, the contestations have metamorphosed into ethnic consciousness . The Chinese felt there is a need for them to form ethnic grouping both to protect as well as to compete for more access to public goods . Such interpretation aroused ethnic consciousness among them . As discussed earlier , collective actions were taken by members of Malay and non-Malay to strengthen ethnic solidarity among respective ethnic group members . Associations and political parties were formed . The collective actions resemble their commitments to their ethnic group . Hence , ethnic identity is not constructed externally . It is constructed by individuals who feel they needed group support to fulfil certain goals or condition of theirs . They are not made to believe that they belong to certain ethnic groups . They themselves have committed their alignment to their ethnic group to reap the advantages of collection action . They demarcate their differences by referring to their socio-cultural and biological features . The demarcations are not imposed . It is a method individuals use voluntarily to differentiate themselves from members of other ethnic groups . Through the collective action , ethnic groups transformed into political movements that organize and manoeuvre to compete with other ethnic groups according to the wishes of the groups ’ members . In order to generate such effects , ethnic socialization experiences that are initialized by members of the groups such as family members and peers play an important role . The experiences form the pillars for the primordialization process that members of an ethnic group go through to construct their ethnic identities and reflects members ’ effort to build ethnic solidarity to face competition from other ethnic groups . Intentionally or unintentionally this process has constructed ethnic consciousness . ‘ Chinese ’ as an Identity The FGDs held with the Chinese students proved that they were conscious about their ethnic identity . They were aware of the differences between them and members of other ethnic groups . When they were asked to describe their ethnic identity , they highlighted categories of traits that they claim as Chinese identity . In other words , they were ethnically conscious about whom they were and the consciousness could lead to include Chinese as an important element in their self-identity and subsequently determine how they categorize Chine and non-Chinese . Origin As descendants of Chinese immigrants , most of the Chinese students felt that the history of their ancestors ’ origins played an important role in determining their ethnic identity . CL said :‘ We are Chinese because our ancestors are from China .’ Similarly , HJ said :‘ Chinese in Malaysia is unique since our tradition , philosophy and beliefs originated from China .’ Therefore , in his view , the Chinese are different because their ancestors came from China . HJ ’ s perception about his Chinese identity was also shared by KS , who explained ,“ I think Chinese can be understood as having a different race , philosophy and language . Historically , China is our root ... we are quite Chinese centric and often see our culture as the best if compared to others . China is the always the best . This is the thinking the Chinese have . ” It is obvious that KS felt that the Chinese in Malaysia are different from others because of their place of origin . This has made him proud due to the belief that Chinese culture is better than that of other ethnic groups in Malaysia – an indication of strong ethnic consciousness . Beliefs and religions Besides discussing the origin of Chinese Malaysians , the students discussed their opinions on matters related to Chinese beliefs and religions . SY said :‘ I think Chinese religion is important to show Chinese identity . It depends on whether we pray during Ching Ming and practice Chinese New Year traditions .’ Her thoughts explain her view about the construct of traditional Chinese beliefs and religions . She felt that Chinese should continue traditional Chinese practice such as ancestor worship during Ching Ming and Chinese New Year rituals and traditions . That is to say , Chinese Malaysians are different from other Malaysians who do not have such beliefs and traditions . This distinction was also reiterated by YS ,‘ It is related to religion that we practice . In Malaysia ... most Chinese are either Taoist or Buddhist . It influences thinking...for example , Malays are Muslim and so their thinking is different .’ This description highlights religion as one of the major differences between Chinese and Malay in Malaysia . In fact , in some of the FGDs some students felt that a Chinese should not convert to Islam because , according to them , the conversion would cause the Chinese to lose his or her Chinese identity . ZT was one of them . According to him , a Chinese would cease being Chinese after converting to Islam because the person would not be able to practice some of the Chinese traditions such as worshipping ancestors . Traditions and everyday practices The Chinese students interpreted their traditions and everyday practices as one of the traits that distinguished them from other ethnic groups in Malaysia . RZ explained :‘ If we are Chinese , our culture will be different from the others . The tradition , the clothes we wear during Chinese New Year , the celebrations and customs like what we eat will be different . We eat pork and the Malays will never eat ’. Hence , for RZ , his daily practices and Chinese traditions have made him Chinese . He also raised the point that the Chinese are different from the others based on their tradition and everyday practices . There was also discussion about Chinese Malaysian values . ES felt that the Chinese Malaysians value diligence , which causes them to be different from the others . Blood ties Many of the students discussed their family background as the determinant of their ethnic identity . In other words , they believed that their blood ties made them Chinese . PY said :‘ I am a Chinese because my family is Chinese .’ Such a statement was also made by another student , LL . She too felt that her family background made her Chinese . Due to such an assumption , it caused some of them to to believe that they were biologically different from members of other ethnic groups . For example , TW believed that he inherited a fairer skin complexion from his family , which caused him to be different from members of other ethnic groups in Malaysia . Language Language was discussed by the Chinese students as an important Chinese Malaysian trait . They felt that their ability to speak Chinese language distinguished them from other ethnic groups in Malaysia . Interestingly , it should be noted here that language was not highlighted by the Malay students as a Malay trait . This might be because since Malay language is the national language of Malaysia , it is now widely spoken by all Malaysians . Chinese language remains a relatively exclusive language in Malaysia since it is not commonly spoken by members of other ethnic group there . SK said :‘ Chinese are people who practice Chinese culture and we speak Chinese language and that include Chinese dialects .’ Her view strongly suggests the role of Chinese language in reflecting her Chinese identity . In the context of Malaysia , Chinese language distinguishes the Chinese from other ethnic groups . This was clearly highlighted by LL , who said :‘ I also think we don ’ t have to tell we are Chinese . When we speak , from our language and slang , people will know we are Chinese .’ Chinese Ethnic Consciousness and Formation of Collective Action The discussion above describes the Chinese students ’ perceptions about their ethnic identity . The traits helped them to explain their Chinese identity , but while doing so they would also point out the differences between them and members of other ethnic groups . Put succinctly , the discussions had delineated their ethnic consciousness . Although their thoughts and descriptions about their Chinese identity created an impression that the traits are inherited and given , it must be noted too that these traits were interpreted by them as Chinese traits . In other words , it was the Chinese students who had voluntarily pronounced their ethnic identity as Chinese when they were asked to describe their identity . Arguably , their pronouncement could be an outcome of an institutionalized ideology imposed by the political elites . However , what could have caused the students to accept such an ideology in the first place ? Could it be that it is the students who allowed such institutionalization to take place ? Chinese solidarity When the Chinese students were asked about the relevance of maintaining their ethnic identity , they responded positively . They felt proud to be Chinese . This was clearly articulated by YX ,‘ I am proud being Chinese ... we are united most of the time .’ Other Chinese students believed that this identity caused them to be more hard-working and resilient . HJ said :‘ I think Chinese is important to me at heart . I don ’ t have to show it . But , deep in my heart I know it is important . This is because there are many Chinese traits ... such as Chinese are hard-working .’ It is evident from these responses that the Chinese students consider their ethnic identity as relevant . It unites them and causes them to be more hard-working and resilient . Congruently , their responses indicate that the Chinese in Malaysia have to be united and more hard-working . They are responding to certain circumstances that caused them to unite and work harder . These circumstances have caused them to be ethnically conscious – a manifestation of ethnic solidarity . According to Hetcher ( 1974:1177 ) ,‘. .. manifestation of ethnic solidarity appears to be a response to the perception of patterns of structural discrimination in the society at large .’ Thus , for the Chinese students , their ethnic solidarity signifies their response to the perception that the Chinese in Malaysia have been marginalized . Dealing with ‘ Chinese marginalization ’ The Chinese students felt that the Chinese in Malaysia have been marginalized in many areas . As Chinese , the students perceived that their rights were compromised by government policies . The perception increases the intensity of their ethnic consciousness . According to PK ,‘ The pressure makes me feel that I want to see myself as a Chinese first and then Malaysian because we are treated as second class Malaysian .’ Similarly , WS said :‘ Yes , I think all these issues such as quota and discrimination makes us feel we are Chinese and not Malaysian .’ The students felt that the policies implemented by the Malaysian government have deprived the Chinese Malaysians of equal opportunities to access the ‘ public goods ’. Such self-labeling is a result of the perception that the Chinese in Malaysia have been marginalized . There is also the possibility that they may even label themselves as third-class citizens since the other native groups in Malaysia enjoy access to ‘ special rights ’. Hence , by using the top-down approach , some scholars will explain the deprivation as the outcome of the political elites ’ strategy to position some groups in a subservient position . However , the Chinese students ’ comments about the Chinese position in Malaysia have also reflected the contestations between Malay and non-Malay . As mentioned earlier , the Chinese students felt they were marginalized and in order to deal with such situation they would have to unite . Consequently this would create a collective need to preserve their ethnic consciousness . Ethnic Socialization Cultural Socialization Through cultural socialization , members learn about the beliefs , values , norms and traditions of their ethnic groups . In the case of Chinese students ’ FGDs , most of the students involved relate the learning to their interaction with family members . Occasionally , in some of the FGDs , peers influence was highlighted too . Through interactions with family members and also peers , the student developed knowledge related to their ethnic identity . The interactions have also shaped their loyalty by making them proud to be a member of their ethnic group . In relation to such socialization experiences , the Chinese students felt their family socialization experiences had provided them knowledge concerning Chinese cultural practices and traditions . SK who is studying Physics in UM relate her experience : When I was small , I was aked to wear red cloths during Chinese New Year . My mother will pray to ancestors by burning worship papers to ancestors . All these childhood memories , are part of my Chineseness . SK experience matched KW ’ s ( SK ’ s course mate ) expression of her interaction with her family members . According to KW ,“ During exam time , my mother will pray to Chinese deities and sometimes ask me to drink talisman water . This is something different from others in Malaysia . I don ’ t think they have the same practice . ” KW ’ s mother had taught her some of the traditional Chinese religious practices . As a result , the practice has caused her to feel she is different from others in Malaysia . The Chinese students also felt their family played an important in shaping their values . According to YX ( USM student ) : .
 
