For many people, Hong Kong is all about free enterprise and the love of money. So one might think that, of all businesses, the love-hotel industry would embrace this philosophy to the fullest. But some societal biases can run so deep that they may prove more powerful than the alluring colour of money. Chief among these is our deep-seated prejudice against gays and lesbians.
It has been whispered for a long time that most love hotels in the city will not serve homosexual couples as a matter of policy. A team of Sunday Morning Post reporters, posing as such couples, has now confirmed that their rejection is a widespread industry practice. In most cases, our reporters were told that the hotel was full, even though it was a slow weeknight; that they were not welcome; or that it was simply company policy not to admit them. There were exceptions, but they involved paying extra.
Their rejection might have been understandable if our reporters had acted in an outrageous manner, because such establishments depend on discretion; but they made discreet requests in each case. It is not clear why love hotels should treat gay couples differently. None of the hotel's managers has come forward to explain why. Their treatment of gay couples is symptomatic of our society's discriminatory attitude towards them.
Despite its appearance of modernity and cosmopolitanism, Hong Kong remains a deeply conservative Chinese society. Open displays of sexuality in general are frowned upon. But this is especially the case when it comes to homosexual behaviour. A good deal of hypocrisy lies behind our attitude towards homosexuality. It is an open secret that some of our movie stars and entertainment executives are homosexual, as are quite a few members of some of the city's most prominent families in business and government. But in our society, their behaviour and lifestyle can be tolerated only as long as they are well hidden.
This is misguided. In an enlightened society, people should not be judged on the basis of their sexual orientation; nor should it be a cause for discrimination.