のゲイの恋愛もの、そういうご年配の会員たちにとって、黙ってても観てくれる種類のものだろうかというと……。 「クラッシュは私たち自身が生きて働くこの業界をよく体現した映画だ( 'Crash' was far more representative of the our industry, of where we work and live)」とあるハリウッド関係者がNYタイムズの記事でコメントしています。対してブロークバックは「神聖なハリウッドのアイコン偶像に挑戦した、アカデミーのご年配方がそういうアメリカのカウボーイのイメージが壊れるのを観たいだろうかというと、答えは明らかだろう('Brokeback' took on a fairly sacred Hollywood icon, the cowboy, and I don't think the older members of the academy wanted to see the image of the American cowboy diminished.)」ということです。
脚本を書いたラリー・マクマートリーもまた「Perhaps the truth really is, Americans don't want cowboys to be gay,(きっと真実はたぶん本当に、アメリカ人はカウボーイがゲイであってはほしくないということなんだろう)」と「bittersweet」なオスカーの夜を振り返っています。
彼らは、これはだれにでも起きることで、たまたまその2人が男だったというに過ぎない、という意味でいっているのでしょうけれど(その証拠に、映画のポスターには「Love is a force of nature」とあるのです。ことさらに、「自然の力」である、と)、これって逆に、すごく危険じゃないですか。
ヤバいなあ、と冒頭に書いたのは、そういうことです。
***
October 18, 2005
Editorial 社説
Pointless Provocation in Tokyo
東京での意味をなさない挑発行為
Fresh from an election that showcased him as a modernizing reformer, Prime Minister Junichiro Koizumi of Japan has now made a point of publicly embracing the worst traditions of Japanese militarism.
Yesterday he made a nationally televised visit to a memorial in central Tokyo called the Yasukuni Shrine. But Yasukuni is not merely a memorial to Japan's 2.5 million war dead.
The shrine and its accompanying museum promote an unapologetic view of Japan's atrocity-scarred rampages through Korea, much of China and Southeast Asia during the first few decades of the 20th century.
Among those memorialized and worshiped as deities in an annual festival beginning this week are 14 Class A war criminals who were tried, convicted and executed.
The shrine visit is a calculated affront to the descendants of those victimized by Japanese war crimes, as the leaders of China, Taiwan, South Korea and Singapore quickly made clear.
Mr. Koizumi clearly knew what he was doing. He has now visited the shrine in each of the last four years, brushing aside repeated protests by Asian diplomats and, this time, an adverse judgment from a Japanese court.
No one realistically worries about today's Japan re-embarking on the road of imperial conquest.
現実問題として、だれも日本が再び帝国主義的覇権の道を進むだろうなどとは心配していない。
But Japan, Asia's richest, most economically powerful and technologically advanced nation, is shedding some of the military and foreign policy restraints it has observed for the past 60 years.
This is exactly the wrong time to be stirring up nightmare memories among the neighbors. Such provocations seem particularly gratuitous in an era that has seen an economically booming China become Japan's most critical economic partner and its biggest geopolitical challenge.
Instead of appeasing this group, Mr. Koizumi needs to face them down, just as he successfully faced down the party reactionaries who opposed his postal privatization plan.
さらに、Ballmer 氏の通信は、雇用差別禁止連邦法に性的指向による差別禁止条項を加えることを支持している企業に Microsoft も仲間入りする意向だとも記している。連邦の雇用差別禁止法は、すでに人種/性別/国籍/宗教/年齢/身体障害による雇用差別を禁じているが、性的指向による差別も禁止すべきだという声も増えており、Microsoft もそれに賛同したことになる。
Microsoft Changes Stand on Gay Issues
By internetnews.com Staff
After withdrawing its support for a pending gay rights bill in Washington State, Microsoft (Quote, Chart) has changed its mind.
In an e-mail to employees Friday, Microsoft CEO Steve Ballmer said after thinking the issue over -- such as whether it was appropriate for a public corporation to get involved in such public policy discussions -- he decided to err on the side of diversity.
"Regardless of where people came down on the issues, everyone expressed strong support for the company's commitment to diversity," Ballmer's memo said. "To me, that's so critical. Our success depends on having a workforce that is as diverse as our customers -- and on working together in a way that taps all of that diversity."
Microsoft said it released the memo to the public in response to widespread public interest in the company's position about the anti-discrimination legislation.
Although Microsoft is among the earliest companies to extend company benefits to same-sex partners, a prior memo from Ballmer, explaining why Microsoft decided to remain neutral on an anti-discrimination bill in Washington State, sparked an uproar among gay rights groups.
"I said in my April 22 e-mail that we were wrestling with the question of how and when the company should engage on issues that go beyond the software industry. After thinking about this for the past two weeks, I want to share my decision with you and lay out the principles that will guide us going forward," Ballmer said.