.. my auntie told me the Malays will spend and spend without thinking about money ... They will buy even without discount . Chinese is different . They are very specific about money .... This experience informed YX about Chinese thrifty consumption behaviour . The role of family socialization in constructing ethnic identity includes the inculcation of ethnic pride . LL , a Chinese student who is pursuing a linguistic degree in UPM believes that the Chinese has superior business skill if compared to other ethnic groups in Malaysia . When asked about the source of such belief , she replied ,“ My family will say Chinese is good in business . They will compare with Malays ... Malays will only open small shop . Chinese will not do that ... I am proud of this part of Chinese . ” Judging from her reply , it is apparent that her family tried to instil ethnic pride into her by comparing the Chinese against the Malays . The transmission of these knowledge is important to promote cultural and traditional practices awareness ( Hughes , Rodriguez , Smith & et . al ., 2006 ) . Through the awareness , the students are aware of the constitution of their ethnic groups ’ cultural and traditional practices . It provided them an understanding of the meaning of their ethnic identity that later became the boundaries that distinguish them from people of other ethnic groups . Competition socialization While family play an important role in instilling knowledge pertaining to their cultural and traditional practices , interactions with peers provide the students information regarding the position of their ethnic group in the Malaysian society . According to Kyrazit ( 2004:632 ) , interactions with peers are often open and therefore sharing of information is often direct and informative . Thus , it is not surprising that the students who were involved in the FGDs related their interaction with peers to the promotion of mistrust against members of other ethnic groups and the biasness their ethnic groups faced . This however does not mean that their families do not share similar information . In fact , according to Hughes et al .
 
