Advertisement
Advertisement
This Cathay Pacific Airways advertisement highlighting its attitude to diversity, was initially banned by the Hong Kong Airport Authority and MTR Corporation. The ban was later reversed following a huge LGBT outcry. Photo: Handout
Opinion
Opinion
by Brian Y. S. Wong
Opinion
by Brian Y. S. Wong

Three lessons Hong Kong can learn from Taiwan’s LGBT journey

  • Taiwan showed that the government can take an active role in shaping consensus, that legislators can speak up for their LGBT constituents and that there is nothing anti-Asian about diversity
Last Friday, Taiwan legalised same-sex marriage. This was a landmark moment for LGBT rights in Taiwan and Asia. After decades of struggle and back-and-forth battles in the legislative and judiciary branches, Taiwan finally came to the consensus that there is no reason for marriage to be confined to a man and a woman; that a same-sex couple need not be marked as different from or inferior to their heterosexual counterparts.

There is much that Hong Kong can learn from Taiwan. In particular, three features stand out: the government’s proactive role in stimulating and guiding societal discussions; legislators’ display of empathy for and appreciation of the concerns of LGBT constituents, and; the fact that there is nothing anti-Asian about LGBT rights.

First, the Taiwanese government – especially under the current administration – has played a critical role in promulgating facts to dispel bigoted assumptions in social discourse. Take the misconception that homosexual relationships are likely to result in HIV: the administration extensively campaigned, and coordinated with the vibrant LGBT scene and businesses, to educate the public. Social and mass media openly report and critique abuse.

In stark contrast, the Hong Kong government is fixated on attaining a social consensus before pushing forward any substantive advances for LGBT rights. But no consensus can come about if the dominant official attitude is one of defeatism, and if no one bothers to initiate the process of building a consensus.

Consensus-seeking requires information, public debates and joint efforts by government and activists alike. Let us not pretend that a consensus will come about while we sit idly by — especially given the powerful anti-LGBT blocs in the city.

Second, Taiwanese legislators are exemplars in their openness and attentiveness to LGBT issues. Parliamentarians across the aisle found commonality in pushing through bipartisan bills in favour of not just homosexuals, but also bisexual and trans minorities often subject to workplace discrimination.

While the issue is of course politicised, this has largely been a positive force in addressing the core concerns of an ever-expanding constituent in Taiwanese society.

In stark contrast, Hong Kong legislators remain largely unmoved by the minimal demands for recognition, respect and a guarantee of partnership benefits for LGBT individuals.

Same-sex partners of the deceased sit through weeks of bureaucracy to be told their marriage status is unrecognised; same-sex couples who seek to live as any other couple would – with access to spousal benefits, legal and fiduciary protections in divorce cases and tailored insurance policies – must instead settle for being “companions” or “close friends”.

This month, Hong Kong’s only openly gay lawmaker Raymond Chan Chi-chuen, seen here at a Legislative Council meeting, posted a video of two women hurling abuse at him on the MTR, prompting gay rights activists to renew their call for an anti-discrimination law. Photo: Sam Tsang

Some legislators even struggle with distinguishing between different groups within the LGBT spectrum – how could we expect them to represent our fellow citizens if they do not even know the identities of those in need?

Finally, the recent referendum offers the perfect rebuke to the idea that LGBT rights are a Western concept that Hong Kong, as an Asian city, should reject.

Taiwan is steeped in Chinese culture, with religions such as Taoism and Buddhism playing a key role in its public consciousness. It is populated mainly by descendants of migrants from the mainland. It is as much a part of the Chinese community as Hong Kong is. Yet, it found that allowing people to love freely is not only compatible with Asian values, but plausibly an extension of them.

Why should we strip same-sex couples of the right to marry, love, associate or be recognised, simply because we do not like what they do? Since when do we allow arbitrary likes and wants to dictate policymaking?

If Taiwan can embrace the fact that adherents to Asian values can practise them but not at the expense of individual rights, so can we. If Taiwan can treat its citizens with dignity and respect, regardless of sexual orientation, so can we. If Taiwan can recognise that marriage does not have a fixed normative meaning, that as a society we ought to move forward and evolve progressively, then, so can we.

Taiwan’s today, Hong Kong’s tomorrow.

Brian YS Wong is a Master of Philosophy student of politics (political theory) at Wolfson College, Oxford University

This article appeared in the South China Morning Post print edition as: HK should learn from Taiwan’s gay rights move
Post