也是一只自由泳的小鸟
“Though we used different signed languages, these Chinese Deaf people and I could make ourselves understood; and though we came from different countries, our mutual Deaf culture held us together. By the end of the evening we’d talked about Deaf life in China, and about Chinese politics.” I nodded. “You couldn’t do that in China,” he said. “No hearing person could. So who’s disabled then?”
“My advice is to have another kid,” Eve said. “So you know what it feels like to have it how it’s supposed to be.”
这里面真的好多生下了有缺陷的孩子的父母最后都会再要一两个孩子…我还以为一般会害怕基因缺陷不敢再要呢…后出生的孩子里确实也不乏出了一样毛病的
总之对这本好评如潮的书有些失望…虽然书很长很长，但主要是因为啰嗦的语言以及大量类似的叙事，所以并没有给我提供很多的 insight。
He proposes that not all persons are human beings; […] In Practical Ethics he wrote, “Killing a disabled infant is not morally equivalent to killing a person. Very often it is not wrong at all.” […] Singer in effect reverses cogito, ergo sum and says that those who do not think do not exist.
啊这，“我思故我在”等于“我不在故我不思”啊，怎么能说“我不思故我不在”呢…
In Peter Singer’s definition, Imogen, Ashley, and others like them are not persons. Nonetheless, the parents I met who lived with and cared for such children often described a great deal of personhood in them. It’s impossible to establish in any given case in what measure such personhood is observed and in what measure imagined or projected.
也有听说狗的情感是人类的投射，狗的主人会想象狗在某种情景中的感受，并且用来解释狗的反应，即时狗在不同场景里的反应并没有什么不同？？
most people embark on parenthood in optimism, and even those who soberly consider a worst-case scenario cannot adequately predict their response to such a situation until they are in it.
怎讲，这本书里的各种极端例子让我越看越乐观，感觉我也能当妈了
（明明很多对这本书的好评都是：这本书看着很压抑但请坚持看下去
越读越觉得里面的例子缺乏多样性。不管孩子有什么样的缺陷，整个故事基本上都是：“我们之前的人生都很顺利，没想过会出这种事，但我们还是决定要了这个孩子。带这样的孩子很累，但并不全是苦恼。一开始我们很绝望，但后来我们都爱上了这个孩子，这孩子非常地好，我们为它取得的成就而骄傲。我们给它找最好的医生，最好的学校。我们后来又要了两个孩子。”
其它类型的叙事一笔带过的偏多…