( 2006 ) , family is one of the institutions that transmit this information . As a result of such socialization , ethnic solidarity to face competition from other groups will be heightened . Promotion of mistrust The Chinese students who were involved in the FGDs shared experiences that generate the perception that students of other ethnic groups are not trustworthy too . YX is one of such Chinese students . He said , .
 
.
 
.
 
” They really enjoy their time even if there is a deadline . Let say there is a conference .... they spend three hours enjoying food and two hours on conference . They are very laid-back . Me and others ... we share it . Ah ... you have the same experience ... so that makes our feeling stronger . ” YX experience indicates that he shared views concerning the Malays students with his friends . The sharing caused them to conclude that the Malay students were laid-back and therefore would not be suitable people to collaborate with . Besides the promotion of mistrust , most of the Chinese FGDs had also discussed about the ‘ marginalized ’ position of the Chinese in Malaysia . WC ( UKM student ) and his friends believed there was biasness by the university hostel management in approving Chinese students ’ activities such as Pesta Ang Pow . Such perception was also shared by YX and his Chinese peers in USM . According to ST who is pursuing social science degree is USM , the marginalization has caused the Chinese students in her university to work hand in hand to face the situation . This means , among peers , there is effort to counter the presumed marginalization by enhancing cooperation among ethnic group members . CL ( a UM Chinese student ) has a different experience . His father often deals with government departments . There were several occasion where his father would relate his frustrations to CL . According to CL : When I entered secondary school , my father often told me about the treatment Chinese get . He is running a private company and deals with some government departments . Often , his documents were often delayed . He would come back and told me his frustration . He told me Chinese were treated differently . The above discussion about the Chinese students ’ socialization experiences clearly reflect collective effort to instil ethnic group solidarity . Peers of both group of students persuaded the students to distrust members of other ethnic groups . Indirectly , the peers were asking the students to trust members of their ethnic groups . Their peers ’ efforts in raising issues concerning the position of respective ethnic group in the Malaysian society will produce initiative by the students to strengthen ethnic solidarity to compete with members of ethnic groups . Conclusion Judging from the findings of the students ’ socialization experience it is apparent that their ethnic consciousness is strong . It is also evident that the socialization experiences have caused them to construct ethnic boundaries . Therefore it is not surprising to observe ethnic polarization in Malaysian public universities . The findings also reveal interplay between individual efforts to form ethnic solidarity with the collective efforts of other members . According to Banton ( 1999, 2011 ) , ethnic groups are outcomes of rational choice made by members . However , in order to bind the social bonding between members tightly to promote ethnic solidarity , efforts were made by members to create emotional attachment between members and their ethnic group . As discussed by Nagata ( 1979 ) , while ethnic group members are trying to exploit the collective action of their ethnic groups , they have inadvertently sparked the collective action to construct ethnic solidarity . Members ’ effort became structuralized effort of the ethnic group . The students ’ ethnic socialization experiences are testament of their ethnic group collective effort to strengthen as well as to preserve ethnic solidarity to compete with other ethnic groups . Their co-ethnic group members such as family members and peers promoted ethnic solidarity by sharing information on the socio-cultural practices and identities of their ethnic groups . As evident in some of the students ’ discussion , they too had participated in the promotion . Through these sharing the students were told that they are members of their ethnic group . The students were also exposed to information that was aimed at enhancing their loyalty to their ethnic group such as the