"First and foremost, we will continue to focus our public policy activities on issues that most directly affect our business, such as Internet safety, intellectual property rights, free trade, digital inclusion and a healthy business climate."
But after looking at the question from all sides, Ballmer said he concluded that diversity in the workplace is also an important issue for the company.
"Therefore, it's appropriate for the company to support legislation that will promote and protect diversity in the workplace."
In addition, the memo said Microsoft would join other companies in supporting federal legislation that would prohibit employment discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation -- adding sexual orientation to the existing law that already covers race, sex, national origin, religion, age and disability.
"Obviously, the Washington State legislative session has concluded for this year, but if legislation similar to HB 1515 is introduced in future sessions, we will support it."
***
Microsoft C.E.O. Explains Reversal on Gay Rights Bill
マイクロソフトのCEO、ゲイ人権法案への支持撤回を説明
By SARAH KERSHAW (記者署名サラ・カーショー)
Published: April 24, 2005
SEATTLE, April 23 - The chief executive of Microsoft, Steven A. Ballmer, sent what company officials described as an unusual e-mail message on Friday evening to roughly 35,000 employees in the United States, defending Microsoft's widely criticized decision not to support an antidiscrimination bill for gay people in Washington State this year.
The e-mail message came as company officials, inundated by internal messages from angry employees, withering attacks on the Web and biting criticism from gay rights groups, sought to quell rancor following the disclosure this week that the company, which had supported the bill in past years, did not do so this year. Critics argue that the decision resulted from pressure from a prominent local evangelical Christian church.
In his message, posted on several Web logs on Saturday and confirmed by company officials, Mr. Ballmer wrote that he had done "a lot of soul searching over the past 24 hours." He said that he and Bill Gates, the founder of Microsoft, both personally supported the bill but that the company had decided not to take an official stance on the legislation this year. He said they were pondering the role major corporations should play in larger social debates.
"We are thinking hard about what is the right balance to strike - when should a public company take a position on a broader social issue, and when should it not?" he wrote. "What message does the company taking a position send to its employees who have strongly held beliefs on the opposite side of the issue?"
The bill, which has been debated in the Legislature for years and would have extended protections against discrimination in employment, housing and other areas to gay men and lesbians, failed by one vote on Thursday.
Critics, including some Microsoft employees and a state legislator, who said they had conversations with company officials about their decision, said a high-level Microsoft executive had indicated that the company withdrew its support because of pressure from a local minister, Ken Hutcherson. Dr. Hutcherson opposed the bill and said he had threatened a national boycott of Microsoft.
Company officials have denied any connection between the threatened boycott and their decision not to support the bill.
会社側は今回のこの法案不支持の決定とボイコットの脅しとは無関係だと否定してるけどね。
Microsoft, which is based in Redmond, Wash., east of Seattle, has long been known for being at corporate America's forefront on gay rights, extending employee benefits to same-sex couples. In his e-mail message, Mr. Ballmer said, "As long as I am C.E.O., Microsoft is going to be a company that is hard-core about diversity, a company that is absolutely rigorous about having a nondiscriminatory environment, and a company that treats every employee fairly."
Mr. Ballmer described the antidiscrimination measure as posing a "very difficult issue for many people, with strong emotions on all sides." He wrote, "both Bill and I actually both personally support this legislation," adding, "but that is my personal view, and I also know that many employees and shareholders would not agree with me."
Blogs and chat rooms on the Web were filled Saturday with lively debate about Microsoft's actions, including postings from people who said they would now buy products from other software companies and encourage others to do the same.
One posting Friday on a Web log run by "Microsophist," who promises "an unfiltered and unfettered view of Microsoft from the inside," said of Mr. Ballmer's memo: "When I read the mail, I felt some relief (the situation wasn't as bad as I'd first thought) followed by disappointment as he's basically saying he doesn't want to do anything that might cross the religious right."
A gay Microsoft employee who read the e-mail message from Mr. Ballmer on Saturday and spoke on the condition of anonymity out of fear of retribution said: "Overall it's a good thing that Steve is reaffirming the company's commitment to it's internal anti-discrimination policies. But I'm disappointed that he would give equal weight to the views of employees or shareholders who would condone discrimination as to those who would be the subject of discrimination."
面白かったのは、両者、同性婚に関しては意見は割れなかったということです。
ゲイの娘を持つチェイニーは、そのマリーさんが聴衆の中にいたということばかりではなく、本来はそんなものを憲法で禁止するなんていうブッシュ政権の方針には政治家としてよりも父親として組みしがたいところがあったんでしょう。エドワーズが「娘さんのこともあろうから、これに関しては副大統領も同じ思い(憲法で禁止すべきではないということ)だと思います」と言ったに対して、30秒の持ち時間があったにもかかわらず彼は単に「ありがとう、わたしの家族のことを気にかけてくれて」とのみ答えるだけでした。対してエドワーズも了解済みという顔で頷きながら「You are welcome」を何度も繰り返していました。