promotion of mistrust against members of other ethnic groups and the biasness their ethnic groups are facing . These experiences shaped the students ethnic identity that later became the boundaries to mark the differences between co-ethnic members and non-members . Therefore , as opined by scholars such as Weber , ethnic groups are formed by individuals for political purposes . Ethnic groups ’ members associate themselves with each other by constructing relationship through claims that bind them into the belief that they share a common ethnic origin . As a result , ethnic groups are not natural group . They are artificial and synthetic . The groups are formed by their members through presumed relationships that are used to create social bonds . In the long run , the bonding will provide platforms for members to utilize their ethnic identity to compete with individuals from other ethnic groups ( Banton , 2008:1275 ) . Hence , ethnic identity is not an outcome of the elites ’ manipulation and distortion . Miles & Brown ( 2003 ) and other neo-Marxist scholars such as Hirschman ( 1986 ) have undermined the roles of individuals in constructing ethnic identity . Their top-down approach has downplayed the roles of individuals ’ interest as well as individuals ’ decision as to whether to accept or not to accept the distortion the elites has tried to create . The students , their family members and their friends are individuals who had participated in a collective action to promote their ethnic group solidarity . Their participation in such process has strongly suggested that ethnic identity and boundaries are outcome of its members ’ actions . Therefore , ethnic identity is not an outcome of the elite ’ s manipulation and distortion . Ethnic group members voluntarily participated in the processes that construct the ethnic consciousness of their group members . Reference Arnett , Jefferey Jensen , 1995 ,“ Broad and Narrow Socialization : The Family in the Context of a Cultural Theory ”, Journal of Marriage and Family ,57 ( 3 ) :617-628. Banton , Michael , 1999 , Ethnic and Racial Consciousness . New York : Addison Wesley Longman . Banton , Michael , 2000 , “ Ethnic Conflict ”, Sociology , 34 ( 3 ) :481-498. Banton , Michael , 2008 ,“ The Sociology of Ethnic Relations ”, Ethnic and Racial Studies , 31 ( 7 ) :1267-1285. Banton , Michael , 2011 , “ A Theory of Social Category ”, Sociology , 45 ( 2 ) :187-201. Barth , Frederick , 1996 , “ Ethnic Groups and Boundaries ”, in Hutchinson , J . and Smith , A . D . ( eds . ) , Ethnicity . Norfolk : Oxford University Press . Eder , Doona & Corsaro , William A .,1990 ,“ Children ’ s Peer Culture ”, Annual Review of Sociology , 16 ( 1990 ) :197-220. Fenton , Steve , 2010 , Ethnicity . Cambridge : Polity Press . Geertz , Clifford , 1973 , The Interpretations of Culture . London . Hutchinson & Co . Hetcher , Michael , 1974 ,“ The Political Economy of Ethnic Change ”, The American Journal of Sociology , 79 ( 5 ) :1151-1178. Hetcher , M . , Friedman , D . and Appelbaum , M .,1982 , “ A Theory of Ethnic Collective Action ”, International Migration Review , 16 ( 2 ) :412-434. Hirschman , Charles , 1986 ,“ The Making of Race in Colonial Malaya : Political Economy and Racial Ideology ”, Sociological Forum , 1 ( 2 ) :330-361. Hughes , D . , Rodriguez , J . , Smith , E . P . , Johnson , D . J . , Stevenson , H . C . and Spicer , P .,2006 , “ Parents Ethnics , Racial Socialization Practices : A Review of Research for Future Studies ” , Developmental Psychology , 42 ( 5 ) :747- 770 . Khoo , Khay Kim , 2009 , “ The Emergence of Plural Communities in the Malay Peninsular before 1874 ” , in Lim , Teck Gee , Gomes , Alberto and Rahman , Azly , Multiethnic Malaysia : Past , Present and Future , pp .11-32. Petaling Jaya : SIRD . Lee , Yok Fee , 2009 , “ Everyday Identities In Malaysian Chinese Subjectivities ” , Akademika , 75 ( Jan-April ) :21-41. Lim , Teck Gee , Gomes , Alberto and Rahman , Azly , Multiethnic Malaysia : Past , Present and Future . Petaling Jaya : SIRD . Mansor Mohd Noor , 1999 , “ Crossing Ethnic Borders in Malaysia : Measuring the Fluidity of Ethnic Identity and Group Formation ”, Akademika , 55 ( Julai ) :61-82. Nagata , Judith , 1979 , Malaysian Mosaic : Perspectives from a Poly-ethnic Society . Vancouver : University of British Columbia Press . Nagel , Judith , 1994 , “ Constructing Ethnicity : Creating and Recreating Ethnic Identity and Culture ”, Social Problems , 41 ( 1 ) :152 - 176 .
 
Nielsen , Francois , 1985 , “ Toward a Theory of Ethnic Solidarity in Modern Societies ” , Annual Sociological Review , 50 ( 2 ) :133 - 149 . Noraini M . Noor , 2007 , “ Polarization and Inequality in Malaysia : The Future of Malay-Chinese Relations ”, Intellectual Discourse , 15 ( 2 ) :191 - 204 .
 
Phinney , J . S .& Aliphuria , L . L , 1996 , “ At the Interface of Cultures : Multiethnic/Multiracial Highschool and College Students ”, The Journal of Social Psychology , 136 ( 2 ) :139 - 158 .
 
Ratnam , K . J .
 
, 1967 , Communalism and the Political Process in Malaya . Kuala Lumpur : University of Malaya Press . Sanusi Osman , 1989 , Ikatan Etnik dan Kelas . Bangi : Universiti Kebangsaan Malaysia Press . Shamsul Amri Baharuddin , 2001 , “ A History of an Identity , Ann Identity of a History : The Idea and Practice of Malayness in Malaysia Reconsidered ” , Journal of Southeast Asian Studies , 32 ( 3 ) :355 - 366 .
 
Strauch , Judith , 1981 , “ Multiple Ethnicities in Malaysia : The Shifting Relevance of Alternative Chinese Categories ” , Modern Asian Studies , 15 ( 2 ) :235 - 26 .
 
Thock , Ker Pong , 2007 , Ketuanan Politik Melayu : Pandangan Kaum Cina . Kuala Lumpur : Penerbit Universiti Malaya .
 
UUM , 2008 , Kajian Terhadap Perpaduan Etnik di Institusi Pengajian Tinggi .
 
Universiti Utara Malaysia .
 
Wan Hashim Wan Teh , 1983 , Race Relations in Malaysia .
 
Kuala Lumpur : Heinemann Educational Books .
 
__UNDEF__ Weber , Max , “ What is Etnicity ?
 
”, in Montserrat , G .& Rex , J .
 
( eds ) , 1997 , The Ethnicity : Nationalism , Multiculturalism and Migration , pp .
 
15 - 26 , Cambridge : Polity .
 
Yeoh , Emile K .
 
K .
 
, 2006 , “ Ethnic Coexistence in a Pluralistic Campus Environment ” , Geo Journal , 66:223 - 241 .
 
從 「 坐月子 」 中 看 文化 在 傳統 和 現代 抉擇 裡 的 調適 吳明珠 ＊ 摘要 華人 一向 認為 「 不孝有 三 ， 無後為大 」 。 傳宗接代 對 宗族 和 家庭 ， 都 很 重要 。 對於 「 生育 文化 」 ， 在 孕育 胎兒 過程 ， 人們 對 胎神 的 信仰 ， 祈男 ， 以及 孕婦 禁忌 等 多 有 傳說 和 規範 。 華人 是 父系 ， 重男輕女 的 社會 。 傳宗接代 「 生育 」 兒女 是 母親 的 天職 。 不過 我們 的 社會 和 傳統 ， 對 生 孩子 的 母親 ， 有 很多 的 照顧 嗎 ？ 以前 ， 只有 富裕 家庭 的 媳婦 ， 才 有 「 坐月子 」 的 福氣 ； 媳婦 生 了 孩子 得以 休息 補身子 。 平民 人家 ， 媳婦 生 了 孩子 ， 只 給 諸多 的 禁忌 ， 沒 休息 幾 天 就 得 照常 做 家務 ， 下田 幹活 。 現代 一般 人家 ， 生活 好 多 了 ， 剛 生 孩子 的 媳婦 ， 比較 有 被 照顧 ， 有 得 「 坐月子 」 。 但 這 「 坐月子 」 怎麼 做 ？ 筆者 和 同事 幾 年 前 曾 對 馬來西亞 城市 裡 受 過 高等 教育 多元 種族 婦女 ， 對 「 坐月子 」 的 習俗 做 過 問卷 調查 研究 。 最近 又 做 了 一 個 相似 ， 但 以 客家人 為主 的 調查 。 本文 將 從 馬來西亞 客家 次文化 的 角度 ， 與 之前 的 調查 ， 對 產婦 「 坐月子 」 的 在 傳統 觀念 和 現代 生活 方式 裡 ， 體驗 其 改變 的 研究 。 一般 的 觀念 都 認為 華人 客家 婦女 非常 勤勞 ， 是 家庭 勞動 的 重要 份子 。 本 研究 的 對象 將 以 客家 婦女 為主 ， 從 生育 文化 「 坐月子 」 習俗 的 改變 和 保留 ， 來 探討 一 個 文化 習俗 ， 在 傳統 和 現代 衝擊 下 的 調適 。 這 是 一 篇 後續 的 調查 研究 。 關鍵字 ： 坐月子 、 生育 文化 、 客家 婦女 、 文化 調適 一 、 導言 生育 文化 是 民族 文化 傳統 的 一 部分 。 生育 文化 包含 層面 廣 ， 泛指 和 生兒育女 相關 的 文化 傳統 ， 其 涵義 和 儀式 在 現實 生活 中 有 實際 習俗 的 操作 ， 像 在 孕育 、 分娩 、 養育 和 啟蒙 等等 （ 鄭曉江 ， 1999 ） 。 「 不孝 有 三 ， 無後為大 」 是 華人 的 傳統 人倫 。 文獻 裡 對 生育 兒女 的 習俗 多 有 記載 與 研究 ， 重點 多 在 傳承 下 一 代 子孫 的 出生 和 養育 上 ， 如 傳統 生育觀 的 胎神 信仰 ， 重男輕女 的 祈男 習俗 等等 （ 費孝通 ， 1998） ； 而 對於 賜予 此 天職 的 媳婦 ， 給與 最多 的 關注 ， 卻 是 在於 禁忌 的 遵守 （ 劉錦雲 ， 1994 ） 。 婦女 生育 的 禁忌 ， 不但 在 懷胎 ， 在 分娩 ， 還 有 在 產 後 「 坐月子 」 休養 期間 的 飲食 和 行為 上 的 管制 。 生育 文化 以及 相關 儀式 ， 代代 傳承下來 ， 古時候 有 ， 現代 也 有 。 儀式 是 一 種 民俗 ， 在 華人 次文化 裡 對於 生育 後 的 「 坐月子 」 ， 不同 地域 ， 不同 方言 族群 ， 在 傳統 觀念 和 生活 的 實際 操作 上 ， 會 有 一些 不同 。 不過 在 現代 的 生活 中 ， 男女 教育 水準 提高 ， 時空 和 環境 的 物質 文化 在 改變 和 提升 ， 注重 自我 生活 品質 普遍 提高 。 生活 的 現代化 ， 對 傳統 習俗 的 操作 都 會 做出 調適 ， 以為 適應 現代 生活 。 筆者 和 幾 位 同事 於 2009年 曾 對 吉隆 玻巴生谷 受 過 大專 以上 教育 的 多元 種族 婦女 ， 做 過 關於 「 坐月子 」 作息 的 探討 。 重點 在 產婦 「 坐月子 」 時 對 傳統 習俗 的 禁忌 ， 在 現代 生活 作息 上 之 改變 的 一 個 問卷 調查 （ Chin et al .,2010; Chin et al . ,2011; Chin , Wu , 2013 ） 。 吉隆玻巴生谷 是 指 馬來西亞 首都 吉隆玻周 遭 以及 沿著 貫穿 吉隆玻 的 巴生河 流域 附近 地區 。 這 是 一 項